[Closed] [coaching-feedback] NL SSS Gold with xarry2 - wednesdays at 7pm CET

Adv SSS Coaching - 08/05

Known players: (for a description of vp$ip, pfr, ats, folded bb, af, wts, wsd or hands click here)     
[tg]Position_Stack:hands/vp$ip/pfr/af/wts/ats/foldbb/w$sd;Hero$170,00:///////;MP3$1442,00:///////;[/tg]
5,00/10,00 No-Limit Hold'em (7 handed)
Hand recorder used for this poker hand: Texas Grabem 1.9 by www.pokerstrategy.com.

Preflop: Hero is CO with J♠, A♠
2 folds, MP3 raises to $27,00, Hero raises to $44,00, 4 folds.

Final Pot: $86,00

before you ask: I made a misclick here. I wanted to raise to ~65-70$. alternatively you can push directly. however if you face an opponent who calls 3bets with tight small raises are a nice means to encourage him calling you looser.
MP3s MP openraise is 16%. there was a discussion if the raise is profitable or not. my reasoning was that he will definetely raise more than 16% in MP3 (CO was 25%). but even if I take the 16% as a range: 22+,A7s+,KTs+,QTs+,JTs,ATo+,KJo+,QJo and let him call with two sample callingranges of:

1) 77+,A9s+,KQs,ATo+,KQo = 10% and therefore 1-10/16 FE = 37.5%
2) 99+,AJs+,AJo+ = 6.3% and therefore 1-6.3/16 FE = 60.6%

I use my EV calculator:

Pot = 42
effective stack = 170
deadmoney = 12
blind/bet = 0

vs 1)

equity = 46.3%
FE = 37.5%

=> EV = 11.36$

vs 2)

equity = 36%
FE = 60.6%

=> EV = 8.40$

It seems the raise is profitable. of course tends to get marginal with 4 remaining opponents but usually he'll have more than 16% openraising range in MP3.

Known players: (for a description of vp$ip, pfr, ats, folded bb, af, wts, wsd or hands click here)      
[tg]Position_Stack:hands/vp$ip/pfr/af/wts/ats/foldbb/w$sd;Hero$74,00:///////;CO$232,62:///////;[/tg]
2,00/4,00 No-Limit Hold'em (8 handed)
Hand recorder used for this poker hand: Texas Grabem 1.9 by www.pokerstrategy.com.

Preflop: Hero is BB with Q♥, T♦
4 folds, CO calls $4,00, 2 folds, Hero checks.

Flop: ($10,00) 5♦, 9♥, 7♦ (2 players)
Hero bets $7,00, CO calls $7,00.

Turn: ($24,00) Q♣ (2 players)
Hero checks, CO checks.

River: ($24,00) T♥ (2 players)
Hero bets $15,30, CO raises to $72,00, Hero calls $47,70.

Final Pot: $159,00

Co plays 12/2, with 6% openraise in CO, CO limp% 15%. even though he is quite passive I like to steal the flop. we have 6 overcards plus with an 8 and a J BDSDs. the passive CO can limp like 99-22,ATs-A2s,KTs+,QTs+,JTs,ATo-A9o,KTo+,QTo+,JTo which is ~15%. of course he could also have some more lower suited connectors. but against this range I can achieve enough foldequity against all the overcards. in addition if the flushdraw does not arrive I could fire a turnbet again, especially with overcards.
well, I hit the Q and I'm pretty sure I'm in front now. why? well, on such a drawy board you can usually say CO doesn't hold a set, 2pair or overpair after a flop call. also 2 pairs - e.g. Q9 or Q7 aren't likely - CO limps too tight to have those hands in his range. but much more likely it is that CO is on a draw or a pocket like 66/88 or maybe a 9x or 7x hand. I tried to check since CO has a 62% bet vs missed cbet score. so I expected him to bet the draws and planned a checkraise. after he also checks behind its more likely he has a 9x or 66/88 hand. to say it differently: a hand with SD value. (besides its still possible, maybe unlikely, he did checkbehind with a draw)
The River is perfect. no draw really arrived. the only straight draw would have been J8 and thats again to loose for him. especially since his turncheckbehind indicated SD value he have to valuebet here. well, and we don't mind the raise. what should beat us? of course he can sometimes show a strangely played TT or 86 but thats it.
(in the end he showed T9s btw, thus our estimations were quite good. in future we should maybe loosen up his CO limping range a bit.)

regards,
xarry

and before I forget it, my current HM HUD:

http://www.file-upload.net/download-1813050/hud.rar.html

thx for da hud

Originally posted by xarry2
thx gonzo for your answer!
concerning the inital formula it is also correct but maybe has missleading names for the variables. but if you choose monster% = 0 then you end up with the normal EV formula. else the 1-FE part is simply split into 2 parts: the one where we play against the monster% and the one where we only play against the initial raiser. it is to say that the formula is still not absolutely realsitic. but taking into account the monster% is already a very sufficient solution imo.

regards,
xarry

Hi Xarry, thanks for the answer. Why do you think its not realistic?

hey guys!

I'm currently in austria hitchhiking well, I've got my laptop here and hope I'll be able to do the coaching on wednesday. I think I can use the wlan of a friend here. thus, well see wednesday!

@ evapoker: I'll answer end of the week. thanks for your patience

regards,
xarry

Fortunately internet is working here. thus we'll see soon!

