\nQuelle: PokerStove<\/i>
\n\t\t\tequity (%) win (%) \/ tie (%) \n\t\t\tHand 1: 38.7700 % [ 00.38 00.01 ] { AKo }
\n\t\t\tHand 2: 30.6090 % [ 00.30 00.01 ] { TT-55, ATs-A6s, KJs-K9s, QJs-QTs, JTs }
\n\t\t\tHand 3: 30.6210 % [ 00.30 00.01 ] { TT-55, ATs-A6s, KJs-K9s, QJs-QTs, JTs }<\/p><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table> Wir haben also hier gegenüber unseren 2 Gegner einen Equity edge von 8%. Wenn wir raisen kommen 3 extra Bets in den Pot, von denen uns 38% gehören. Somit erhöht ein Raise hier nach Equity Gesichtspunkten unseren EV um 0,14 SBs. Dieser Raise alleine ist schon so viel wert wie eine gute Hand ala 99 im Durchschnitt!<\/p> Das Standardargument gegen diese Berechnung ist, dass man ja den EV, den man preflop verschenkt, post-flop wieder reinholen könne, da man aufgrund der kleineren Potgröße besser protecten könne, also seine Gegner in Positionen bringen können, wo sie entweder folden oder aber schlechte Calls machen müssen. Durch einen pre-flop Raise - so wird argumentiert - sorgen wir aber dafür, dass unser Gegner post-flop automatisch korrekte Calls macht, weil der Pot einfach zu groß geworden ist. <\/p> Hierbei wird aber impliziert, dass ein guter Call eines Gegners schlecht für uns sein muss. Obwohl dies bestimmt von 70% aller \"guten\" Spieler geglaubt wird, ist es schlichtweg falsch. <\/p> SB vs BB<\/h1>Stellt euch vor wir sind am Flop heads-up und der Gegner hat einen Draw der mit einer 25% Wahrscheinlichkeit am Turn trifft. Lasst uns weiterhin annehmen, dass wir die Karten des Gegners kennen und er unsere Karten kennt. Wir sind nur an der mathematisch perfekten Spielweise interessiert.<\/p> Unterscheiden wir weiterhin zwei Fälle:<\/p> a) Wir haben preflop gecheckt. Pot = 2 SB
\nb) Wir haben preflop geraist. Pot = 4 SB<\/p> Fall a) Er checkt, wir betten, er foldet. Häufigkeit: 100%, Extra Value= +2 SB <\/p> Fall b)
\nFlop: check, bet, call. Pot 6 SB<\/p> Turn, sein draw kommt: bet, fold
\nHäufigkeit: 25%, Extra Value - 1 SB<\/p> Turn, sein draw kommt nicht: check, bet, call Pot 10 SB
\nRiver, sein draw kommt: bet fold
\nHäufigkeit: 18,75 %, Extra Value -3 SB<\/p> \nTurn, sein draw kommt nicht: check,bet, call
\nRiver, sein draw kommt nicht: check, bet, fold
\nHäufigkeit: 56,25 %, EV +7 SB<\/p> Gesamt:<\/p> Post-Flop value unraised Pot: 2 SB
\nPost-Flop value raised Pot: +3,9375 - 0,5625 - 0,25 = 3,125 SB<\/p> Nun haben wir natürlich im raised Pot pre-flop auch eine SB extra investiert. Selbst wenn wir dies miteinbeziehen, so haben wir beim raised Pot im Vergleich zum unraised Pot einen extra Value von 0,125 SB erhalten. <\/p> Dieser Effekt kommt dadurch zustande, dass aufgrund der Potgröße der Gegner dazu gezwungen wird, korrekte Calls mit Händen die eine schwache Pot Equity haben zu machen. Durch die größe des Pots wird er somit an den Pot gebunden. Da wir pre-flop ja nur raisen, wenn wir eh schon einen equity edge haben, wird es häufiger vorkommen, dass wir den Gegner an einen Pot binden als er uns. Somit schlägt sich die pre-flop equity deutlich in der post-flop equity nieder. Die Größe dieses Effekts ist nicht zu verachten. Die Behauptung von Sklansky, dass man in loose Games Hände wie AQo in der BB nicht raisen sollte ist absolut falsch und wäre ein fataler Fehler. <\/p> \nDiese Thematik wir vom Limit-Profi Izmet Fekali in folgendem Beitrag erörtert. Das Fazit ist auch hier, dass es bei pre-flop Entscheidungen fast ausschließlich auf eure Pot Equity ankommt. Ist eure Equity höher als der Durschnitt, so ist es fast immer korrekt, pre-flop so viel Geld wie möglich in den Pot zu bringen. Die Tatsache, dass ihr die Gegner dadurch post-flop zu mathematisch korrekten Calls verleitet ist nämlich dann in den meisten Fällen für euch ein weiterer Wertgewinn!<\/p> Fazit<\/h1>\nKurz gesagt: <\/b>Pre-Flop Strategie richtet sich fast ausschließlich nach der Pot Equity. Wenn eure Pot Equity höher als die der Gegner ist, könnt ihr sie durch das Vergrößern das Pots preflop dazu zwingen, dass sie postflop länger in der Hand bleiben und euch so extra Value geben.\n<\/p> Hier nun der versprochene Artikel<\/h1> <\/p> \n\n\nZitat:<\/b><\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n\n| Quelle: Izment Fekali's website<\/i>\n \t\t\t>Dear Izmet, 6-12 hold'em
\n\t\t\t>
\n\t\t\t>I'm in the big blind last night at the Normandie, where they have
\n\t\t\t>no small blind. About 5 callers and a regular 10-20 thru 20-40
\n\t\t\t>player(whose regular game broke)raises on the button. I have A-Q
\n\t\t\t>both diamonds, I called. Would 3 betting have been best, in regards
\n\t\t\t>to what you refer to as the EV(estimated value?).
