previous page

1

next page

Definition of playability:

quote:

The value "playability" can be defined in the following way: a hand has a high playability if the correct strategy often overlaps with the optimal strategy. The correct strategy means playing the hand right in the given situation. The optimal strategy means playing the hand as if you knew the cards of the opponent.

Say the opponent has a 35% range and raises first-in. Everybody folds to us in the BB. Now we will compare two hands: KQo and A9o. KQo has ca. 52% equity, A9o 54%.

KQo, however, has clearly better playability, since we usually know on the flop where we stand. With A9o we are never sure: if we don't hit the flop, our ace high could be the best hand. If we hit the ace, the opposition might hold a better ace. If we hit the 9, he might still have a better hand. These problems do not surface with KQo. KQo is the stronger hand here.

Now imagine we're playing no-limit (or in some other way we are able to go all in against the opponent pre-flop). Then the playability disadvantage of A9o would disappear and we would only be concerned with the equity.

But if we are not playing no-limit we can acheive the same effect in limit hold'em using the pot size: the larger the pot pre-flop, the weaker the effect of playability.

Furthermore, a 3-bet pre-flop will often "automate" the entire hand, thereby simulating an all-in. After a 3-bet pre-flop, a flop bet almost always follows. The opposition will often not raise this since he fears a strong hand. Therefore, we can lift all playability disadvantages until the turn. The situation becomes more difficult on the turn, but because of the now-large pot the playability effect will still be diminished. And many opponents give a very "honest" statement of their strength on the turn, allowing us to play optimally.

In summary, we can say the following: with a hand with poor playability, we try to match the actualy EV of the hand to the pre-flop equity. We do this by making the pot as large as possibly pre-flop and by "forcing" the pre-flop bet sequence as much as possible, that is, we wish to automate it. This should not be overdone. You should only 3-bet if you really have an equity edge (at least 50% equity). It is questionable whether it is worth 3-betting worse hands as well (48% equity but bad playability).

What about a hand with very good playability like KQo? Exactly the reverse! We often know exactly where we stand on the flop with this hand: either clearly behind or clearly ahead. For this reason, we don't want to be forced into an automated mode of play pre-flop.

We call the pre-flop raise. If the flop is bad, like A92, we can then play check/fold with a clear conscience and have lost only 2 SB. If we had 3-bet pre-flop, bet flop it would have been at least 4 SB.

If we like the flop, however, we can then make just as much or more (check/raise flop, bet turn in 95% of cases) through good post-flop play.

This effect is clearly not worth pushing pre-flop with our 2% equity edge. In fact, this strategy will let us make a good bit more with KQo than the 52% equity indicates.

Quote:

Obsolete part While playing today the following axioms occurred to me: The better the playability, the less important is initiative The worse the playability, the more important is initiative Explanation using an example: We are 1st in the SB and have 22. We raise, BB 3-bets. If we call we will have a dilemma on the flop: the opposition will bet into us and put us into a position where we will often have to fold the best hand or call with the worse hand. If, in the same situation, we have Qjo this will not happen. Here we know on the flop where we stand with good precision. In general, we can say that a hand with a low playability is better off with the initiative. The effect if often - I think - large enough that you can make a pre-flop 3-bet or cap that is not justified by value. So with 22 in the example above we should cap pre-flop. This will put our opponent in an unpleasant situation, namely that he will often fold the best hand on the flop. We, on the other hand, will spare ourselves this decision. Comparison with the shorthanded seminar text Tactical caps are discussed in the pre-flop section of the shorthanded seminar text. When writing this text the abstract connection between tactical caps and the playability of a hand was not directly apparent. It can now be said, however, that tactical caps serve to compensate for the playability deficit of a certain hands.

Next article: Equity vs Strategic Advantages [Beta]