I am trying to get a better understanding of how to use aggression factor properly, but I am having a difficult time with it. Here are a several examples, and they probably have some mistakes in them. There might even be an overall huge mistake that I just do not see for myself. Please give me your opinions, let me know if you think I am right or wrong in each example, add refinements to the examples if you think it is necessary, and add another example if you think that more information would be good. If you think the entire thing is just completely wrong, then that is fine so just tell me the whole thing is wrong, but please give some reasons. I put the examples in a progression, so it might be best to read all of them before deciding that a specific example is incorrect.

Example 1: Hero is in position with top pair. He bets the flop and bets the turn, and then Villain check min-raises him on the turn. Hero needs to fold this hand. If AF is low, like 2.5 and under, it is obvious that he needs to fold, but even if it is very high, like 4 or 4.5, it still might be good to just fold the hand.

Example 2: Hero is in position with a big hand. He is check min-raised on the turn. Villain has AF that is 2.5 or less. Even though Hero has a big hand, Villain likely has a monster, so Hero needs to fold. If Villain had AF of 4+, then Hero could call with his big hand.

Example 3: Hero calls preflop from OOP and flops a set or top 2P. Villain has AF of 4.5 or higher. Hero should just donk bet the flop, because Villain will probably raise him. (I am not sure what Hero should do when AF is low, like under 2.5, because if he donks the flop Villain might just fold.)

Example 4: Hero is OOP with a good hand, but it is not crushing Villain’s range. Villain has AF of 2.5 or less. Hero needs to lead the turn to prevent this passive player from checking behind to get a free card and possibly draw out on Hero.

Example 5: Hero is OOP with a hand that crushes Villain’s range, (possibly a set on a dry board). Villain has AF of 2.5 or less. It is okay for Hero to check the turn here, and in fact it might be best b/c he does not want to scare off this passive Villain.

Example 6: Just like example 5, Hero has a hand that crushes Villain’s range. It could be a set or top 2P on a dry board. This time, Villain has AF of 4.5+. Hero can now lead the turn b/c he is not going to scare off this Villain.

Question about Example 2: I indicated that Hero can call with a big hand if he is check min-raised by Villain with an AF of 4+, but this might not be correct. Does Hero need to be more cautious because it is a min-raise? In other words, with that high AF of 4+, would it actually be safer for Hero had Villain actually made a normal-sized check-raise?

Woah, slow up, slow up. You are treating the AF stat as waaaaaaaaaay too cut and dry. This is not the stat to solve all of your post-flop problems. In fact, it's little more than a broad indication of your opponents mentality when he elects to play a hand. A player with an aggression factor of 1.0 can play the exact same amount of hands as a player with an AF of 5.0. It's just that they play those exact same hands in a different way (one player calls a lot, the other bets and raises a lot). This is the problem with AF and why it's not as useful as you think in your examples.

Take the 'turn c-min raise examples'......you believe that a player with the high AF has a higher liklihood of bluffing than the low AF. That's not necessarily the case. It could simply be that the high AF player check-raises these spots for value with monsters whereas the low AF player smooth calls more often to slowplay.

This is where the Afreq statistic can be far more useful as it'll show you how often a player is taking an aggressive line. If you noted that player A was 25% and 2.0 you might conclude that his is usually passive on this street and the way he plays his hands. As such, this turn c/r must usually be for value with a big hand. On the other hand a player that is 38% and 4.5 is playing this street aggressively often - there is therefore a greater liklihood that he is bluffing.

However, I'd suggest that the line an opponent takes is usually more important than his raw AF/AFreq stats. Simply put, a min check-raise on the turn is very often for value from any player and so you should start out from that position.

You are also using AF to try and determine the liklihood of your opponents calling or raising a donkbet, or making a cbet themselves. It's far better to simply look at how often they cbet or how often they call/raise a donkbet and take matters from there. Remember, AF will give you no clue as to how often villain will raise your donkbet. A high AF simply means that IF he does anything other than fold, it'll usually be to raise. AFreq will give you an indication of how often he'll call or raise it - however, the specific stats (call db, raise db) are far more useful.

I'll try to give an example of how you can use AF/AFreq stats:

100bb effective, you raise AA from MP, folds to BB who calls. BB is 17/10/4.0. Flop is 5s,8s,2h. You don't have As as combo blocker. Villain check-raises your cbet for a normal amount and you look up his Afreq on the flop and can see it is high. You also note a high flop-cr. What do you do?

