   |
Poker Forum |
Over 972,000 Posts! |
|
| ||
|---|---|---|
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
| bjsaust |
|
||||||||
|
Wow, I really havnt kept up on reading others blogs. Self obsessed lately I guess  . Shitty to hear you've had even worse downswing issues. Lately seems like half of FTR is. Heres hoping we both push through and come out with just a blip on our long term graphs.I played some 100nl today, first session. I lost, but felt really good. It really felt like people were just playing straightfoward, like they might as well just show me their hands (then I'd call anyway, but thats another issue). |
||||||||
|
Just playing to improve.
|
|||||||||
| daven |
|
||||||||
|
short version - squeeze work you have done is very nice. Long version - I wonder how many people are going to properly read what you have written and work through the implications. Not too many I hope! Anyway, I read the squeeze posts and ran through the math. I like the post and it has made me think further about a couple of spots... You may enjoy how I managed to somehow get stuck at Q(P+5)/2 cos i was like hang on it's Q(P-5)/2+5Q.... and then i didn't want to put C in the extension to replace the .... but i got there! My comments: I know you address this in bold earlier in the post, but I'm uncertain on using P = 80, especially as P=contested pot size rather than pot size, meaning that you're assuming a bet and a raise on the flop and/or HU to a turn a lot of the time. Lucky it doesn't make much difference to Q, but for other analysis/spots this may become more important. Re your notes 1) Q vs short-stacks vs P. I think this needs to be reconsidered (not that it matters until you choose to shortstack). At 20bb a squeeze == All-In, meaning that B=0. Now it becomes a simple matter of villain tendencies re calling/folding and their ranges to do so. Assuming a call range of 88+/KQs/AJs+ from some villains means one thing for your range, other call ranges mean something different. Also need to consider that the flat-caller often has a monster if there are 2 or more short-stacks left to act... anyway, analysis becomes even simpler at (1/45)*(-8F/C -2.5)+0.5, right? The maths geek in me wants to shortstack. But... I'll probably open a stars account, tell nobody, and shortstack it while laughing at FTR mid-stakes regs groaning about awful shortstackers 2) here I got interested when i was thinking about full ring application here - basically trying to figure out how easy it is to be breakeven post-flop against a 2% range (i.e. a 13-10 who opened from EP or MP cos otherwise we can't LP squeeze, so his range is like 7-2-2 where calling range=4-bet range about evenly balanced) And this is where i started to wonder about how post-flop equity was going to be calculated, cos stoving ranges assumes a static state post-flop, and that doesn't happen. 9Ts does just great against AA, unless you have to play a flop with your one pair/gutshot/runner runner FD... 3/4 combined) obvious implication here is how we should deal with a squeeze when we are either the PFR or the flat-caller! more 4-betting. nh. 5) the whole thing has lead me to seriously question some of my earlier (and incorrect) ideas about blind squeeze plays As above, I switch off at the specific hand analysis a little because of the stove-approach vs multi-street dynamic in HU pots. It's obviously useful, I think it needs to be combined with solid flop and turn range-estimation and understanding of villain's post-flop tendencies |
||||||||
|
with winning in mind win, move up, repeat
|
|||||||||
| Robb |
|
||||||||
|
@ BJ & Daven - thx guys I wasn't sure if anyone was still reading this  Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
The postflop isn't equity, per se. It's the percentage of time Hero can manage to win the chips postflop. So we take it on a case by case basis. Knowing we need, say, 40% of the chips postflop to make the squeeze profitable, can we win that much with T9s against his likely calling range. By the way, I like the fact that you put AA in his "flat the squeeze bet" range. You're thinking correctly (which I wasn't not too long ago). Too many people put too many premium combos in their 4b range, but anyone who's squeezing at all "light" is going to fold the squeeze to a 4b. With AA, you're almost always pretty happy (or should be!) to flat the squeeze and pray for the pair of 2's to your left to come along for a flop. Quote:
That part really worried the TAGG in me, since I don't like getting out of ahead of poor hands in huge pots. But this is the heart of my theorem, or will be when I'm done formulating it. HERO doesn't get to determine his preferred range of "big pot" hands. HERO inherits a pretty narrow "optimal" range of hands based on villain's aggression. When our opponents bet/raise lighter, they force many more of our mediocre combos into our "big pot" range. We can refuse to play those combos in big pots, but only by leaving ourselves very exploitable in very obvious ways. Quote:
In fact, I'm sorry I'm not explaining things well, because the whole beauty of the analysis from my point of view is that it gives us a very attainable target whenever we squeeze and get called. I used to play as though I had to win 80% of the contested pots, whereas now I just let it go on the rare occasion I get 4b or when I get called and see the world's worst flop for my hand. Mathematically, if I've done my preflop analysis right, I only have to win ~40% (worst case) when I'm flat called. That allows me to get away from bad squeezes cheap knowing I can pick up my 40% when I connect with flops and when the pot is obviously orphaned. I don't have to play "raisy daisy" like durrr to make the squeeze profitable. I just have to win my natural share and few from just being better prepared than my opponent. The whole reason why noobies won't profit from reading this - and it's the thing you picked up on right away - the whole exercise is useless when left in term of percentages. Until we slot in various combos and ranges based on different types of villain profiles, the numbers aren't helpful. So I've done some work there (but less than I should). I now realize that if someone we have 2k HH's on has a 12% squeeze bet stat, I've gotta be fist-pump excited about how weak most of that range is, and the BETTER he is the WEAKER it is since he will probably put much of his KK+ in his value call-behind-the-caller range especially if he's ip. But the exercise is pretty helpful if you're good at turning those percentages into real ranges and estimating playability of various hands against that range postflop. Final comment I'll make is this: I've never seen a post or video that talked about isolating isolators. Is everyone else just that much more aware of it that it doesn't need to be discussed? Or is it being discussed on FTR but not in the BC? It's the one thing about poker I discovered pretty much for myself, but it's such an obvious adjustment (once you see it) that I'm surprised it's not more widely talked about on FTR. We probably don't need to post on it in the BC, tho - it's one of those "have to pick your spots" spots where the picking can be a bit tricky. |
||||||||
|
Quote:
|
|||||||||
| Parasurama |
|
||||||||
| I think it's because it's enough like squeezing that it doesn't need too much of its own separate discussion | ||||||||
|
--Para
A game is beautiful when it has simple, logical rules which give way to a depth of skill and strategy unforeseen by its creators.
|
|||||||||
| daven |
|
||||||||
|
i haven't sent the bet-sizing math over cos i got sidetracked yesterday by this, another question, a good book, climbing, cooking, and actually playing poker. Today perhaps? Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
||||||||
|
with winning in mind win, move up, repeat
|
|||||||||
| Robb |
|
||||||||
|
Quote:
I was enjoying life by tackling the BEAST 5 MILER this morning and thinking about poker lots during the early parts of the run. The latter parts were more focused on my last will and testament and trying to recall if my various insurance policies were paid up. Quote:
The place where we have to be careful is when we squeeze and both our stack and the PFR's are 150 BB or more deep. We can still squeeze light, but we're going to have to be very careful not to jam our way into what rock climbers call the "coffin zone," the place where we're committed to a big pot (or potentially nasty fall) with no value (or protection). Quote:
---- Speaking of BEAST 5 MILERS, I'll take you up on the fitness prop bet deal. I'll post something in our old thread from last Spring later today. I wanted to tackle the BEAST for a second time in 5 days to see how my body would hold up. I've been adding some lifting and cardio at the gym 3 days a week to 3 hard running days, but I'm trying to focus on arms, chest and back at the gym to save the legs for distance. The upshot is that I think after today's run I have a decent measure of my current fitness levels, so I can pose a challenge that will challenge both my character and courage while I'm completing it. I've got an idea for a short bet on a strong finish to August building to a more substantial bet on September's fitness. As I said, I will post later today. |
||||||||
|
Quote:
|
|||||||||
| Robb |
|
||||||||
|
Daven, game on :P Robb v. Daven Fitness Prop Bets |
||||||||
|
Quote:
|
|||||||||
| Robb |
|
||||||||
|
My name is Robb and I'm an alcoholic. I get drunk on playing too many tables. I get so inebriated that I hurl chips. I turn games I can crush into break-even death swamps just so I can have another 6 pack of tables open. I go "on the wagon" every few weeks, play better, win more, then get sauced up again with two too many. Then two too many ain't enough, and it takes three too many to feed my habit. Then four. Then a misclick costs me 1/2 BI 'cuz I'm stumbling around too many tables in a drunken auto-piloting stupor. I have been sober for 3 days now. And counting. |
||||||||
|
Quote:
|
|||||||||
| Robb |
|
||||||||
|
OK, I will only play 6 tables of 6m, and 12 tables of FR. At those amounts, I'm taking notes, watching hands I'm not involved in on a couple key tables, and have time to look at popup stats preflop and adjust my ranges accordingly. Rage's scripts really help by allowing me to have "featured" tables and deal with folding a lot very quickly. But still, if I play more than that amount, my win rate suffers and my learning rate deteriorates even more quickly. In the past month or so, I've been trying to "max out" on my Iron Man bonuses, but I need to just admit that at 50nl with the hours I have available each month, I'm doing well to focus on Gold, not Iron. I'd like to be back at 100nl 6m next month, but top level Iron Man's just gonna have to wait for the bigger pot sizes. Still, at Gold Level, I can earn ~$25 per month in bonus. So, I'm saying no to massive volume via mass tabling. And heck, maybe I'll even play some hands tonight. |
||||||||
|
Quote:
|
|||||||||
| bjsaust |
|
||||||||
| When you say isolating isolators, you really mean 3-bet bluffing them? To me its a sign of whos paying attention and thinking about their play. I'll do it a bit and see how they react. Likewise occassionally I'll find someone who does it to me, but the fact the most regs dont is a pretty fair indication that they're weak regs. In fact, thats one of the things I really noticed when I took a shot at 200nl. At 100nl other regs would let me isolate to my hearts content. How easy is poker when the other 'good' players constantly let you play HU against the table money? At 200nl though, I seemed to find it much harder to just isolate from wherever whenever I wanted to. | ||||||||
|
Just playing to improve.