\n\t\t\t>
\n\t\t\t>Everybody but the raiser could have been holding almost any two
\n\t\t\t>touching cards(unsuited). And all the limpers would have called my
\n\t\t\t>re-raise, and then certainly a cap at that point from the button.
\n\t\t\t>
\n\t\t\t>I think the main reason I didn't re-raise was due to my horrible
\n\t\t\t>position, and then to a lessor extent, that I was somewhat intimidated
\n\t\t\t>by the higher limit player.
\n\t\t\t>
\n\t\t\t>Thanks for any help, Connie
\n\t\t\t>
\n\t\t\t>PS: I like the super-simplified explination for implied odds you
\n\t\t\t>provide at your site.<\/p>\n \n\t\t\tThere are good arguments for calling only (as Jim suggests in his
\n\t\t\treply). You have bad position for all betting rounds, but a good
\n\t\t\tchance to check-raise the button if the flop hits you, thus, narrowing
\n\t\t\tthe field easily. This is the standard play \"by the book,\" which
\n\t\t\tincreases chances to win the pot and enables you to get out cheaply
\n\t\t\tif the flop doesn't hit.<\/p>\n \t\t\tIt's a good, bulletproof, profitable strategy.<\/p>\n \t\t\tSee, if you make the pot too big, postflop play turns into a
\n\t\t\tcrap shoot and anything can happen. Most poker players hate that,
\n\t\t\tthey hate getting sucked out by freak draws that would have folded
\n\t\t\ton the flop, hadn't the pot been so big. And that's exactly what
\n\t\t\thappens often when a multiway pot gets blown up out of proportions.
\n\t\t\tThere are no guaranties, you can flop good and still lose big. You
\n\t\t\thave little control of the play on the flop and beyond, and whatever
\n\t\t\tyour edge in postflop play was, it's gone through the window.
\n\t\t\tSwelled pots are a source of frustration. For a drunken, Rolex-wearing
\n\t\t\tGerman tourist with a miniskirt chick hanging on his shoulder, this
\n\t\t\tis fun. For a pro with a modest bankroll, big pots are toying with
\n\t\t\tdeath. You can see traces of sweat on his forehead and upper lip.
