Monthly Conceptualization: Slightly Ahead/Slightly Behind Spots

Intro: Why You're Reading This Post

A spot where regulars (including myself) get confused very very frequently are spots where there are a ton of cards that might hit the turn/river that will drastically change our equity or villain's perceived equity. That's confusing, so I'll give you two recent examples from the BC:

http://www.flopturnriver.com/pokerfo...ts-191144.html

http://www.flopturnriver.com/pokerfo...ml#post2098770

Two different hands and two different answers for whether or not we want to see a turn that will drastically improve/reduce our equity. Well, which is it? Do we to get the money in fast before the turn gets ugly and our equity is dropped, or do we want to keep the pot small then take advantage of the knowledge of what turn might come and decide what to do with the remaining money?

The Concept

I think the problem is that we're using the wrong terminology and the wrong concepts here. I am going to propose a much more streamlined way of thinking about these spots that uses language that I think will be less self-contradictory:

Will the information of knowing which turn/river will hit be of more value to Hero, or will it be of more value to Villain?

The above in bold is the schnazzier wording of it, but I actually think more specifically, we're saying, "Will the information of knowing what the turn/river is be of more use to how Hero plays his specific hand versus Villain's overall range, or will it be of more use to how Villain plays his overall range to our specific hand? I think this clarification is important for this concept.

The idea is very basic: If Villain will better be able to use the information of the turn/river card to play his range better against your hand, then we want to reduce the amount of money that's left behind. If Hero will be better able to use the information to play OUR hand against HIS range better, then we want to leave more money behind (and then exploit with that remaining money, ldo).

If you'd like to see this suspiciously simple concept in action, then skip to the examples, but I'm going to sketch out the concepts most relevant to this one a bit.

The Factors: What Should You Consider When Applying this Concept

POSITIONAL ADVANTAGE: This is simple. When you have the last say on what to do on each street, then you can check back cards that are bad for you, you can bet cards that are good for you, you can make better guesses at how much a certain card hurt/help Villain based on whether he checked, c/r'ed, donked, cbet, etc, then Villain will be able to determine about use simply based on whether we check or bet. Initiative probably plays a bit into this, too, but it's not as important as the other factors listed.

SKILL ADVANTAGE: Droolers who don't put Hero on ranges, don't much consider relative hand strength (and so are trying to get their TP in regardless of how coordinated the board comes), etc. are going to get less value out of knowing what turns come. They're stacking off ranges (most especially) just don't adapt to the card as well and they're not going to change the value of their draw enough based on whether they have one card left to hit or two, and so on and so forth. Meanwhile, Hero should be able to get a ton more value out of this information. Even predictable nits are less likely to exploit their positional advantages by forcing us off the best hand when a blank/scare card hit or by getting us to call worse, so we feel a little bit better about leaving money behind against these players, even when they're in position. Against top notch players who are going to as often as possible put us in tough spots with disguised ranges and who probably have a decent idea of which cards help/hurt us, etc, it's obviously not good to leave a ton of money behind.

HOW MUCH WILL WE CHANGE WHAT WE DO ONCE WE FIND TURN/RIVER vs. HOW MUCH WILL VILLAIN CHANGE WHAT HE DOES ONCE THEY FIND OUT WHAT IT IS: This is a big factor in pretty much every hand listed as an example. In Hand 1, we're stacking off regardless. Meanwhile, Villain is more likely to get away from worse hands once the board goes 4-straighted/3-flushed or the board pairs. In other words, when Villain is playing elastically and is properly adjusting to the cards that improve/hurt our equity (he's stacking off lighter when our equity goes down and getting away from his hand when our equity goes up). In Hand 2, we're getting away from our hand when a T/Q/spade hits, yet villain's still going to have an equally difficult time getting away from his AsAx or his QT or his QQ when they don't improve to the nuts, so we ensure that we get the money in when our hand is further ahead of his hand, yet villain is doomed to put more money in regardless.

This isn't to imply that we should always get rid of the money left behind every time we're stacking off regardless of what turn/river hits. Hand 5 is an example of this. We're stacking off with our set regardless of whether we bet on the flop or the turn, but the turn can help us because it makes Villain play his hand differently in a way that we can exploit. This is because this is not a slightly ahead/slightly behind (SA/SB) situation; villain only perceives it that way. We're trying to get money in while villain thinks he has a chance because, guess what, LOL HE HAS NO CHANCE AT ALL SONNNNNN!!!!