|
|||||||||
| Robb |
|
||||||||
|
Got sick, didn't play much for a week. Still on a downswong, but who cares? I got my 24" wide monitor for Full Tilt points in the mail yesterday and spent last night reconfiguring my poker setup to larger tables, fixed the HUD to reposition seat stats and use a different font, and reset all my table management and betting scripts - it's pretty cool. It's my youngest's 3rd birthday today, so lots of family stuff going on. Maybe I'll bet back to playing and have a better Fall than I did Summer. But I'm still enjoying pokerz whenever I get to play. Hope I can get more time to finish my work on my theorem stuff above. I'll check in to the forums when I get some time later this weekend. |
||||||||
|
Quote:
|
|||||||||
| daven |
|
||||||||
|
hmmm, if the reason for prop-bet losing is being sick then iou $9. Monitor with points is cool. 3yo birthday sounds like a recipe for chaos. Have fun! |
||||||||
|
with winning in mind win, move up, repeat
|
|||||||||
| Robb |
|
||||||||
|
Quote:
Robb's FTC Theorem (1st draft): When a player bets or raises, he is committed to a rather narrow band of fold-to-continue ratios (FTC's). A player whose FTC is too wide is easily exploitable by raises. Corollary 1: A player whose FTC is too narrow is playing cards face up. Corollary 2: Hero avoids unbalanced lines with proper FTC's for his aggression levels. I guess the most obvious result I could share is something I've been thinking about since Ben said it almost a year ago: "a player who cbet's more than ~70% is probably exploitable." Without equations and such, here's the brief sketch: a player who cbets ~70% REQUIRES that Hero start raising light: I'm looking for boards that shouldn't hit him and leave me at least some kind of draw. When he cbets ~80%, I don't need the draw any more. Ten high will do. And if Hero doesn't adjust, Villain's horribly unbalanced line profits, damn him. So Hero has a certain looseness forced into his game by the unbalanced aggression of others. The problem for the 80% cbetting villain is that there is a ton of dead money in the pot, and it's pretty cheap (relative to the pot) for me to raise the flop. The dead money and cheap raising price mean that Villain has to fold less than half of his cbets to raises or he's toasty-cooked. And with a decent PFR, say 10% or more, it's almost impossible to continue often enough to sustain an 80% cbet rate. When that PFR gets wider, the situation just deteriorates - for Villain - Hero doesn't mind .I should probably mention when I say dead money, I mean anything already committed, even by the active players. Those chips are worth a stab if there's decent fold equity, and Villain's wide FTC's are the way I'm finding good places to leverage FE. Another FTC situation is steals. Most TAGG's have really awkward FTC's for their 35% or greater BTN steals. Since the 3b FTC range is pretty wide, it's easy to attack them. I know most folks KNOW this already. I'm just saying that the maths I've done back it up. Where I'm drawing conclusions based on math, the outcomes seem reasonable based on the theory of adjustments we all know. So now I'm using my FTC's at the tables, searching for exploitable villains and lines. I've been working on a range of playable FTC's for each aggressive action: 3b's, 4b's, squeezes, cbets, steals, resteals and so forth. I'm finding some interesting results. First, 3bets have this big wide playable range of FTC's, which is probably why about any 3b% between 4 and 10 works OK given that the player is reasonably skilled. Second, 4b'ing is extremely brittle. You have to have just the right mixture of 4b bluffs, if any. I guess the best way to say it is that the gap between "cards face up" 4betting and "exploitably loose" 4betting is pretty thin. There's no wiggle room. Third, as the dead money in the pot increases, FTC's are surprisingly narrow, meaning that many TAGG's will have exploitably unbalanced lines. I don't know if I'll ever post it anywhere but here. The more I think about it, run the numbers and work with it at the tables, the more I realize it's just my limited understanding of ISF's and Renton's theorems. I do have the maths to back it up, but it's pages and pages of spreadsheets with ranges, equity, combos. Pretty boring stuff. The problem is that I'm not sure I could teach anyone else to "use" my theorem. I'm looking at a half dozen HUD stats, making some estimates based on stats and any actions I've noted, guessing at ranges and then applying my knowledge of FTC's. The cool thing is that it works pretty well. I can tell when I'm in "thin value" situations (if re-bluffs can be called value) and when I'm home free. |
||||||||
|
Quote:
|
|||||||||
| kmind |
|
||||||||
|
Interesting read. I'll admit I'll have to give it another read or two before I feel like I can mention what I want to say but it seems kind of like something I've noticed recently. Just kind of attacking anything but unbalanced strong ranges. If that makes sense. Just kind of knowing you can start bluffing vs. even balanced ranges to unbalance it and then of course vs. unbalanced-yet-heavily-weak ranges. I think what I am saying doesn't relate too too much with what you are saying but just thought I'd lay it out there. Tbh, I'd love to see some HHs and stuff. I know you gave examples and I appreciate them and understand them but I think as many examples as possible really helps us all out. Even HHs from players other than you. P.S. The spreadsheet stuff seems far from boring. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| Robb |
|
||||||||
|
