[OFFICIAL] MDA Quiz - Page 2 - Micro Stakes Pot Limit and No Limit

What's really interesting to me is how ranges shift based on flop cbet sizing wrt to what boards are now overbluffed/underbluffed.

For the purposes of this poll I intentionally used paired flops because the same patterns emerges in all 3 cbet sizing's.

Cool. I assumed you posted this at first to make a point that flop texture doesn't mean much in relation to betting pattern based on the data you're looking at, but sounds like that may not be the case.

Quote

04-16-2024 , 11:56 PM

#27

dude45

veteran

Join Date: Sep 2019 Posts: 2,818

If DDP is talking about theory than it's a good data point. if he's talking about pool tendencies i'm not sure,

Quote

04-17-2024 , 01:35 AM

#28

DooDooPoker

Verified Coach NLHE

Join Date: Mar 2018 Posts: 18,586

Quote:

Originally Posted by dude45

If DDP is talking about theory than it's a good data point. if he's talking about pool tendencies i'm not sure,

We have a 0EV bluff catcher so it's neither good nor bad, it's just neutral in theory.

Quote

04-17-2024 , 03:00 AM

#29

Dante Alighieri

centurion

Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 196

Quote:

Originally Posted by DooDooPoker

Are other people having problems understanding this question as well? I thought it was pretty straight forward.

To me, the wording of "good data point" sounds more like it has to do with if a data point is useful or not. I had to read the post an extra time to make sure I understood what you meant.

Quote

04-17-2024 , 04:23 AM

#30

dude45

veteran

Join Date: Sep 2019 Posts: 2,818

Quote:

Originally Posted by DooDooPoker

We have a 0EV bluff catcher so it's neither good nor bad, it's just neutral in theory.

I don't think 0EV means it doesn't matter what you do

Quote

04-17-2024 , 07:19 AM

#31

Koss

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 7,100

Quote:

Originally Posted by dude45

I don't think 0EV means it doesn't matter what you do

It does. If we are playing a against a theory perfect opponent and have a 0EV bluff catcher OTR we can either call or fold at 100% frequency and our results will be the same over the long run. The solver only mixes call/fold to prevent an exploitative adjustment by the opponent.

My guess would be this spot is under-bluffed by the pool. But I'm projecting because I feel like after getting called twice on flop/turn that villain doesn't have a lot of folds left OTR so bluffs are more futile than average, so I might under-bluff the spot too.

Quote

04-17-2024 , 09:13 AM

#32

dude45

veteran

Join Date: Sep 2019 Posts: 2,818

Quote:

Originally Posted by Koss

Maybe for that one particular hand but if you start folding say all your 0ev bluff catchers 100 percent of the time isn't your opponent gonna start printing with their bluffs

Quote

04-17-2024 , 10:06 AM

#33

DooDooPoker

Verified Coach NLHE

Join Date: Mar 2018 Posts: 18,586

Quote:

Originally Posted by dude45

I don't think 0EV means it doesn't matter what you do

That's exactly what it means.

He only makes money off his bluffs if he always bluffs his mixed 0EV bluffs and we always fold our 0EV bluff catchers.

It's a frequency mistake vs a fundamental mistake. Frequency mistakes can only be mistakes in theory if your opponent knows your frequencies (not possible).

Quote

04-17-2024 , 10:07 AM

#34

DooDooPoker

Verified Coach NLHE

Join Date: Mar 2018 Posts: 18,586

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dante Alighieri

To me, the wording of "good data point" sounds more like it has to do with if a data point is useful or not. I had to read the post an extra time to make sure I understood what you meant.

oh I see where the confusion is okay. How would you word it to make it more clear?

What about EV+ data point vs EV- data point?

Quote

04-17-2024 , 10:46 AM

#35

DooDooPoker

Verified Coach NLHE

Join Date: Mar 2018 Posts: 18,586

To be more clear: You can lose EV with frequency mistakes if you do something 100% of the time (like folding 0 EV hands) and your opponent does something 100% of the time (like bluff all his 0EV hands).

But I want to talk about this wording. What do you think would be a better way to word this poll?

Quote

04-17-2024 , 11:13 AM

#36

Dante Alighieri

centurion

Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 196

Quote:

Originally Posted by DooDooPoker

But I want to talk about this wording. What do you think would be a better way to word this poll?

Maybe: "According to MDA: Should you call down more or less often with a paired flop?"