In other words, this isn't as simple as saying “Well I'm gonna put all the money in regardless of what happens, so I might as well get it in now.” If villain's going to play differently depending on what cards come, we have to decide whether that's to his advantage or to ours. If it's to his, then leave as little money left behind as you can; if the advantage is to you, leave lots of money behind so you can exploit that advantage.

HAVING A DISGUISED HAND: Early on I clarified that we're talking about whether the information will make Villain's range play better against our hand, and we're not as concerned that it will make him play better in general. If Villain is Tom Dwan, and he never puts us on 53o, however we have somehow arrived at a K42r flop with 53o, then the turn is more likely to MISINFORM our opponent about how much it helped/hurt us than it is to INFORM us (even though Villain has the skill advantage!). The more your range is faceup, and your hand falls smack dab in the middle of that range, the more Villain will be able to gauge what turns hurt/help us and so the more we will get exploited with the more money left behind.

Stack Depth/SPR/etc.: Notice that I keep talking about “leaving money behind” versus “leaving less money behind.” The more money that's left behind, the more that the person with all of the previously listed advantages will be able to exploit the other guy. Without a ton of money left behind, the less this whole conversation matters (but it's still always important). If there's a MASSIVE SPR, then this becomes crucial and even more factors come into play, like likelihood to make the nuts and all that fun stuff.


_____________________________

That's the concept in a nutshell. I will be posting 6 hand examples to go along with this, and hopefully you guys will be able to feel comfortable in this thought process by the time you work through the thread.

Hand Examples

NOTE: Whenever you're zooming in one particular concept, the more you are necessarily putting aside other factors. This concept is NOT some end-all, be-all, so in the following hand examples, specific reads, range balance, underrepping hands, setting up river shoves, choosing a spot that maximizes fold equity, blah blah blah are ignored. I am NOT, for example, saying that Hand 5 is the way we should always play flopped top set. I am simply showing how Villain may incorrectly perceive it as a SA/SB situation and will incorrectly use the information that the turn brings.

Hand 1:

Originally Posted by surviva316

Hand Converter isn't working for me, so I'm just gonna type it out.

Anyway, 5-or-so orbits in and villain seems pretty positionally aware and pretty agressive preflop. He had 3b once or twice, had only entered pots by raising preflop and had stolen 100% from the button. His hands have been uneventful postflop thus far, so he's like 2/2 cbetting so far and that's about all I know postflop.

Preflop I thought that it was blind vs. blind which is why I called instead of 3b'ing or folding, so yeah, stop misreading where the button is; leak plugged.

$10.47 effective stack
Hero (SB) has

PREFLOP: ($0.15)
3 folds
Villain (BU) opens for $0.25
Hero calls $0.25
BB folds

FLOP: ($0.60)
Hero's turn to act....

FACTORS IN ACTION: We are OOP. Villain is a TAgg and is unknown, so even if we're better than he is, we don't have enough reads (and the proper position) to be able to much exploit this. I am stacking off on any turn and Villain is far more likely to be able to get away from JJ with no spade type stuff when the turn brings a third spade or a 4-straight or another 4. Our hand is disguised because we misclicked pre, but we frequently have a 6, and we frequently have two spades (we don't often have a 4, which is nice, but that's the worse part of our draw, both outs wise and strength wise), so Villain will probably do just fine against us. We should lean toward reducing the amount of money that's left for us to be exploited on future streets (most especially, having us stack off even though our equity has gone way done on a blank turn).

CONCLUSION: The turn allows Villain to play his hand better once our equity has gone way up or way down, whereas we're pretty much gonna play the same, so we should lean toward leaving less money behind for the turn.

Hand 2:

Originally Posted by mondayscool

Villain is 15/10 0 3bet, 6.0 agg factor over 40 hands

Poker Stars, $0.01/$0.02 No Limit Hold'em Cash, 8 Players

CO: $4.39 (219.5 bb)
Hero (BTN): $5.02 (251 bb)
SB: $2 (100 bb)
BB: $1.09 (54.5 bb)
UTG+2: $0.95 (47.5 bb)
MP1: $1.92 (96 bb)
MP2: $0.59 (29.5 bb)
MP3: $5 (250 bb)

Preflop: Hero is BTN with 5 4
5 folds, Hero raises to $0.08, SB calls $0.07, BB folds

Flop: ($0.18) 2 T Q (2 players)
SB checks, Hero bets $0.13, SB raises to $0.30, Hero . . .