After 3 horrendous months, the end of September was a rebirth. I realized that I'm not reading ranges at all accurately - I'm worse than most 10nl droolers right now. I am practicing range reading. First session, 8 hands, grade is C. But my best play at the tables followed intensive practicing with range reading early this year. So I'm not posting any poker results here for the next little bit. Just number of hands where I did ALL the work. Start with an explicit range preflop and narrow on each street. Decide on a specific number of combos before I look at showdown (using hands I wasn't involved in so there's little chance of me remembering it). A - 3 combos or less B+ - 5 combos or less B - 8 combos or less C - 10 to 15 combos D/F - narrowing too much or missing something - showdown hand is out of consideration - worse than 15 combos I sort of average the grades. I got an A, B+, B and rest C or worse. But I got an A+ 'cuz I'm practicing ranges again. Trying for 30 - 35 hands worth of practice each week for the next month or so. |
||||||||
|
Quote:
|
|||||||||
| dranger7070 |
|
||||||||
|
This is a fantastic idea for practicing hand reading, and I think I'll do it myself. I find that reading hands/putting villains on a range is by far the weakest point in my game, and its starting to become critical that I do so, if I want to be a solid, consistent winner at 50nl+. Thanks for this Robb, as usual you come through with another amazing post. /brown nosing 
|
||||||||
|
Man some crazy shit happened that can only be explained by God. - surviva
|
|||||||||
| Robb |
|
||||||||
|
Quote:
I also use my chunking method for grabbing preflop ranges. I described that method here: Practicing Ranges My goal is to use the same method each time I practice so that I can get better and better at EXACT range estimates (knowing the exact number of combos/hands in the estimated range). Each chunk is ~5% of all hands, and I've grouped them according to hands I think play similarly and in groups I can easily work with. The hope is that several months of practice will lead to estimates like: "180 combos total, he's calling this flop raise with 30 of them, shoving with 20, and folding 130." If the estimates are reasonably accurate, then I'll have a real advantage at the tables. Not there, yet, by a long shot. Short term, though, I can get reasonably close by cycling through each chunk, dropping "half a chunk" and so forth. Which is tons better than I've been doing, which is not thinking too deeply about ranges at all. And that, my friends, is the #1 way I've found to really suck at poker. **Bad, Robb - stop that!!** |
||||||||
|
Quote:
|
|||||||||
| Robb |
|
||||||||
|
10 hands for range practice tonight, pretty solid B average. Boy, I'm rusty. While I'm getting the feel again, I'm sooooo sllooooooowwwww. Oh, well, if I didn't need it, it wouldn't be hard. |
||||||||
|
Quote:
|
|||||||||
| Robb |
|
||||||||
|
Poker life is good. Practiced 8 HH's of range reading. Solid B. I've been working on players with wide preflop stats, so it's hard to give them exact ranges by the end. But I'm getting better. I need to work more on bet sizing and what it means. Went rock climbing with a bunch of college kids who worked for my Summer Honors program the past few summers. I had a blast and pulled off an undercling, patial lieback move I've never managed before on the crux of a 5.9. I was pretty exposed at the time, so it made me feel great. Played tonight for a couple of hours, my longest session in almost two months. I lost 3 BI early with decent chances (worst was 60-40 against, best was 55-45). I shoved some draws thin and thought they'd fold the hands they called with. Normally, I go off the rails after that, but I came back and played as well as I have since June. Won 'em back to break even for the night. I did get a couple of nice suckouts to even out the variance overall, but I was happy I didn't tilt. Maybe had something to do with the climbing. I just love being outdoors, and today was a great day. About 70 degrees, mostly sunny, and low mists over the Smokey Mountains with great views from the top of all the climbs. |
||||||||
|
Quote:
|
|||||||||
| TonyB73 |
|
||||||||
|
Quote:
Seriously, good to hear you're getting back into it Robb. You've been very quiet (esp by your standards) for a while now. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| bjsaust |
|
||||||||
|
Hey there Robb. Sorry, completly missed the essay comp, congrats on winning. Some comments occurred to me, thought I'd mention them here. You kind of mention this, and hopefully folks can work it out, but your maths at the beginning of how -EV it is to have a wide FTC ratio when stealing ONLY takes into account the times the light 3-bettor in the blinds 3-bets you. Very few even light 3-bettors will 3-bet 100% of the time no matter how wide you're stealing. So you might lose 2BB per hand the times you get 3-bet, but that ignores the 1.5BB per hand you win when you dont. Maths is a bit beyond me atm, but it would be a mistake to make too many adjustments (i.e., stealing less) until you start getting 3bet a LOT. Point 3 - hurt but dont alert, I pretty much ignore this these days. In reality I just dont find people can adjust well enough to make a difference. More and more I just pound on TAGs in the blinds when I'm in position. I guess the point is (and again you make this point, just I think I take it further) unless villains are adjusting enough to make a meaningful difference, being exploitable isnt a bad thing. Obviously the higher you get the more villains will be capable of this, but I'd wait until I see the adjustment before allowing for it. Really good article. A few things I've been blindly stumbling towards that you outline clearly, and a few things I hadnt considered that I found really useful. I got a lot out of it. |
||||||||
|
Just playing to improve.