Well, ordinarily a check-raise here on the value side of things say's, "I have an overpair or better" Against that range, AA is usually in trouble. However, it seems unlikely a 17/10 is calling pre OOP with 85,82 or 25 meaning he will rarely show up with two-pair. That leaves sets to worry about on the value side of things. Our next question is 'how often can he be bluffing'. Well, he could have spades for a semi-bluff, 67 and 34, and - of course - air. Given the existance of a lot of drawing hands, the fact he has a high AF, high AFreq and high c/r....we can conclude that this guy check-raises this flop with a far wider range than his identified value range. Thus, we should call and allow him to bluff into us.

However, if that villain was a 13/9/3.0 with a low flop c/r and low flop Afreq we might have a more difficult decision. It's probably a little nitty to fold putting him precisely on a set but this may be the spot to call and evaluate his turn. If he's bluffing or betting with worse this type of player will probably give up when called. If he bets into us again on the turn he can usually beat AA.

The key thing IMHO is that your opponents chosen line relative to his broad VPIP/PFR stats is often your biggest indications over what to do at the table. Next factor in specific stats such as 3-bet%, c/r%, etc. Use AF/Afreq as a further indicator to guide and nudge your decisions one way or another.

Cliff Notes

1. AF/Afreq are indicators
2. AF/Afreq are NOT gospel
3. Let common sense prevail, do not call turn check-raises with weak hands simply because villain has 5.0 AF.

Hope that helps

I dont even use AF, I dont find it very usefull

Thank you Acevader for your help. When I was reading your response, I started to think to myself, “well, then why use AF in the first place?” In other words seems to make sense to me. Do you have an opinion on this?

One more thing. I was told that when AF is less than 2.8, then my opponent will in general rarely be check-raise bluffing, and when he does bluff, it will almost always be as a semibluff with a big draw. After reading your post, I am starting to question the accuracy of this statement. Is there anything about this statement that is good or correct? It now seems to me that the best way to decide if a check-raise is a bluff is to look at Flop_CR (or turnCR/ riverCR), overall_CR, AFreq, and Flop_AFreq (or turn/river AFreq). Also, the best way to decide if a bet is a bluff/semi-bluff or a value bet is to look at Flop_CB or Flop_Bet, Flop_AFreq, and AFreq (if it is the turn, then use the turn stats). Plus, we can also use W$WSF to help us find the bluffers as well.

Is this idea of using 2.8 AF or lower as an indicator that my opponent is probably not bluffing as a check-raise, and that his bluffs are almost never with air, just simply bad advice? Is there anything about it that is useful?

the one way I guess I use AF is when i look at flop Aggression v turn and that tells me how often the villian will give up after cbetting so i will float more. other than that I cant find a use for it. my hud read vpip/pfr/3bt/fld to 3bt/ cbet/ fld to cbet/ stl/ #hands I use the main pop up to look at 3bet from positions like blinds/ late postion and how often people defend blinds. I dont know the exact way AF is calculated I just notice that it varys widely even among winning regs.

Thanks for the in depth response ace, one thing i wanted to clarify

Dont both stats AF and AFq show how often the opponent is takin a aggro line?

Interesting. So when AF is high on the flop, but low on the turn, that is a signal to you that you can float more often.

Do the actual raw scores of AF matter to you here? Or are you looking to simply see a large % drop from flop to turn, and the actual AF scores do not need to fall within strict ranges? How much of a drop do you need?

Ace, amazing post

I dont put too much into it but say like a 4 on flop and 1 or 2 on turn something like that. some nits are like 8 flop and 4 turn, thats pretty exploitable. Just look for large differences by street to add floats and river calls. Best way I can use it so far. Some people have high turn aggression so they lead turns alot and such. as far as a AF of 1.5 or a 4 I havent been able to process anything from differnt general AF

be aggressive

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2XGp5ix8HE

Aggression Factor is calculated by:

Number of Times Bet + Raise/Number of times Call.

It is therefore a ratio to indicate a players attitude when he elects to play a hand. We'll use extremes to highlight the point....if you check and fold 99 hands in a row only to bet and raise as often as possible on the 100th hand you'd have a very high Aggression Factor. Would you regard this opponent as a threat or particularly aggressive?

Aggression Frequency is calculated by:

Number of Time Bet + Raise/Number of Times Bet + Raise + Check + Call + Fold

It is a percentage that shows how often you choose to bet or raise when the option is available to you. Therefore, if you checked and folded for 99 hands only to go nuts on the 100th you'd still have a very low aggression frequency. This is why, in many ways, AFreq is a better stat as it gives you an idea of how aggressive a player is playing overall. AF only tells you how aggressive a player is playing the hands he wants to play.

