do it up. this thread is for discussion on this topic...sounds good to me

k i was going to post this, but i realized that there are no overpair or straight options in opponent groups and i think my math may be slightly (or more than slightly) skewed. I'll try to rework it.

ok here's my take on King Spew's homework:

Option: Shove

Hero is dealt 99
Villain’s PF range = 22+, ATs+, KJs+, QJs, JTs, T9s, 98s, AJo+, KJo+, QJo, JTo
On the turn: T 8 7 2
48.5 BB pot after villain bets 22 BB
Villain has 90.5 BB behind

Option: Shove
Villain’s turn cbet range = AA - 77, 22, AKs, ATs, ATo, QJs, QJo, JTs - J9s, JTo - J9o,
T9s, 98s,

I am adjusting the preflop range to include the J9 straight here since villain is willing to fire a double barrel on a connected board. I have removed a lot of the overcards that would most likely not fire again, but left a few in (AK) because he will do this once in a while. I’m deriving this range based on PF range + board texture + postflop tendencies (65% turn cbet in particular).

Villain will continue with straight, OESD (T9), sets, and overpairs. He folds 56% of the time.
Hero has 23% equity versus villain’s continuance range.

Profit (BB) = (0.66 * 48.5) + 0.34((0.23 * 139) – (0.77 * 90.5))
Profit (BB) = 27.16 + 0.34(-37.72)
Profit (BB) = 14.33

Since shoving is profitable, I am assuming that is going to be the best option as opposed to calling. We do fold out all worse hands and only get called by better. BUT we can also fold out some better hands, and we are not going to gain any more value out of worse hands on the river by calling the turn anyways unless those worse hands improve to better hands and end up beating us. And if we end up calling and hitting our straight, we are not getting anymore either since our hand is obvious.

And shoving is even better if we can ever get him to lay down overpairs. I think he may be capable of folding JJ/QQ in this spot.

Flopzilla does not account for turn, which is essentially blank except for villain having 22. I've taken that into account by upping the continuation % a bit. I also removed two 9's from the deck, which we have:



Thoughts?

The group 'overpair' is missing in stoxpoker combo and from what I can see an overpair is not counted as TP. So if I check the boxes before TP, OESD and twopair to get a continuation range, than overpairs are not counted.

Or am I wrong...?

EDIT: just saw that JH1 also mentioned this.

im just hoping i turn u all into huge spewfish so my WR can go up =)

but srsly, AQ in a positional or BvB pot = instanuts

44...not so much unless they hold it against my AQ =)

also...this is like a nice "next step" type program from StoxCombo

Flopzilla

its the program that JH1 used, and is very simple but with more continuance range settings (like overpairs and such)

Ok, so now I've watched the video . . . nice work, by the way . . . and I have a question.

SS speaks of calling the 5-bet shove and how changing the size of the 4-bet can give us the odds to call the shove with more marginal holdings. I don't have the video in front of me here, so I can't give the specifics, but I hope you know what I'm talking about. Here is the question:

Why would we want to manipulate the size of our 4-bet to give us proper odds to call a 5-bet shove with somewhat more marginal holdings? If our goal is to get it in, why wouldn't we just 4-bet shove? Are we just playing games with our own heads to get it in with lighter cards just because we manipulated the odds to make it look ok? Isn't it better to have the FE of shoving than it is to have the reassurance that we had the odds to call? I ran across this question with HOH as well, but never really thought to post on it.

So maybe there's something I still don't fully understand about this, but as long as we're thinking about it, I wanted to ask.

Okay, I decided to apply the math Split taught in his video when I was analyzing my last session.

I found 2 spots where I gave up a pot on the turn (IP) when betted into with a flush draw and at least one overcard. I found out that a shove was profitable in both spots, so I made a -EV laydown.

I wanted to post this just to let split now that his video was helpfull in improving my game, it wasn't just interesting to see. It works, thanks and congrats.

I have to keep reminding myself of this, thanks for actually typing it

It doesn't really matter how much 'free' information/advice you give here as far as educating the fish. Its only going to benefit people that put in the hard work. I need to work harder.

Thanks for this video split. I'll have to watch it properly at some point.

ps. Why the fk didn't I know about the stox combo?

great vid,
but all of a sudden I really start to dislike the "Concept of the week"

Giving so much information where people normally take coaching for or sign in to a poker training site.. mweh

anyways, nice vid

Yeah we're gonna have to start charging people to sign up for 2+2.

As long as we only charge people with less than 100 posts...

yeah, but people who have, well, .. I don't know ..2060 post or so, can stay for free (;

Chat threads don't count.

Can anyone post any hand histories where they used equity evaluation to make a decision? I'm struggling to understand how to implement it during game play. More examples I think would solidify my understanding. Thanks in advance.

I suggest reading post #28 of this thread as a start.

But as an aside, you don't do this while playing. This is work you do off-line in the quiet of your home. It is really for players who have an interest in the math side of poker. You do enough of these and their variations to know where to 0 EV line is. When you are playing later, you'll already know what the right play is.