|
|||||||||
| Robb |
|
||||||||
|
Poker life is good, but I haven't had much time lately to blog, or play or comment on others' stuff. I've been playing mostly HU SNG's and reading Colin Moshman's (sp?) Heads Up book. I've also been wearing my FTR hoodie to work, stylin' in my Essay Winning poker swag. My poker playing has been erratic, but mostly good, since I've played so infrequently lately. I'm likin' HU at the cheap stakes - they suck worse than I do. |
||||||||
|
Quote:
|
|||||||||
| Robb |
|
||||||||
|
I've been playing HU lately. Details for the interested: Noobie HU Learning Curve. Funny story. I have a 2 to 1 chip lead against this LAGG, and I beat him with a sick all-in call. He limps, I have K5o, and the flop is AA2. He cbets and I'm like "What could he possibly have?" So I call. Turn is Q, river is another 2 and the betting goes check turn, bomb river all-in. He shows down T-high, and my K-high takes it. I was about 75% certain I was ahead when I called and was only worried about 2x, but he just goes off on me in the chat box. "You donkey! You are horrible!! You play so bad - every bet is SO terrible. You suck at poker and should JUST QUIT!!" We're done early and it's a 4-man $6.40 HU SnG. I have to wait for the other table to finish anyway, so I pull the ol' "I'm new -- just learnin' poker" level. He actually apologizes, says I have a lot to learn and wishes me gl. So I ask for coaching help which he provides by going through each HH in the replayer, telling me his hole cards and explaining how I should bet/play against him/others. 1. He gave some decent advice, but he totally exposed his entire poker mindset in the 5 hands he critiqued with me. Problem is, he could be an FTR grinder. The advice was at that no-longer-a-noobie level typical of our winning 5nl and 10nl regs in the BC. I felt pretty bad for the guy as I totally set him up for rape and pillage action. Buddy list, amiright? 2. Talk about tapping the fish tank. Jeez. If I was a fish, I wouldn't have been worse than this guy for long. 3. If you're wondering, I lied about my hole cards. So I'm having fun, making a bit of money and learning tons. Position, position, position. Aggression - why do so many of these guys limp their button all the time? I mean, it's a tourney so it's not horrible, but they still are doing it when they're short stacked, say, 12 BB. I won 4 of 11 4-man $6 SnG's last night for about $75 in BI's and $96 in payouts. Cash game is on hold right now. I'm going to try generating some positive returns in HU. I'm rolled for (at least) the $11, and the players seem epically readable at $6. So I'm pretty much just trying learn as much as I can as fast as I can so I can justify moving up with results instead of optimism. |
||||||||
|
Quote:
|
|||||||||
| Robb |
|
||||||||
|
Took a 3-game shot at the $11 4-man SnG's, won 1, lost 2, so I'm positive. But I have certainly found HU players who are as good as I am, and some who are better. So it's back the $6 game to learn more pokerz before I take serious shot. Been thinking about ICM, and (duh) realizing it doesn't apply in HU. Not even in HU MTT's. Should have been obvious, I know. But there's a skill difference that matters. I searched for ICM and found a thread about "ICM corrected by skill difference" which I can't find again (dammit - I knew I should have book-marked it). But the theory is simple enough: shift some chips from the less skillful to the more skill players before applying the ICM mathematics. Of course, for more skill difference, more chips are shifted. And this math result feels worthless, but I'm exhausted. So I think I will post it and see if I can start poking holes in it later. If you're still reading, thanks!! Let me know what value this could have - or not have. So that works for HU. Suppose I play BJaust HU, and let's just suppose he has a 2 to 1 skill advantage. If we played thirty times, he would win 20. So to perform ICM style calculations taking skill difference into account, we could first shift chips from one stack to the other. In the BJ vs. Robb 2 to 1 skill