|
isf, you should spend more time doing actual math and calculations and less time doing sklanskyesque statements that sound good but easily proven bad.
example #1:
If you have 33% equity or better facing a stack off calling range preflop facing a threebet or fourbet and you think there's fold equity, raise/shove.
it's usually more like 29-30%, but meh. more importantly:
'and if you think there's fold equity, raise/shove'
lol, what? here's a hint, there is almost always going to be fold equity in any spot where most of your opponent's stack isn't in the middle of the pot. the key is doing an actual equity calculation and figuring out how often they need to fold. another hint: when someone 4-bets with typical 100bb stacks, they are folding to a shove almost never. If you enjoy shoving 86bb into a pot where you're going to have 60bb equity when you're invariably called, ok. and if you're 4-bet shoving yourself, you need more than 'some fold equity'. you often need him to fold 2/3 or more of his range. A lot of people are going to love you for this post, but if they don't understand these concepts, you might actually be doing them a disservice.
similar with flop play: if you have 20% equity and there's enough dead money in the pot and you have enough fold equity, by all means, shove. but you need to quantify that better, A LOT BETTER, than just saying 'if you have 20% equity and there's fold equity, shove' or whatever. that can easily be wrong and often is.
Try to play in such a way that easily defines your value bets and your bluffs
I generally disagree with this. It may make your decisions easier, but more importantly, polarizing your range-- which in effect is what you're advocating-- makes it much easier to play against you.
Try to manipulate your opponent to carry weaker hands into later streets
I like this. Often times you can play around with how you manipulate pot/stack sizes (i.e. not betting your generic 'standard' amount), or take unstandard lines to do this.
If you can count two hands or more on the river you feel opp likely has and will fold to a bet/shove with, do it.
back to the first two examples-- this just seems like another one where it sounds good and all, but the grossly fuzzy math just doesn't seem to help. It just seems better to actually quantify his range and see how to best play it. What if he has 2 hands that seem likely that you beat and 10 that have you crushed? Or he has 2 very weak hands that are overwhelmingly likely but you have the nuts and the board crippled? is betting and shoving still ideal in both cases?
There are a lot of good ideas in your post. Some I think are a bit too abstract to really be useful, and the lack of actual math and calculations makes it a bit less useful still. Good post though.
|