Polarized vs Non-Polarized Range HU IP on River (Exercise)

[spoonitnow]

I'll take a stab at this.

I think betting with a polarized range is neutral EV, no matter what villain's calling range looks like. If he's calling wide, then the top of our range gets a lot of value, but the bottom of our range is -EV to bet. Conversely, if he's calling narrowly, then the bottom of our range steals a lot of equity, but the top of our range loses value relative to what it would have if we just checked back. The middle of our range beats his bottom 33% of the time, loses to his top 33%, and flips against his middle 33%. So also neutral EV when we check that back.

I think polarizing is fine if we don't have a good idea of what villain's calling range is since it's technically never a mistake. If we do have some idea of what he'll call with, then we can exploit it some other way.

So you're saying that if we bet 1 combo of bluffs and 10 combos of hands that each beat our opponent's calling range that we are break even against his calling range?

[grnydrowave2]

So you're saying that if we bet 1 combo of bluffs and 10 combos of hands that each beat our opponent's calling range that we are break even against his calling range?

No. But is that polarizing?

[spoonitnow]

No. But is that polarizing?

A polarized range included hands that are either strong or weak, with nothing in the middle. Like

<--bet---|---check---|---bet-->

Yup.

[grnydrowave2]

Yup.

Forgive me if I'm being dense. I thought a polarized betting range would be something like 5 bluffs and 5 strong hands, not 1 and 10.

So since it's neutral EV, wouldn't the answer be "no, we shouldn't be polarizing our range" then?

--assuming there's a +ev option out there.

Yeah, that's kind of what I meant. If you know what the +ev option is. Otherwise, you can fall back on the neutral EV option.

[Ragnar4]

Forgive me if I'm being dense. I thought a polarized betting range would be something like 5 bluffs and 5 strong hands, not 1 and 10.



Yeah, that's kind of what I meant. If you know what the +ev option is. Otherwise, you can fall back on the neutral EV option.

I'm not saying you're wrong, or anything.

I'm just saying that's the answer to Spoons Question. All things being equal, there is probabyl a +ev choice, a neutral ev choice and a - ev choice. We should strive for the + ev choice.

Although Poker is one of those batshit crazy games where you're stuck with neutral ev or -ev as your only options every once in a while, and in that case you take the neutral ev.

[NightGizmo]

Forgive me if I'm being dense. I thought a polarized betting range would be something like 5 bluffs and 5 strong hands, not 1 and 10.

"Polarized" just means the top and bottom of your range. It doesn't say anything about the ratio of the top to the bottom.

I think betting with a polarized range is neutral EV, no matter what villain's calling range looks like

If the villain only calls with the nuts and second nuts, and folds 100 other combos in his range -- you wouldn't bet a polarized range? And you don't think that would be +++EV?