\n\t\t\tIt's a nightmare.<\/p>\n \t\t\tBut so what. If you have a bankroll, you should ram 'n jam on the
\n\t\t\tflop. Yes, the skill factor goes way down postflop, but you are
\n\t\t\thaving way best of it now. Jamming is profitable.<\/p>\n \t\t\tI assume Connie is talking about a typical California-stye game
\n\t\t\twhere players are loose and trigger-happy. The limpers would surely
\n\t\t\traise with AQ\/QQ or better, so we are safe to assume our only
\n\t\t\tconcern is the raiser on the button.<\/p>\n \t\t\tThis guy can have a wide range of cards, if he is a good player
\n\t\t\t(and even a wider one if he is a maniac). There are many hands that
\n\t\t\tshow profit with a raise against multiple limpers. The only hands
\n\t\t\tyou that can give you trouble are AA, KK, QQ and AK. Against these
\n\t\t\thands, reraise with AQs is not such a good idea, as you are either
\n\t\t\tdominated (against KK, QQ and AK) or destroyed (against AA). But
\n\t\t\teven here, the five dupes in are covering for you with
\n\t\t\ttheir contributions (as a good chunk of their money is dead, since
\n\t\t\tthey have a relatively small chance of winning the pot). You are
\n\t\t\tnot in bad shape even when dominated.<\/p>\n \t\t\tBut against other possible hands the button could have
\n\t\t\t(Axs\/K9s\/98s\/77\/KJo or better), you are a happy camper. You will
\n\t\t\tmake a load of money even when against a better hand like JJ. But
\n\t\t\tremember, you are increasing EV (drastically, I might add) here at
\n\t\t\tthe expense of higher variance. Reraise is a most profitable play,
\n\t\t\tyet you still might not want to do it. Profitability is not the
\n\t\t\tonly factor when judging a certain poker play. For some pros living
\n\t\t\tin the van by the river, variance is baaaaaaad. They prefer calling.<\/p>\n \t\t\tHow profitable is the reraise (and a subsequent cap if rereraised,
\n\t\t\tNevada style) with AQs?<\/p>\n \t\t\tI ran a $10-20 Turbo sim for Connie with a player on the button
\n\t\t\tholding JJ and a player in the big blind with AQ (I did not bother
\n\t\t\tto set up the sim with a single blind like Connie's game, because
\n\t\t\tif the game is loose, the blind structure is not that important).
\n\t\t\tThe lineup was loose, with players that tend to go a bit too far
\n\t\t\tpostflop. To put it simply, it was a fishy table, except for the
\n\t\t\ttwo test players. I used the same profile (optimized for playing
\n\t\t\tin loose games) for both the button (JJ) and the big blind (AQs).
\n\t\t\tThe results after 500000 runs with 5 or more opponents (at least
\n\t\t\t4 limpers + the button raiser):<\/p>\n \t\t\tAQs calling a raise in the big blind, min. 5 opponents:
\n\t\t\t---------------------------------------------
\n\t\t\tJJ, win rate: 28.0%, $ net per hand: $39.27
\n\t\t\tAQs, win rate: 26.1%, $ net per hand: $20.78<\/p>\n \n\t\t\tAQs jamming preflop in the big blind, min. 5 opponents:
\n\t\t\t---------------------------------------------
\n\t\t\tJJ, win rate: 30.0%, $ net per hand: $61.61
\n\t\t\tAQs, win rate: 27.2%, $ net per hand: $36.81<\/p>\n \n\t\t\tAgainst JJ and four other opponents, AQs just flat called, tried
\n\t\t\tto keep the pot small and went for a check raise with top pair on
\n\t\t\tthe flop. With no hit, AQ called for one bet on the flop with two
\n\t\t\tovercards (which is a pretty much correct play, given the size of
\n\t\t\tthe pot). It did quite ok, earning a big bet per hand.<\/p>\n \t\t\tBut, when AQs capped it preflop, it earned almost twice as much!
\n\t\t\tThe difference between calling and jamming was more than one and
\n\t\t\ta half small bet. And that's a lot, baby! Note also the difference
\n\t\t\tyour jamming made to JJ's profits. The button should buy you a
\n\t\t\tdrink for making him $20 with your aggressive preflop play. You
\n\t\t\tboth profited, but the fish should think twice before entering a
\n\t\t\tpot with trash again...<\/p>\n \t\t\tHere's the same sim, but with QQ on the button. The situation seems
\n\t\t\thopeless, but the fish covered the losses. Jamming with AQs against
\n\t\t\tQQ boosted profit per hand from $3.74 to $09.91. It's not that
\n\t\t\tmuch, considering the increased variance, but hey, I can use every
\n\t\t\tdollar...<\/p>\n \t\t\tAQs calling a raise in the big blind, min. 5 opponents:
\n\t\t\t---------------------------------------------
\n\t\t\tQQ, win rate: 31.5%, $ net per hand: $40.76
\n\t\t\tAQs, win rate: 19.6%, $ net per hand: $03.74<\/p>\n \n\t\t\tAQs jamming preflop in the big blind min. 5 opponents:
\n\t\t\t---------------------------------------------
\n\t\t\tQQ, win rate: 33.7%, $ net per hand: $69.93
\n\t\t\tAQs, win rate: 20.7%, $ net per hand: $09.91<\/p><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Dieser Artikel besch\u00e4ftigt sich mit der Frage, inwiefern es sich lohnt, Potequity preflop aufzugeben, um daf\u00fcr am Flop strategische Vorteile zu haben.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"template":"","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"inline_featured_image":false,"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":""},"strategy_category":[183],"strategy_level":[117],"class_list":["post-52657","strategy","type-strategy","status-publish","hentry","strategy_category-fixed-limit-silber"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n Equity vs Strategic Advantages [Beta] - PokerStrategy DE<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.pokerstrategy.com\/de\/strategy\/fixed-limit\/equity-vs-strategische-vorteile\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"de_DE\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Equity vs Strategic Advantages [Beta] - PokerStrategy DE\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Dieser Artikel besch\u00e4ftigt sich mit der Frage, inwiefern es sich lohnt, Potequity preflop aufzugeben, um daf\u00fcr am Flop strategische Vorteile zu haben.