difference example, we could compare 1500 chip starting stacks. Shift 500 chips from my stack to his, so the 2k vs. 1k chip stacks reflect the portion of the final prize money BJ is expected to win. So the math is obvious for starting stacks, but what if BJ is evaluating a all-in call with JTs holding a 2 to 1 chip advantage along with a 2 to 1 skill advantage? We can do ICM style analysis if we can develop a formula for shifting chips to have the resulting stacks reflect percentage chance to win. Of course, there's no real way to decide if it's useful until we do it. The formula should work at the margins: if BJ has 2900 and I have 100, the formula should still work. And vice versa. And in the end, it should lead to useful analysis. So let me offer this idea. For the 2 to 1 chip advantage, take a fraction of chips from the worse player's stack and add it to the better player's stack. The fraction is ( 2 - 1 ) / ( 2 + 1 ) = 1 / 3 For the start of a match, it works. I have 1500, so we deduct 1500 * 1/3 = 500 and give them to BJ, so we have the 2k vs 1k stacks like we needed. Now, what if BJ has 1800 and I have 1200? Well, just deduct one third of my stack: 1200 * 1/3 = 400, so BJ's expectation can be based on a 2200 to 800 ratio, so he'd be a 5.5 to 1 favorite with only a 3 to 2 advantage in chips. If I had a 2250 vs 750 chip lead, we'd take 1/3 * 2250 = 1500, so BJ would have break-even chances as long he still had 750 chips in his stack. (This also presumes that the blinds are still small enough that BJ doesn't have to revert to push/fold and can exploit his full skill differential.) So, back the JTs question. If BJ has a 2 to 1 chip lead and a 2 to 1 skill difference, should he call my all-in? Suppose blinds are 25/50. BJ posts the t50 BB, and I push. If BJ folds, he has 1950 and I have 1050. Adjusting for SD, take 1/3 * 1050 = 350, so BJ's equity advantage is 2300 to 700. Suppose in this situation, I would push Axs, KJs+, KQ, and any pp (just trying to get a halfway decent range and keep things simple). Then BJ stoves it and finds he's got 40% equity against that range. If he goes all-in then 40% of the time he wins the whole match, and 60% of the times he ends up losing t1,000. Now, the stacks are reversed. So the unadjusted equity is 3,000 * .4 + 1,000 *.6 = 1,200 + 600 = 1,800. Shift a third of my chips over to BJ to find his SD-adjusted equity of 2,200. So BJ should (by this yet-to-be-validate model) fold JTs and play his 2300 to 700 AD-adjusted equity. If he has AJo, his Stove equity would be 48% against the same range, so the EV for calling would be 3,000 * .48 + 1,000 *.52 = 1,440 + 520 = 1,960. Then adjusting for SD would mean taking 1/3 * 1,040 = 348 chips, and shifting them, which would come out almost identical to folding. So calling vs. folding is breakeven for AJo. Now, I'm not sure that any of this is meaningful, or will lead anywhere. I just wanted to post it so others could critique as they see fit, and so that I could get the ideas down on "paper" so I can work on some endgame scenarios and see if it can be helpful in assessing calling in push/fold scenarios or, likewise, deciding what range to push/fold ourselves. I do know this - if I have a skill advantage, I need to be much more conservative about getting all the chips in. Coin flips favor those likely to lose. |
||||||||
|
Quote:
|
|||||||||
| bjsaust |
|
||||||||
|
I gotta admit, I dont know about the maths, but generally speaking you've got the right conclusion, which is that the less skill advantage, the more willing you should be to take small edges, or conversely the more the skill advantage, the less willing you should be to take small edges. Of course this applies more to deeper stacks. The skill advantage becomes less relevant the shallower the stacks, and the advantage shifts to the player with the better push/fold game, which is to say if your edge is a better knowledge of when to push and when to call pushes, then giving up an edge becomes a bigger mistake because you're negating your own advantage. |
||||||||
|
Just playing to improve.
