Hand review...

Have I done this calculation right?

I'm trying to analyse an all in...

Here is the hand, and I'll explain my process underneath it

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $0.02 BB (5 handed) - Poker-Stars Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com

SB ($5)
BB ($2.75)
Hero (UTG) ($4.36)
MP ($3.60)
Button ($2)

Preflop: Hero is UTG with 10:heart:, A:club:
Hero bets $0.08, 3 folds, BB calls $0.06

Flop: ($0.17) 10:diamond:, 9:heart:, 6:diamond: (2 players)
BB checks, Hero bets $0.50, BB raises to $2.67 (All-In), Hero calls $2.17

Turn: ($5.51) Q:heart: (2 players, 1 all-in)

River: ($5.51) 5:diamond: (2 players, 1 all-in)

Total pot: $5.51 | Rake: $0.25


Step 1: The pot on the flop = 3.34

Step 2: Size of the bet = 2.17 (is what I'm calling)

Step 3: My equity against his range is 55%

Step 4 (the bit I'm not certain about): 2.67 (bet) divided by 2.84 x 100 = 94%

So in retrospect I believe I was SO wrong to make this call...EVEN though I was ahead on the flop. Yay or nay? Am I also right in saying that it was an awful play by villain, since he had middle pair and also because he had less equity than me?

Where's the 2.84 x 100 coming from?

Let me try this:

You have $2.17 to call into a pot of $3.34, and you have 55% equity. So 55% of the time you win $3.34 and 45% of the time you lose $2.17.
That is an expected value of (0.55 x $3.34) + (0.45 x -$2.17) = $0.86, so I call every time.

Right?

As for villains raise, I guess it depends on his fold equity, which is down to his opinion of your range, so hard to tell.

First of all, what range are you putting him on?
Second, based on the info you gave us DanAronG has it exactly right.
Third, No, it is not wrong for you to call if you are ahead on the flop with more equity than him, ever.

As for the villain's raise as Dan said, it depends on what he has and what he thought his fold equity was.

betting 50c into a 17c pot? And you have 55% equity against his shipping range?

Oh yeah, sorry I forgot to include any reads/stats I had on him.

Well, I had no notes on him and I figured from his stats 65/9/35 he played a tight range, but was fairly aggressive. I only had 50 hands on him though, so I doubt it's a totally accurate description...since his VPIP was 65%, I guess he was hitting some good cards (please confirm if this is the right way of analysing stats).

As for his range, after he checked the flop I put him on 22-55, 77, 88, 56+, Ax, Qx, Kx, but seemingly no *made* hands (by this I mean, nothing bankable). However, I was probably wrong in thinking like this because his stats indicated a really tight range, so I should have factored him having a set. (even though I wasn't *actually* wrong with Qx).

Since I had TPTK, I bet highly (to take away his implied odds?), and he re-raised me high I figured maybe I had his range. His stats indicated (as I later checked) that he check-raises a lot, so maybe I should have acted differently.

Quote:

---

betting 50c into a 17c pot? And you have 55% equity against his shipping range?

---

Are you asking me something or berating me for something?

There is so much wrong here, and considering you have over 200 posts, I suggest you start taking notes to help you remember stuff.

65% vpip, means he actually chose to put money into the pot 65% of the time, this means he plays approximately 65% of the hands he is dealt. He raises 9%, which means he lilmps 56%. So he is weak and loose.

Someone who plays short handed should prob comment on what I just said, as my stat knowledge comes from full ring, but even at 6max I would think that is really loose.

Why did you give him that range? I suggest you look through Sppons excercises 1 to 5, you would probably beneift from going through these.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DanAronG

65% vpip, means he actually chose to put money into the pot 65% of the time, this means he plays approximately 65% of the hands he is dealt. He raises 9%, which means he lilmps 56%. So he is weak and loose.

Someone who plays short handed should prob comment on what I just said, as my stat knowledge comes from full ring, but even at 6max I would think that is really loose.

---

Ah that helps a lot...didn't know that VPIP splits into limping and raising like that.

cheers

I just posted and it's not appearing.

I basically said thanks.

if bet/(bet+pot) is < our equity, we can call profitably.

so here, 2.17/(2.17+3.34) = about 39%. Since we have 55% equity, it is an easy call.

Something to think about. The fraction bet/(bet+pot) has a maximum value ie, it can never be larger than a certain number.

Something else. If betting 2.5x the pot was because you expected to get called alot by worse, then great. Be careful however, because against anyone that has even the slightest idea of what they're doing is gonna exploit the fuck out of you.

Something else else. Someone playing 65% of hands doesnt hit as many flops as that person thinks he does. Check out how JTo does on a AK2r board against his limping range, or how A2 does on a Q82 board. Careful how you interpret these results...

@Dan: Ya, a 65/9 is super weak loose regardless of the game. Like, thats terrible for HU too.

@the actual actions in the hand: meh, as played i probably call too.

@betting super large to take away implied odds: Betting this large probably did take away his implied odds ( didnt maths it out), but thats not all there is to betting. Every hand in villains range except the nuts is willing to fold to some bet. Its our job to get him to call with the most hands that we're ahead of as possible...but its also our job to get him to put as much money in when behind as well. Betting larger might make him continue with less hands...but betting smaller might give him odds to call with everything. So we gotta find a equilibrium point where we maximize both aspects...and that pretty much is how to determine bet sizes. FOR INSTANCE: at 2nl, its generally more profitable to bet larger preflop since people dont see a difference between a 4x bet and a 6x bet, so we get them to call more with the same range which is usually good for us.

If you worry so much about implied odds... play fnords 1/2 stacking strategy (you'll find it in strategy section). Fish like the one in your hand don't look at stack sizes. They won't notice they have no implied odds when you'll shove the turn and still call hoping the miracle river comes.

Overbetting the pot 3x, will most of the time win you a very small pot when you're ahead... and lose you a big one when you're behind.

I'm gonna PM you what my general style of play was on those 2NL tables, when I find the time. (when I start tilting over some suckage today :) )

To give you an idea of just how much 65&#37; of hands is from poker stove....
A2+,K2+,Q2s+,Q4o+,22+,J2s+,T2s+,54s+,64s+,74s+,84s +,94s+,J6o+,T7o+,97o+,86o+,76o+
That's, for lack of a better term, a fuck ton of hands. Way too many to be playing at FR or 6m. Add that to his only 9% raising range and you have a very passive weak player.

Not really sure why you're betting .5 into .17 since the only things calling you here even by an awful player are hands with good equity against you. As for his shove, I'd personally put him on a range of T6+,96+,78,A6dd+,K9dd+, TT,99,66, JJ. You still have 61% equity for this range and it makes this an easy call.

2NL i shit my pants everytime someone donk shoves all in, because it's either complete shit or what opp believes is the nutzzz. I think the range is very read dependent and could be as narrow as {TT,66,99,78, T9, etc } or as wide as his whole PF limping range. Had he ever shoved and flipped over the nuts before? By fairly aggressive do you mean always shoving like he did, or just raising some sensible amount?

BTW do we get a spoiler?