Note: The calculation method for Afreq above is the HEM way. PT3 doesn't divide by the number of times you check. Thus PT3 reports higher aggression than HEM for the same players/actions. There is quite a lot of debate over which is better - but that's not for this thread.

So, knowing this I'd say that using AF=2.8 as a basis of deciding if your opponent is semi-bluffing or not is slightly flawed. It only tells you part of the picture. What I would say is; if said opponent has a 3.0 AF and a high Afreq (say 35%+) then there is a good chance he plays draws in this manner. This is because he often takes aggressive actions signifying that he can't always be playing aggressively for value (you don't get that many value situations). In addition, when he is electing to play he's playing aggressively by betting and raising. It therefore follows that raises and check-raises with semi-bluffs are in his arsenal. However, it simply easier to look up his check-raise stat.

I use AF/AFreq to paint a very broad picture of my opponents general attitude to his poker. I also use it to identify if he is particularly passive or aggressive on a particular street. You sometimes find people with very high river aggression as they just love to bluff the final street. The rest of the time I rely on reads through experience of playing the person (i.e. note taking) and specific stats that I can get from my pop ups.

I'm not entirely convinced. A high flop AF could indicated that villain cbets a lot. However, the specific cbet stat is far more useful. A low turn AF probably indicates that he doesn't barrel that often (again, turn cbet stat is better) but that doesn't mean he gives up. A low Afreq might tell you that but a low AF might mean that he goes into check-call mode when floated meaning you'd burn money to auto-bluff this player. Better to look at flop cbet vs turn cbet to determine how much villain slows down. Then look at WTSD and perhaps turn AFreq. If both are low then you can float and bet when checked to. If not, be careful!

As CCL suggests in his last post: where AF can be useful is to spy oddities. Players that are passive on the flop and turn but aggressive on the river (river bluff machines). Or aggressive everywhere but the turn (pot control merchants). It can simply nudge you in the direction of where your opponents game is lacking balance.

probably the biggest reason most ppl dont use AF is because they just have always used TotalAF instead of breaking it down by street agression factors. TotalAF in and of itself is pretty useless because you get no idea when the opponent is being aggressive.

Two people can have the same AF of 4.0. One player might have something like a 1/1/8 flop turn and river where the other might have an 8/1/1. these players play completely differently postflop. Knowing which streets opponents tend to be aggressive on can lead you to perfecting a plan for a hand. Take the 2 players above for example. Against the 1/1/8 i would take a bet bet c/c line against them with great frequency, whereas the 8/1/1 i might take a c/c bet bet line against.

Street aggression factors FTW!

be agressive and dont over value those numbers

These are two VALUE lines that you would take, right?

yes or obviously against the 8/1/1 a c/r bet bet line for value.

What would be the actual stat ranges for making this float play?

Instead of just asking the question, I am going to try to give some of the answer too, but I am not at all sure about what I have put together here. If anyone sees a mistake, then let me know. If you think the whole thing is just wrong, then say so, but please give some reasons, and give a couple examples. Note that I did not include VPIP/PFR in my examples, so they might be missing some important information.

To do the float, I want to see a drop between CB_Flop and CB_Turn; and to see a low WTSD; and to see a low AFreq_Turn. So I tried to put together some guidelines for the float play. Here are the guidelines that I came up with:
- CB_Flop, 70+ is high values to drop from (62 is on the lower side)
- CB_Turn, 35 or less is low values to drop to (53 is on the higher side)
- AFreq_Turn, 0-21 is is very low (32 is on the higher side)
- WTSD, 0-19 is very low (27 is on the higer side)

Now for some examples. Say that Hero is the BTN or CO, there is a preflop raise in front of him, and he calls. Villain then c-bets the flop. Should Hero try to float?

Case 1: Villain's stats are CB_Flop 75, CB_Turn 30, AFreq_Turn 19, WTSD 17. Hero should float.

Case 2: Villain's stats are CB_Flop 68, CB_Turn 37, AFreq_Turn 23, WTSD 20. This one is closer, but I think Hero should float.

Case 3: Villain's stats are CB_Flop 70, CB_Turn 34, AFreq_Turn 21, WTSD 29. There is a very nice drop in CB% from flop to turn, but Hero should not float b/c Villain is too likely to go into check-call mode.