|
|||||||||
| Robb |
|
||||||||
|
Quote:
I set up a spreadsheet to get all the formulas working right, and I realized that the "chip switch SD difference" is based effective stacks, not Hero's stack. And I listed every stack size from t100 to t2900. Generally, the maths have us calling with a 40% equity hand when really short, folding when we have a decent sized stack, and calling with good-sized lead (say 2500 to 500). Which makes a good bit of sense. I've compared the Hero in the BB, SB open-shoves, just to get the setup right. I plan to work on the Hero SB fpr 3xBB, with opp 3b shoveling. With more chips at risk, of course, I'm expecting the "all-in" call recommendations to be more liberal. When I get some of the maths test-driven for accuracy and run some scenarios, I will post what I find. Of course, there are some hurdles to overcome: 1. Does Hero really know his skill difference advantage? I would say "yes, to a point." We can always assumed based on history. For example, I've won 57% of my HU $6 matches over 75 or so attempts, so we could safely guess my SD is 55 to 45 against all be the top tier opponents at $6. 2. Can Hero really gauge his equity accurately enough to run these estimates? Yes, since it's the same process as ICM, and yes again, because most of the various all-in configurations like overcard/undercard (A6 vs QT) have well known probabilities. We can generally get a pretty decent idea of opp's shoveling range by seeing a couple of showdowns. For example, I had been punishing this guy's limps, but I had just flatted a couple as well and saw he liked to limp Axo. About the 4th time I picked up a hand like AT and saw him limp, I raised him 4x. I could tell he was tilting. He thought about it, and I raced him to the middle with my stack when he shoved. Sure enough, he turns up A4o and my AT holds up. Game, set and match. I'll post something with details in a few days, and see if y'all think it makes any sense. |
||||||||
|
Quote:
|
|||||||||
| Robb |
|
||||||||
|
I started typing this outside in our front yard, sitting on a bench watching the kids play. I took the leaf blower out this afternoon and made a huge pile (which is easy on our 1 acre fully wooded lot) about a meter tall and 3 meters in diameter. So my kids were diving in, burying each other and having leaf fights. I was stting on our garden bench, enjoying being outside in GA (barefoot!!) in mid-November, wearing shorts and a tee, with a view of the mountains now that some of the leaves are off the trees, and generally enjoying an amazing autumn day. The only thing that could have made it better is playing poker. I had to come in and start dinner, so it wasn't the best time to fire up a HU tourney. (Sorry, kids, that you're hungry. Daddy needs to concentrate on this match. Just go play and I'll make something when I'm done.) HU pokerz are going well. I didn't really think of it as building the bankroll, just a way to learn some more about the game. But it's doing both. Stars is SERIOUSLY weaker competition for the same stakes of HU matches. Daven transferred $75 over there for me from FTP. I was running like 30% ROI in HU at Tilt. I'm more like 90% at Stars. That will probably deteriorate a bit over time, but there's a significantly fishier pool of HU players at Stars. I've played $11 HU at Tilt, but I'm not rolled for that yet on Stars. Actually, I don't really know any HU BR guidelines except that $90 on Stars probably wasn't enough for $6 HU SnG's. I didn't worry about it since it wasn't my whole roll, but I'm going to wait until I have 25 - 30 BI's for the $11 game before I start moving up at Stars. Can't wait to play their $11 games. Hope they're more of the same. To those of you who grind cash on Stars - wow. Full Tilt's software is so much faster and more responsive. I only play one match at a time on Tilt, but the games move so much slower on Stars that I'm playing two at a time. It gets a bit hectic when I'm at the end of two matches simultaneously against opp's with different playing styles. I'm up nearly double my original stake of $90 after 17 4-man HU SnG's (winner takes all $24, if you're not familiar with the payoffs). Another hundred or so and I'll tell you what I think of the $11 games. |
||||||||
|
Quote:
|
|||||||||
| daven |
|
||||||||
|
Quote:
i'm still waiting for mine to turn up (dictionary entries) = downside of being on the other side of the world I guess... HU sng, interesting change! |
||||||||
|
with winning in mind win, move up, repeat
|
|||||||||
| Robb |
|
||||||||
|
Quote:
But we'll see... I like learning new stuff, and I think the HU experience will help my 6-max when I return to it. I don't have time to split my attention, but I will have to play some 6-max to grind my Full Tilt holiday bonus. One HU SnG at a time is killing my rakeback!! About 10 FTP's per day right now - lulz. |
||||||||
|
Quote:
|
|||||||||
| Robb |
|
||||||||
|