FACTORS IN ACTION: Villain seems competent but is out of position. We are absolutely changing our stack-off frequency and how much we control the size of the pot when the turn makes our flush a 5-high flush on a 4-flushed board lol. We're also going to be able to get away from our hand when the board pairs the T or the Q because the only hand we will be beating is AsQx, which would have a TON of equity against us (11 outs on a T turn and 17 outs on a Q turn). Villain will obviously be less and less pumped about his QT, 33, AsQx type hands as more blanks come out, but he will still have a VERY strong hand on the turn, and will still almost definitely bet into us again, at which we can raise and put him in a tough spot with his now reduced equity.

CONCLUSION: The turn allows us to play our hand better against villain's range, so we should be more willing to leave more money behind for later streets.

Hand 3:

Originally Posted by SnapCall

Ok so I'm playing at borgata on a Friday night. Action has been crazy and room is packed. I run into this specific hand where I couldn't decide the perfect line to extract max value. Obv I have the nuts. But that's not the issue. This post is solely based on a line for value.

Hero (button) - 20s. $600. Just came onto table within an hour. Made huge tank call vs a triple barrel bluff

Villain (utg+1)- Asian girl. 20s. $650ish Haven't seen her play one pot postflop within an hour. Someone mentioned she doubled up with a flush draw

PREFLOP

Utg raises to $12 , villain calls, hero A6 calls

FLOP

23Q

Utg check, villain bets $22, hero calls $22, utg folds

TURN

5

Villain checks, hero bets $41, villain raises to $85

Hero???

After this bet we both have about $500 behind. What would be my best line to take to extract max value without spelling out that I have the nuts?

So in this thread, players were arguing about whether we should raise big because we have the mega nuts and there are rivers that we hate, or should we raise a smaller amount. Again, this concept isn't the ONLY thing that should be taken into account, and the most important factor is how do we extract from the given villain, but I think this is an interesting spot for this concept.

FACTORS IN ACTION: Villain is a very bad and very predictable brand of player: a live nit (and a friggin' GIRL no less....tehe just playin). We have position on her and will have initiative once we raise. If she shoves over us, then gravy, but should we leave more or less money behind on the river?

Well, this is a tough one. If a 4th club comes, we're gonna have a tougher time extracting from lesser flushes, and there's a very good chance she even folds the second nuts when the board goes 4-flush, and we shove. However, if the board pairs and she shoves into us, we can fold. It sounds sick, but she's a live nit and we have to exploit the fact that she only plays the nuts this way and never turns a hand she calls the turn with into a bluff. So leaving more money behind let's her play correctly when we see the card WE want to see, but allows us to get away when she sees the card SHE wants to see.

CONCLUSION: Given that we have position + initiative + massive skill advantage, I tend to think we can get away with a smaller raise and have a better idea of which rivers to shove than she will have an idea which rivers to call on. Again, this doesn't get into concepts like how to best extract from villain; it's just a matter of "does leaving money behind give us the advantage or does it give her the advantage?"

Hand 4:

Originally Posted by oban14

Been watching the table for about 30 minutes waiting for my seat. Charity room, stacks flying around and all pretty bad/ dont like to fold.

Effective stacks 200 (7 HANDED)

utg+1 hero
V1= BUTTON
V2= SB (WORST GUY AT TABLE) overplays tp, underpair, basically everything

i limp 98d ( figure was gonna get 4/5 limpers)
V1 calls
V2 raises $10 ( 2 callers)

($33 pot pre)

Kd 2d 9c

V1 Cks , HERO cks, V2 bets $10, V1 raises to $45 , HERO..?

I just wondering if this an easy fold? If I call the $45 im basically commited if V2 does something crazy, or shoving an option?

FACTORS IN ACTION: We're in middle position and have a MASSIVE skill advantage over this lolcharitygame. We are, however, never getting away from our hand just because SPR won't allow us to get away from our pair+FD when both opponents play their hands this lightly. While both villain's will play dumb in general, they are at least slightly more like to get away from diamond turns and slightly less likely to get away from non-diamond turns, so the information the turn will bring will better benefit them than it will us.