It is even more critical in SNG play.

See, I can actually learn something reading one of these Concept threads......

If that was true everybody would be on 200 posts

This is the hand I was talking about upthread--I think i said up there that I was suited, so my bad on that.

Anyway, villain in this hand was 3 betting me pretty much every orbit; in a pretty big sample his 3 bet raise % was 14%



Party Poker $50.00 No Limit Hold'em - 7 players - View hand 29755
The Official 2+2 Hand Converter Powered By DeucesCracked.com

SB: $105.35
BB: $50.45
UTG: $45.45
UTG+1: $45.05
MP: $25.00
CO: $57.20
Hero (BTN): $100.75

Pre Flop: ($0.75) Hero is BTN with A Q
4 folds, Hero raises to $1.50, 1 fold, BB raises to $6.50,

OK, so he is 3 betting with 14% of his hands:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 55.232% 51.33% 03.91% 130071968 9898314.50 { AsQh }
Hand 1: 44.768% 40.86% 03.91% 103552395 9898314.50 { 77+, A8s+, K9s+, QTs+, JTs, ATo+, KJo+, QJo }


I'm significantly ahead of his range, so I 4 bet:

Hero raises to $25, BB raises to $50.45,


Now we have his 5 bet shove--at this point, his range is pretty polarized--he has a strong hand or he has a hand he is bluffing/semi-bluffing with, so his range looks like this, more or less (I just threw in some trash to represent the crap he might shove on a bluff):

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 41.265% 40.55% 00.71% 40273408 707897.50 { AsQh }
Hand 1: 58.735% 58.02% 00.71% 57624429 707897.50 { JJ+, 44, 22, AKs, 54s, AKo, 54o }


So now I am an underdog to his shoving range. But there's $75 in the pot and it is $25 to me, so I only need to win 1 time in 3 to break even. Since I actually win 40% of the time against this range, this is a profitable call.


Hero calls $25.45

Final Pot: $101.15
BB shows 4 4
Hero shows A Q
BB wins $98.15
(Rake: $3.00)

Now, suppose I had only 4 bet to $18. This would have put $68 in the pot and it would have been $32 more for me to call. It would have been a much less profitable play for me to 4 bet to $18 and call a shove than it was for me to 4 bet to $25 and call a shove; this was why I 4 bet big, to give myself an easy call against even a very tight shoving range (and to maximize my fold equity).

Shouldn't we adjust his 5bet range to include most PPs? still makes it profitable but then we can play around with 4bet sizes....just for kicks.

There is an issue (which WJL eluded to earlier) with making ur 4b that big and it is that you allow you opponents to play closer to perfect. they know you are close to commitment so they will 5b bluff less often and only come thru with QQ+/AK on average. So yes you maximize FE...but there are better and more profitable ways to go about 4b-ing

(i only mentioned the 4b example in the vid to show how the math changed...notice i never mentioned if the play itself was good nor bad)

if by making a play you allow ppl to play perfect and dont allow them to make mistakes...then you are making a mistake yourself.

*SS*

It makes it more profitable because I am crushed by a smaller % of his range (AK, AA, KK and QQ):

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 42.628% 42.11% 00.51% 67785154 827722.00 { AsQh }
Hand 1: 57.372% 56.86% 00.51% 91515978 827722.00 { 44+, 22, AKs, 54s, AKo, 54o }

I agree with this, on average

I guess I should expand on this:

I was ready to get stacks in against this villain in this situation as soon as i looked down at AQ. he had been 3 betting me ruthlessly and it was time to make a stand. I sized my bet the way i did because I needed 3 to 1 to call even if he was rarely 5 bet shoving:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 28.800% 27.66% 01.14% 14206360 587851.00 { AsQh }
Hand 1: 71.200% 70.06% 01.14% 35987058 587851.00 { QQ+, 44, AKs, AKo }

and there was no way I was folding this hand in this situation. So I wanted to get my money in good even against a solid 5 bet shove.

My 4 bet was sized that way for the reasons I specified--I wanted to be able to b/e on a call against his tightest range (allowing for one semi/bluffing hand) and profitably call against his likely range.

So basically, I planned to get stacks in no matter what, and in this case, all of my money went in good--my 4 bet was a value with my hand a favorite over his 3 betting range and i was clearly getting correct odds to call a 5 bet shove even against an uber tight range.

Absolutely awesome video, thank you very much.

This is exactly the point I was trying to make. Isn't a 4-bet shove going to fold at least some of the hands that are beating you now that Villain might 5-bet shove if given the odds? Aren't we just playing a game with our own minds making the 4-bet to give our selves the 'odds' to call the 5-bet shove when we were planing to stack off all along? There is exactly 0 fold equity in calling a shove; very likely the 4-bet shove has a non-zero FE.

I admire the discipline you are using here in making the right plays mathematically. It just makes that spite shove so much less enjoyable. I prefer to spew with complete awareness and vindictiveness myself.