You could also choose a different focus of the question, and not mention MDA, for example:

"Would you be more or less inclided to call down if the flop is paired?"
1. Call down more
2. Call down less"

Quote

04-17-2024 , 11:19 AM

#37

newguyhere

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2016 Posts: 7,197

I voted bad (call less)

Quote

04-17-2024 , 12:03 PM

#38

DooDooPoker

Verified Coach NLHE

Join Date: Mar 2018 Posts: 18,586

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dante Alighieri

I like your two examples better than mine, especially the bolded part. I don't want to scare people off by using MDA in questions so I'll use this vernacular in future polls.

Thanks Dante.

As an aside, my only metric for the usefulness of a poll is how close it can get to 50/50. So far so good.

Last edited by DooDooPoker; 04-17-2024 at 12:15 PM.

Quote

04-21-2024 , 10:46 AM

#39

DooDooPoker

Verified Coach NLHE

Join Date: Mar 2018 Posts: 18,586

Results will be revealed in 24hours.

Last chance to vote.

Quote

04-21-2024 , 04:22 PM

#40

ZKesic

veteran

Join Date: Jan 2014 Posts: 2,093

It's for sure a good data point. People get the biggest erections when they see a paired board.

Quote

04-22-2024 , 09:36 AM

#41

DooDooPoker

Verified Coach NLHE

Join Date: Mar 2018 Posts: 18,586

Thank you everyone for participating in the poll!

I will reiterate the question and then show the answer:

The poll question:

"Would you be more or less inclined to call down if the flop is paired?"

1. Call down more
2. Call down less

Results:

We know from MDA that the B30-B-B line in the aggregate is 35 weak.

When we filter for "paired flop" and look at B30-B-B line we notice there is a discrepancy from the aggregate.

Spoiler:

Quote

04-22-2024 , 10:30 AM

#42

newguyhere

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2016 Posts: 7,197

i genius

but i wonder how much it matters (if at all) if it's low, middle or high pair?

Quote

04-22-2024 , 10:48 AM

#43

DooDooPoker

Verified Coach NLHE

Join Date: Mar 2018 Posts: 18,586

Quote:

Originally Posted by newguyhere

i genius

but i wonder how much it matters (if at all) if it's low, middle or high pair?

Congrats!

I think in a vacuum it won't matter too much unless it is the extreme (i.e. 22vsAA) but the fact that on low pair you get a bunch of turn/river overcards (overbluffed data point) will be the important part.

Quote

04-22-2024 , 12:41 PM

#44

Haizemberg93

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2016 Posts: 7,256

Its 1% difference.

Quote

04-22-2024 , 12:54 PM

#45

DooDooPoker

Verified Coach NLHE

Join Date: Mar 2018 Posts: 18,586

Quote:

Originally Posted by Haizemberg93

Its 1% difference.

Yes poker is a game of small edges and we are vs regs.

PSA to everyone: Did you guys like this poll? If not I won't post another one.

Let me know!

Quote

04-22-2024 , 08:43 PM

#46

YanasaurBBQ

veteran

Join Date: Jun 2020 Posts: 2,126

Quote:

Originally Posted by DooDooPoker

Yes poker is a game of small edges and we are vs regs.

PSA to everyone: Did you guys like this poll? If not I won't post another one.

Let me know!

I like your all your polls and hope you do more. They help me think about why I think certain things and how I am often quite wrong in what I perceive.

Quote

04-23-2024 , 06:27 AM

#47

slyless

Hand Evaluation Expert

Join Date: Dec 2021 Posts: 2,347

More polls are better

Quote

04-23-2024 , 07:06 AM

#48

ZKesic

veteran

Join Date: Jan 2014 Posts: 2,093

I'm surprised by your results.

I have a DB of ~40mil 50z hands from the past 6 months and in my sample the paired flops are consistently 2-3% more bluffy in BBB spots by both fish and regs.

Quote

04-23-2024 , 09:43 AM

#49

DooDooPoker

Verified Coach NLHE

Join Date: Mar 2018 Posts: 18,586

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZKesic

I'm surprised by your results.

I have a DB of ~40mil 50z hands from the past 6 months and in my sample the paired flops are consistently 2-3% more bluffy in BBB spots by both fish and regs.

Interesting. What site?

Yeah I have fish overbluffing here but not regs.

Zoom tables have better regs/are more aggressive than reg tables but that is still surprising to me.

Quote

04-23-2024 , 10:25 AM

#50

ZKesic

veteran

Join Date: Jan 2014 Posts: 2,093

Pokerstars.

Quote

Page 2 of 3

First

1 2 3

Last

Post Reply Subscribe

...

Page 2 of 3

First

1 2 3

Last