Random analytical NLHE ring discussion.

I sat down yesterday and worked out some calculations. I'm starting to get into the habit of EV analyzing common situations that come up in ring, and its helping me understand where fundamental flaws in my game exist.

As a random choice of what to analyze, i decided to do a little digging up on blind defense. Basically I chose a situation where someone is opening light on the button (like 25-30% of their hands), Im flat calling with a hand that flops well, and we play a flop.

The hand i chose was KQo. This was pretty arbitrary, but KQo is a perfect example of a hand that flops well but doesn't have very good hot/cold equity if u get all in with it.

I ran this through a series of example flops with the following controls:

-stacks are 200, and blinds are 1/2, and its 6 handed
-villain is opening 30% of his hands from the button, a range of something like (i don't have the stuff with me here at school) A2s+ A8o KTo+ K8s+ Q9+ J8o+ and all suited connectors and pairs.
-villain is raising to 8 and we are calling 6 from the BB, with the sb folding.
-we see a flop and villain bets 12 into 17 75% of the time when checked to, regardless of whether he hit.

Here were some interesting tidbits about the range i chose for villain (which is about what my range would be on the button in his spot)

-Villain has a pocket pair about 20% of the time he raises.
-Villain has an ace about 30% of the time he raises.
-KQo is about 53% vs this range (e.g. if we were to go all in and he were to always call)

Like i said, i don't have the precise data with me, but the results were very interesting:

Approximately 25% of the time, hero flops a pair of Queens or Kings without an ace on board, and has 80-85% equity in the pot. Sure, some flops are better than others, but in general a QcTc5c flop (we have no Kc) is nearly the same pot equity as a Qc9d3s flop when u compare it to the wide range villain is raising pre.

Approximately 3% of the time, hero flops a pair on an ace high board. In this spot, we still actually have very good equity in the pot (around 70%), when u consider the fact that villain only is raising an ace 30% of the time, and the fact that an ace is now out slightly decreases those chances. This basically indicates that its terrible to check/fold in this spot.

Approximately 3% of the time, the flop comes JTx giving hero an oesd. Surprisingly, we're only 50% vs villains range here.

Approximately 3.5% of the time, hero flops huge (two pair, KKx, QQx or KKQ/QQK/KKK/QQQ). In this spot we are between 92% and 99% to win.

The rest of the time (65%), hero flops nothing. Now heres the interesting thing. Even in this spot, we almost always have 40-45% equity vs villains wide range. With that number, which basically is exemplifying the overwhelming possibility that villain has nothing or a very weak hand, couldn't we justify check-raising or lead-betting almost 100% of flops when we whiff KQo here?

Isn't it almost always a mistake to check/fold the flop in this scenario (other than for balance)?


I'll get the precise numbers for this later if anyone wants them. I'd like to eventually get into discussing some EV analysis for checkraising/leadbetting/checkcalling this flop as a bluff. I'd also like to play with different preflop raising ranges for villain and similar hands in this spot.

Interesting it would be to know how JT fares here, or how much of a difference it would make (ev-wise) to cold call in position (e.g. he raises the cutoff and we call the button) with hands like this, and also how much more plus ev it would be (if at all) to threebet pre in spots like this.

Good post. You probably know this already but just because you have 40% equity against his range doesn't mean you should float him OOP with nothing, for the same reason that you shouldn't call a min-raise from the BB with trash even though you're probably better than 28% against the min-raisers range. Hitting pair on the turn potentially has bad reverse implied odds and you probably won't be able to play the hand profitably on the turn and river.

By the way, i intend for this thread to span many pages, and ultimately culminate into a giant eureka moment for all of us.

Please add thoughts to this.

I guess the first point is obvious, if we are 53% vs his range we should NOT 3-bet pre-flop. We will only fold junk we are beating and don't have that much equity anyway.

I think I might check/fold terrible flops like AXX (paired+X) or ATX all suited to something other than you.

I think check/calling on a totally blank flop is bad, leading or check/raising much better.

Originally Posted by zenbitz

I guess the first point is obvious, if we are 53% vs his range we should NOT 3-bet pre-flop.

this isn't true at all, for reasons i will go into when i do the more in depth analysis situation.

But suffice to say, that threebetting with a hand like KQ that is usually good in a threebet pot when it hits the flop, and has outs when called, isn't bad at all, and is actually a really good play against the right players.

obv calling trying to hit the flop and c/f if we miss is bad.

Are we making any assumptions about the villain? Just standard TAG?

It may help to break up this 75% cbet range. What hands does a TAG cbet, (TPTK+, some complete whiffs, strong draws)? What hands does he check (TPGK, gutshots, etc)?

Originally Posted by swiggidy

obv calling trying to hit the flop and c/f if we miss is bad.