CONCLUSION: We should tend to leave less money behind. Doesn't mean we're good enough to just shove here or that we shouldn't call to bring the other fish along or any of that. Calling STILL might be the right play, but in terms of this concept of whom will the turn information benefit the most, the answer is it will benefit the villains.

Hand 5:

We open JJ in the CO 100bb's deep and a player (any player really, but let's say it's someone who overplays single pair hands, even second pair) in the blinds calls. The flop comes J62r, and it checks to us.

FACTORS IN ACTION: We are in position and have the skill advantage. Since Villain doesn't have QQ+ in his ragne, we have the deck CRUSHED, so it is not an SA/SB, but Villain likely perceives it to be one. We are stacking off no matter what turn comes and Villain will obviously change his mind about how much he's paying off depending on if the turn helps or hurts him. Because he is crushed regardless of what turn card comes, though, the fact that he's more likely to put money in the pot on a card that helps him means that he is using the information of the turn card INCORRECTLY, and so we WANT him to change his mind about how he plays his hand.

CONCLUSION: For the 100th time, this does NOT mean that we should check here, but for the sake of this concept, the information of the turn card hurts Villain in terms of how he plays his range versus our hand, while it doesn't affect how we play our hand at all, and so we should lean toward leaving more money behind (though other factors will generally outweigh this concept in this situation).

Hand 6:

A TAgg Villain min opens from MP 100bb's deep. We call in the BB w TT. The flop comes T99dd. Villain bets ½ PSB and we call. The turn is the 8d and Villain bets again, this time bit bigger. Hero's turn to act . . . . .

FACTORS IN ACTION: Once again, this is not a SA/SB situation, but one where Villain will ABSOLUTELY perceive it to be. Villain is going to be less likely to stack off when the board brings 4 to a straight or 3 to a flush. Even though, we will not actually have a flush or a straight, Villain STILL plays more correctly against our hand on these rivers simply by folding (regardless of WHY he folds). Villain may also be more pleased about his hand once he himself has hit a 4 straight or a flush, but given the fact that we will be OOP and without the initiative against a decent player who understands relative hand strength, it will be tough to make him make the mistake of stacking off when we have so much money left behind (~85bb's in a ~25bb pot) going into the river. We are playing the same regardless, but Villain is going to play more carefully on bad rivers.

CONCLUSION: We're not changing how we play based on the river, and Villain is; namely, he's changing how he plays it in a way that behooves him against our particular hand (even if he's not particularly putting us on this hand). Get money in, take back the initiative and reduce the SPR.

why did you check the turn in hand 6

why the hell would you not bet the flop in hand 5

hand 4 raise pre wtf.

hand 3 this is a super std big raise spot. secure the cooler.

hand 2 secure the cooler against this micro donk

hand 1 lead/3b will play far better against his range. why the turn.

i hate all your examples for this concept.

Originally Posted by bikes

i hate all your examples for this concept.

NOTE: Whenever you're zooming in one particular concept, the more you are necessarily putting aside other factors. This concept is NOT some end-all, be-all, so in the following hand examples, specific reads, range balance, underrepping hands, setting up river shoves, choosing a spot that maximizes fold equity, blah blah blah are ignored. I am NOT, for example, saying that Hand 5 is the way we should always play flopped top set. I am simply showing how Villain may incorrectly perceive it as a SA/SB situation and will incorrectly use the information that the turn brings.

I'm definitely not, for the sake of this conversation, concerned about PF in Hand 4, and Hand 6 was only to demonstrate that the idea of getting value before scare cards hit relates to this concept.

^ As a less dismissive response, your reply to Hand 2 is directly relevant to the concept here applied.

I don't know what cooler we're securing, though. You mean against AsQx, QT and sets? We can still cooler these hands on the turn after their equity has reduced on a blank. On a card that's good for that range, we can fold on a 4th spade and control the pot on a T/Q so that we lose less than we would have. Of course we win less from QT and sets when the turn is a spade and the river is a blank, and we win a little less from AQ when the turn is a T/Q and the river is a blank, but if we're making the right decisions against his range, then these adjustments are +eV (and if you think through each spot individually, it seems pretty clear that we are making the proper play with our hand against his range....like by a lot).

Don't really have anything to contribute but I'd just like to bump this up to the front page and thank surviva on behalf of all the noobs for the work that went into this post; helped solidify the concept for me.