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.pokerstrategy.com\/de\/strategy\/fixed-limit\/equity-vs-strategische-vorteile\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"PokerStrategy DE\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2026-03-12T09:18:02+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"10\u00a0Minuten\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.pokerstrategy.com\\\/de\\\/strategy\\\/fixed-limit\\\/equity-vs-strategische-vorteile\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.pokerstrategy.com\\\/de\\\/strategy\\\/fixed-limit\\\/equity-vs-strategische-vorteile\\\/\",\"name\":\"Equity vs Strategic Advantages [Beta] - PokerStrategy DE\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.pokerstrategy.com\\\/de\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-08-31T12:51:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-03-12T09:18:02+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.pokerstrategy.com\\\/de\\\/strategy\\\/fixed-limit\\\/equity-vs-strategische-vorteile\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"de\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.pokerstrategy.com\\\/de\\\/strategy\\\/fixed-limit\\\/equity-vs-strategische-vorteile\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.pokerstrategy.com\\\/de\\\/strategy\\\/fixed-limit\\\/equity-vs-strategische-vorteile\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.pokerstrategy.com\\\/de\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Strategies\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.pokerstrategy.com\\\/de\\\/strategy\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":3,\"name\":\"Equity vs Strategic Advantages [Beta]\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.pokerstrategy.com\\\/de\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.pokerstrategy.com\\\/de\\\/\",\"name\":\"PokerStrategy DE\",\"description\":\"\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.pokerstrategy.com\\\/de\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"de\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Equity vs Strategic Advantages [Beta] - PokerStrategy DE","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.pokerstrategy.com\/de\/strategy\/fixed-limit\/equity-vs-strategische-vorteile\/","og_locale":"de_DE","og_type":"article","og_title":"Equity vs Strategic Advantages [Beta] - PokerStrategy DE","og_description":"Dieser Artikel besch\u00e4ftigt sich mit der Frage, inwiefern es sich lohnt, Potequity preflop aufzugeben, um daf\u00fcr am Flop strategische Vorteile zu haben.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.pokerstrategy.com\/de\/strategy\/fixed-limit\/equity-vs-strategische-vorteile\/","og_site_name":"PokerStrategy DE","article_modified_time":"2026-03-12T09:18:02+00:00","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Est. reading time":"10\u00a0Minuten"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.pokerstrategy.com\/de\/strategy\/fixed-limit\/equity-vs-strategische-vorteile\/","url":"https:\/\/www.pokerstrategy.com\/de\/strategy\/fixed-limit\/equity-vs-strategische-vorteile\/","name":"Equity vs Strategic Advantages [Beta] - PokerStrategy DE","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.pokerstrategy.com\/de\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-08-31T12:51:00+00:00","dateModified":"2026-03-12T09:18:02+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.pokerstrategy.com\/de\/strategy\/fixed-limit\/equity-vs-strategische-vorteile\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"de","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.pokerstrategy.com\/de\/strategy\/fixed-limit\/equity-vs-strategische-vorteile\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.pokerstrategy.com\/de\/strategy\/fixed-limit\/equity-vs-strategische-vorteile\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.pokerstrategy.com\/de\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Strategies","item":"https:\/\/www.pokerstrategy.com\/de\/strategy\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"name":"Equity vs Strategic Advantages [Beta]"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.pokerstrategy.com\/de\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.pokerstrategy.com\/de\/","name":"PokerStrategy DE","description":"","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.pokerstrategy.com\/de\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"de"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.pokerstrategy.com\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/strategy\/52657","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.pokerstrategy.com\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/strategy"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.pokerstrategy.com\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/strategy"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.pokerstrategy.com\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.pokerstrategy.com\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=52657"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"strategy_category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.pokerstrategy.com\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/strategy_category?post=52657"},{"taxonomy":"strategy_level","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.pokerstrategy.com\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/strategy_level?post=52657"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}} | | |