So I spent 6 weeks learning HU SnG's and making a little bit - one at a time, I'm definitely a winning player, but it would take until 2055 to grind up any serious roll. I'm competitive at the $11 HU SnG's, but not dominant. I will probably continue to play them off and on over the next few months, but I'm back to my 6m game, grinding my Christmas bonus, my last Iron Man bonus which will turn into a year-end bonus. I took spenda's and others advice in Kmind's thread (think it was in the short handed forum). They said the 18/15 TAGG just wasn't going to win much at 50nl and beyond. They suggested opening up. I went down to 10nl for a few thousand hands and began playing a laggier 30/25 style, and now I'm at 25nl doing the same. I can see how it works, now. Of course, folks are going to attack you and play back, but you make a lot stealing small pots so you can let ease out of pots where you have nothing. And, of course, hitting trip 9's when you open 97s from MP with two nits on your left really crosses them up when they call with AQ and the flop is Q99. For two years, I've been focused on playing a tight TAGG style. This style gets me into more big pot situations with big hands and big draws. The TAGG's play back at me more, and I get to play more pots with the fish. I'll probably have to tighten up as I move on up to 50nl or 100nl again, but I'll still be at something like 25/20 when I do with some good experience playing those wide, weak ranges. Oh, yeah, I haven't been around FTR much 'cuz work has been CRAZY. But it's all good. Hope ya'll have been doing well the past few months. |
||||||||
|
Quote:
|
|||||||||
| Robb |
|
||||||||
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Some goals for next 3-4 months (year-long goals aren't realistic in my life or my poker right now): 1. Grind $250 worth of Iron Man bonuses 2. Get nicely rolled for 100nl 3. Try new laggy style at 100nl for 10k hands or so, re-eval, tweak game and try to stabilize at 100nl for long run 4. DON'T PLAY TOO MANY TABLES YOU MORON 5. Grind to Silver level in FTP's Iron Man each month, which is basically 1k hands of 50nl 15 days in the month I think all of that is do-able provided I don't tilt/spew. I've finally realized that most of the downswings in my poker career have been double- or triple-severe because I follow up bad poker luck with a hyperaggressive/station can't-fold tilt/spew/donk asswipe play. My game goes completely off the rails for 15 or 20 hands, or sometimes 100 hands, and I turn a 1.5 BI downswing into 5 BI's down 'cuz of tilt. I've really been working hard on that, keeping my game ABC basic right after bad beats, probably folding too much in marginal spots. But folding is a small mistake in marginal pots, and I've proven I'm very capable of spewing. So I am working on relaxing, trying out the fold button and thinking very clearly about each decision when the bad beats cluster on me. And taking breaks immediately after any bad play follows a bad beat. Just sit out and steam a minute, then sit right back down and play solid. Two minutes fixes it, usually. |
||||||||
|
Quote:
|
|||||||||
| Robb |
|
||||||||
|
I'm just testing to see if the forum codes for LaTex work at FTR. [latex] \frac{x^2}{3x+4} [/latex] Guess not... |
||||||||
|
Quote:
|
|||||||||
| Robb |
|
||||||||
|
Poker life has been good but frustrating. While I've not stacked off like I would have in the past, I've had 6k hands of coolers and bad beats, just running like dog poop. I'm down 2.5 ptBB/100 over that stretch, with a 4.2 ptBB (positive) EV. Tonight, it started just the same, but then I hit a mini-heater and picked up a couple BI's. I've just gotta convince myself to keep fold, fold, folding. It will turn around eventually. No reason to compound (bad) poker luck by spewing. Sometimes they really do have it 5 times in row when they 4b your light 3b's. Sometimes they really do have 3 times in a row when they make a big turn raise. Take your read, make your laydown, wait for things to look better. I withdrew $300 because I was nearing the point would I "have" to play 100nl. I've been working pretty hard on my game and improving a lot at 50nl, but I don't feel quite ready for 100nl. So I made a defensive withdrawal to keep my bankroll marginal enough that I wouldn't be tempted to take a shot. I still have lessons to learn here. Finished clearing an Iron Man bonus, and I get to turn in Iron Man medals for a $100 bonus 1-Feb. At the end of February, if I don't spew off my roll between now and then, I'll probably be taking my game back to 100nl. |
||||||||
|
Quote:
|
|||||||||
| Robb |
|
||||||||
|
Sort of the quintessential example of implied odds: Grabbed by Holdem Manager NL Holdem $0.50(BB) Full Tilt Hero ($30) BB ($52.65) UTG ($53.50) UTG+1 ($51.85) CO ($40.70) BTN ($51) Dealt to Hero 4  6 fold, UTG+1 raises to $1.50, CO calls $1.50, fold, Hero calls $1.25, fold FLOP ($5) J  4 7 Hero checks, UTG+1 checks, CO checks TURN ($5) J 4 7 8 Hero bets $2.50, UTG+1 calls $2.50, CO folds RIVER ($10) J 4 7 8 5 Hero bets $3.75, UTG+1 raises to $47.85 (AI), Hero calls $22.25 (AI) UTG+1 shows A 9 (Pre 65%, Flop 27.2%, Turn 34.1%) Hero shows 4 6 (Pre 35%, Flop 72.8%, Turn 65.9%) Hero wins $59 |
||||||||
|
Quote:
|
|||||||||
| dranger7070 |
|
||||||||
| lol pwn tanmts | ||||||||
|
Man some crazy shit happened that can only be explained by God. - surviva
|
 |
| Latest Poker News | |
| lolzzz_321 |
03-19-2010, 02:43 PM Innovation, Sponsorship, and Festivities at Ladbrokes
|
| This is an exciting time at Ladbrokes! First, the prolific Microgaming room, has introduced Ladbrokes Instant Poker. Players no longer have to download software to get in the game! Prospective Ladb ... | |
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
Linear Mode
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 11:27 AM.
|
All content © FlopTurnRiver.com |
Advertising |
Partners |
Testimonials |
T&C |
Contact Us |
FTR News & Press |
Site Map |
Search FTR
Full Tilt | Titan Poker | UltimateBet | Poker Stars | Ladbrokes Bonus | Sportsbook | Cake Poker Play Texas Holdem Online, Online Texas Holdem Strategy, & Poker Forum |
 |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2000 - 2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
| This is not a gambling website. |
