[spoonitnow strategy] EV Calculations Tutorial 6: Calling Scenarios

[spoonitnow]

Late last year, I had a series of EV Calculation tutorials that offered players a way to do even complex EV calculations with simple addition and multiplication (Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5). Recently, someone posted in the Beginner’s Circle asking about how to do calling calculations. While it seemed like that individual might have just not gone through the entire series and learned the method that I was teaching, I realized that most of the examples I gave were from the perspective of being the aggressor. To this end, I’m going to cover some calling scenarios here in this week’s edition.

Keep reading: http://www.flopturnriver.com/poker-s...cenarios-20795

[WeldPhaser]

Cool thanks spoon. I'm gonna go through it after work

[spoonitnow]

I'll be available in the FTR Chat room for anyone who wants to talk about this.

[MadMojoMonkey]

Great work, as usual, spoon. Here's something that caught my attention.

If my "This assumes..." statements are incorrect, then please feel free to correct them... I have a tendency to get caught up in "always" and "never" statements, but that doesn't mean those statements are always incorrect.

[...] and we will always win if we hit

This assumes either a rare and specific board or a full knowledge of Villains' cards.

How does Hero's uncertainty that his outs are the effective nuts affect the equity?

[...]with no chance of winning if we miss

This assumes that there is no bluffing opportunity on a future street, or that the equity of a bluff attempt is exactly 0%.

How does including an opportunity to bluff on a later street affect the EV of calling on the current street?

[Renton]

MMM, to be more thorough with the NFD example you'd need to separate the outcome for flush cards that pair the board. For example, if the board were Ks 9s 2d 3c and we had As7s IP facing a pot size bet with a pot size bet left on the river if we call, there would be the following outcomes:

1) non board pairing flush and he shoves or check calls and we always win (pot + turn bet + river bet)
2) board pairing flush and he shoves or check calls and we win (pot + turn bet + river bet)
3) board pairing flush and he shoves or check calls and we lose (turn bet + river bet)
4) any flush card and he check folds (we win pot + turn bet)
5) any blank (we lose turn bet)


And if you want to add a bluffing outcome

1) - 4) the same as above
5) blank we don't intend to bluff (we lose turn bet)
6) blank we intend to bluff, but he shoves first (we lose turn bet)
7) blank we intend to bluff, he check folds (we win pot + turn bet)
8) blank we intend to bluff, he check calls (we lose turn bet + river bet)

[Renton]

Supposing in the K923 board facing a pot size bet with 4x the pot behind (i.e. the turn bet is 1p and the river bet is a pot size shove) example given the following assumptions

1) he'll shove 50% of the time that we hit a flush, otherwise he c/f, and we'll have 100% equity on non pairing flush rivers and 90% equity on paired board flush rivers

2) he'll shove 50% of the time that we miss and we will not be able to call, even on an ace
3) he'll thus check 50% of the time that we miss as well
4) we intend to bluff on 3 rivers that we don't hit, and we expect him to fold to our bet 60% of the time

the mathematical outcomes

1) non pairing flush and he shoves, we win 5p - (7/46)(0.5)(5)
2) pairing flush and he shoves, we win 5p 90% - (2/46)(0.5)(0.9)(5)
3) pairing flush and he shoves, we lose 4p 10% - (2/46)(0.5)(0.1)(-4)
4) flush and he c/f, we win 2p ------------------ (9/46)(0.5)(2)
5) blank and he shoves, we lose 1p ------------- (37/46)(0.5)(-1)
6) blank and he checks and we shove, win 2p --- (3/46)(0.5)(0.6)(2)
7) blank and he checks and we shove, lose 4p -- (3/46)(0.5)(0.4)(-4)
8) blank and he we both check, lose 1p ---------- (34/46)(0.5)(-1)

sum the outcomes:

ev = (7/46)(0.5)(5) + (2/46)(0.5)(0.9)(5) + (2/46)(0.5)(0.1)(-4) + (9/46)(0.5)(2) + (37/46)(0.5)(-1) + (3/46)(0.5)(0.6)(2) + (3/46)(0.5)(0.4)(-4) + (34/46)(0.5)(-1)
ev =-11/92 pot

I rushed through that so idk if it's right, the process is right though. You can set the bluffing stuff to a variable and zero the ev to figure out how often you need to be bluffing on blank to justify calling the turn for a psb.

[WeldPhaser]

So spoon i will be posting from the tutorial. Been wicked busy. Thanks

Oh yeah bro I have gone through the ev tutorial s. I have to say with gratitude I has taught me a great deal

[spoonitnow]

Great work, as usual, spoon. Here's something that caught my attention.

If my "This assumes..." statements are incorrect, then please feel free to correct them... I have a tendency to get caught up in "always" and "never" statements, but that doesn't mean those statements are always incorrect.


This assumes either a rare and specific board or a full knowledge of Villains' cards.

How does Hero's uncertainty that his outs are the effective nuts affect the equity?


This assumes that there is no bluffing opportunity on a future street, or that the equity of a bluff attempt is exactly 0%.

How does including an opportunity to bluff on a later street affect the EV of calling on the current street?

Add possible outcomes, find the chance of each of those outcomes, and find the profit for each of those outcomes. Just follow the process that I have laid out, and you can make it as detailed as you want.