Not necessarily. My analysis of that base line indicated that hero would lose approximately 1bb (thats BIG BLIND, not big bet) per hand if he check/folded whenver he missed and checked/called whenever he hit, based on factors:

1. Hero ALWAYS wins EXACTLY his equity in the pot when he checks calls (e.g., it assumes a situation where u flop good, c/c the flop, and the turn and river are checked through).

2. Hero checks/folds 65% of the time, forfeiting all equity in the pot (Note that this assumes a 100% cbet frequency. Sometimes (albeit rarely), you will check down and improve on the turn, or even showdown a good King high).

Obviously, if u play well after the flop (i mean solidly, you'd still never be bluffing), you should easily be able to make that 1bb/hand back by simply getting a little turn value out of your hand whenever u hit, or win a big pot occasionaly when u flop huge.

It is my belief that with a hand as strong as KQ you could easily defend your bb without ever bluffing. JT or T9s on the other hand, probably not.

Originally Posted by swiggidy

Are we making any assumptions about the villain? Just standard TAG?

It may help to break up this 75% cbet range. What hands does a TAG cbet, (TPTK+, some complete whiffs, strong draws)? What hands does he check (TPGK, gutshots, etc)?

For now, im doing a base analysis using a loose aggressive (preflop) who cbets most flops and gives up when he's called. Basically your standard unremarkable 25/18ish player.

how does all this work if we donk every flop from the bb?
i.e lhe 6max.

Originally Posted by Miffed22001

how does all this work if we donk every flop from the bb?
i.e lhe 6max.

obviously any play without balance is going to suck, but I think its highly possible as part of a balanced strategy, that if u defend with KQ here 100% of the time, donkbet 100% of the time that you miss, check/call 100% of the time that u flop a pair, check raise/donkbet 50/50 when u flop oesd, and checkraise/donkbet 75/25 whenever you flop huge, and never checked/folded, that you'd be doing quite well with KQo in this spot, long run, versus the described unremarkable tag player.

^^^^ run on sentence

sup straight flush boi

Someone teach me how to think like you guys.

these numbers are interesting, but what about other stuff, like villain's tendencies or history?
for example, if villain has 4 5, and the flop is A K 3 rainbow, you have a ton of equity, but what will you do if villain fires two barells? or 3bets your check raise, etc?

Originally Posted by benny999

these numbers are interesting, but what about other stuff, like villain's tendencies or history?
for example, if villain has 4 5, and the flop is A K 3 rainbow, you have a ton of equity, but what will you do if villain fires two barells? or 3bets your check raise, etc?

well we first need to determine profitability vs straightforward players, then we move on to tricky ones.

If you want to play this hand against a straight forward button player, 3-bet preflop and lead out on the flop. You'll find out sooner than later how things will turn out by the showdown.

Originally Posted by BankItDrew

If you want to play this hand against a straight forward button player, 3-bet preflop and lead out on the flop. You'll find out sooner than later how things will turn out by the showdown.

people like to call.

i tried this last night and donking the flop with AT/KQ type hands always, leads to opps folding lots of hands.

A standard Tag does not donk bet very often, and they often treat donk bets as showing huge strength. The 25/18 player Renton is refering to is not a typical Tag, nor is he a Lag or sLag. He is somewhere in between and often there is a huge difference in the postflop ability of these 25/18 players. I have often found these players to think they are much much better than they are. They 'think' they are good enough to play more hands than their 18/15 solid Tag counterparts, and often have a regular case of FPS. Anyway I think these players are rarely straight forward.

I think you guys are over looking the impact of your own image. If you are running 18/15 these players 'typically' will raise the **** out of you or fold. If you are a 30/20 player like Miffed, then they will fold or call more often than raise. If you are going to employ this strategy you need the image to go with it and the stones to bet a lot of turns.

thats probably why AA/KK and even JJ are pretty big winners for me, yet AK in particular is such a looser because i get called down a lot by really light hands.

Nice post, Renton. I think you might want to throw AQs/AJs into his flatting range, but otherwise it looks good. I also think 30% PFR from the CO is a little higher than average, but we'll see the effect of lowering it in the next segment...

a 30% steal the blinds rate is pretty standard, no?

Originally Posted by Renton

a 30% steal the blinds rate is pretty standard, no?

I think its low for the average 100 6 max player, but about right for 200, at least for Stars. However steal % is for both the CO an BTN, so their raise range on the CO is really only 20-25, with a BTN range 30+.

Bump!

More calculations and excellent discussion please

Theory:
It's better to threebet KQ here when he is calling a wider range. However, it's still good to threebet when he's folding a tight range. So why the fuck wouldn't we threebet! lolz.

My question is is which do we prefer before we threebet: too passive or too aggro. I'd think too passive.

bump

More content kthx rent.