Case 4: Villain's stats are CB_Flop 64, CB_Turn 41, AFreq_Turn 23, WTSD 21. I am not sure about this one. We do see a good drop in CB% from the flop to the turn, but CB_Turn is not exactly in the low range. I would like some opinions here.

Case 5: Villain's stats are CB_Flop 67, CB_Turn 48, AFreq_Turn 29, WTSD 25. Hero should not float. The CB% drop from flop to turn is there, but it is not that great, and WTSD is sort of on the higher side.



>>>>>>>>>>>>>> BELOW IS SOME EXTRA INFORMATION >>>>>>>>>>>>>>

If you want to know how I came up with the guidelines, here is how I did it (this is not the main point of my post, it is here just to show some more information). If you decide to read this extra stuff, and you think I made a mistake, then say so.

I want a low AFreq_Turn. For this stat, I will say that 22-25 is starting to get low, and 33-37 is starting to get high. 19 would be really low, and 40 would be really high. So for AFreq_Turn, I say anything under 21% is very low.

I want a low WTSD. For this stat, I will say that 20-23 is starting to get low, and 25-28 is starting to get high. 18 is really low, and 30 is really high. So for a low WTSD, I say anything under 19% is very low.

Now for the drop between CB_Flop and CB_Turn. I think this is the hardest part to figure out. For CB_Flop, I say that 58-61 is starting to get low, and 72-77 is starting to get high. 44 is really low, and 81 is really high. CB_Flop is the high side of the drop, so I want high values. 70+ and I have high values.

For CB_Turn, I say that 36-39 is starting to get low, and 51-54 is starting to get high. 27 is really low, and 56 is really high. CB_Turn is the low side of the drop, so I need low values. 35% or less and I have low values.

all posts itt = tldr

The goal is to do a float based on opponent's CB_Flop, CB_Turn, WTSD, and AFreq_Turn. What stat ranges are we looking for before we call on the flop with position and then bluff the turn if opponent checks?

GW it seems that you are referring to a pure float; an exploitation play whereby you call ATC on the flop because you know you can blast your opponent off his hand on the turn and don't expect him to notice/adapt.

If that is the case then I'd suggest that in nearly all cases your margins are too tight for a 'pure play' with no other back-up or reasoning for making it.

I'd be looking for something along the lines of 75%+ cbet flop and <25% cbet turn. This signifies that the player is almost certainly playing robotically and rarely if ever firing two shells without the goods. This player you can pull a pure play on. The rest of the time you should be using the stats to suppliment your other analysis of the hand.

So for example, let's say we hold 7s8s against the Case 1 player. Flop is Ks,5h,4h. Against this player I might consider a float for the following reasons (in order of importance):

1. I have a gutshot draw and any middling card or heart can potentially be used to bluff. (virtual outs)
2. I have position, ldo
3. Picking up a 7 or 8 might win me the pot
4. Villain's stats indicate that he cbets a fair bit but often slows down on the turn and doesn't go to SD that often.

I'd also bet this type of opponent will cbet the likes of 1010 here as a matter of course. He'll then check-call the turn because he won't auto-believe your bet. However, he'll fold to your river bet nearly always. THAT is exploitable.

As you see, the raw stats only help nudge my decision. They do not define it. I get the impression throughout this thread that you are trying too hard to use stats to solve poker and I think that's a bad road to go down. Better to use them to aid your game but to try and improve overall at poker and how you can use stats to guide decisions.

Villiain in my example above is: CB_Flop 75, CB_Turn 30, AFreq_Turn 19, WTSD 17 by your definition. However, I still might consider my float above if villian was: CB_Flop 75, CB_Turn 50, AFreq_Turn 27, WTSD_20. The reason for this is that the board presents me with so many options. I know he barrels a lot so I can often win even when I spike just a pair on the turn. I can obviously win if I hit my gutshot. However, there are so many turn cards that are going to be horrible for my OOP opponent that will connect with his perception of my flop calling range. For example, if the turn comes a 3 or a heart I might raise over my opponents turn bet. We can see from his WTSD stats that he's not a calling station so put yourself in his spot holding QQ vs that action, or even AK. How do you feel about playing for stacks?

Hope that helps in some way. Also, if you are looking for stats to make a pure play I'd turn your attention to "fold to flop cbet" versus "fold to turn cbet". Nothing better than when then are 30% and 75% respectively

For aggression frequency or pct, what range is passive, neutral and aggressive?

Thanks.

+1

You might find this thread useful:
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/96...factor-654756/

Thanks.