Adv SSS Coaching - 08/12

Known players: (for a description of vp$ip, pfr, ats, folded bb, af, wts, wsd or hands click here) 
[tg]Position_Stack:hands/vp$ip/pfr/af/wts/ats/foldbb/w$sd;Hero$30,00:///////;BB$172,96:///////;SB$39,72:///////;MP3$77,71:///////;CO$214,61:///////;[/tg]
1,00/2,00 No-Limit Hold'em (6 handed)
Hand recorder used for this poker hand: Texas Grabem 1.9 by www.pokerstrategy.com.

Preflop: Hero is BU with J♥, Q♦
MP2 folds, MP3 calls $2,00, CO calls $2,00, Hero calls $2,00, SB calls $1,00, BB checks.

Flop: ($10,00) 6♠, 2♠, Q♥ (5 players)
SB checks, BB checks, MP3 checks, CO checks, Hero bets $7,50, 4 folds.

Final Pot: $17,50

Usually we don't limp. In this spot I think limping is justified. MP3 and CO were unknown at that point. On the other hand SB and BB were passive. Since the limpers are unknown I don't like to raise here. if they are tight/passive I'll run into stronger hands too often. Nevertheless folding is too weak imo. Thus we can limp! The blinds are passive, we've got position and: if we can see the flop we have position and can evaluate our holding the best. what I'm pointing out: of course a raise can be possible sometimes here but without much information we don't know if it is. by just limping we however get more inforamtion if we see the flop. we can now decide if we want to play on a better basis of information.
in this hand we flop top pair and everybody checks to us. in an unraised multiway pot this is pretty often a sign that nobody has a strong hand since otherwise it has to be protected. so we can easily lead out for a value/protection bet on this board. if we get checkraised I would probably go broke. the reason is that except 66 or 22 not many better hands are likely. KQ is possible but AQ is almost never a hand for an unraised pot. Q6, Q2 and 62 are unlikely 2pairs as well. On the other hand there are possible flushdraws or gutshots as well as other worse Queens possible.
All this information I got by just limping here. of course this shouldn't get our standard play since aggressiveness is mostly the best strategy - but sometimes a limp will make at least the same profit.

Interesting Question from the coaching channel:
Xarry, you often recommend to sometimes play only few tables in order to have more time gathering reads about your opponents. Which observations are important then? Which type of notes you make?

While playing 4-6 tables you'll often have no playable hand. Thus I use the time to observe whats happening on the tables. There are different possibilities to gather notes now. First you could just observe every interesting hand on your tables. You should make notes about special lines/betting sizes/ timing tells for example. Sooner or later you'll have more single reads like: villain check/calls 3 times on J64/8/K with 77 or villain check/calls the flop T94 with QJ+flushdraw. In order to keep the overview you should sum up the single notes if they contain similar information. In this case we could write: villain is loose/passive, plays draws passively, can't let go of pocket pairs. Other interesting reads are those concerning the openraising ranges. E.g. You should note that a 12/10 shortstack raises 99 from early position or that he steals 87s in the CO in order to be able to put him on more accurate ranges in future. Sometimes I also note down how quick opponents make actions. But you should be careful to make rush conclusions. Timing tells are hard to get and oyu should never just rely on a specific spot. But you could use the read that your opponent instantly checkraises the flop 489 with QJ against your cbet. it seems like your opponent wants to let his bluffs look stronger by making quick actions. With more of this type reads its easier to determine on which level of thinking your opponent acts btw.
Besides just observing every interesting hand its sometimes also very useful to focus on specific players. I.e. you focus on a reg against you have to play often and who often fights back against you. You now observe him very accurately. By doing so you will quickly get many reads: not only about single hands but also about how they are connected. i.e. does he tilt after loosing? does he change gears? and much more. if you do this concentratedly you can get a feeling for the playing flow of this certain opponent. the result is you can somehow manage to "get into his mind" and make much more accurate estimations about his actions. Of course keeping track of the actions of a big fish is recommended as well. Especially those players often have unbalanced reads which are quite easy to find out.
Overall you'll get a much better understanding for the game you play: poker. As a shortstack you should never forget that you can mostly just scratch what is poker. Even though its hard for us but with a small stack the real big poker is not playable. But don't mind: if you make concentrated observations you'll get a much better understanding for the game. By observing whats standing behind the different lines/betsizes ect. you'll eventually just know how a certain play has to be evaluated in average. unfortunately this takes time. but if you start today...

regards,
xarry

... and one day you can play poker as well. ♦

Adv SSS Coaching - 08/19

Known players: (for a description of vp$ip, pfr, ats, folded bb, af, wts, wsd or hands click here)  
[tg]Position_Stack:hands/vp$ip/pfr/af/wts/ats/foldbb/w$sd;Hero$74,00:///////;MP2$400,00:///////;SB$592,55:///////;CO$141,25:///////;UTG+2$72,50:///////;BB$408,60:///////;[/tg]
2,00/4,00 No-Limit Hold'em (8 handed)
Hand recorder used for this poker hand: Texas Grabem 1.9 by www.pokerstrategy.com.

Preflop: Hero is BU with J♣, Q♣. MP2 posts a blind of $4,00.
UTG+2 calls $4,00, MP1 folds, MP2 checks, MP3 folds, CO calls $4,00, Hero calls $4,00, SB calls $2,00, BB checks.

Flop: ($24,00) 4♣, 6♠, 8♣ (6 players)
SB checks, BB folds, UTG+2 bets $22,80, MP2 folds, CO calls $22,80, Hero raises to $70,00 (All-In), SB folds, UTG+2 calls $45,70, CO folds.

Turn: ($185,30) T♦
River: ($185,30) 3♦

Final Pot: $185,30

UTG+2: 30/10, UTG limp 18%, UTG openraise 10%, 259 Hands
MP2: 19/7, MP openraise 9%, 14k Hands
CO: 72/29, 69 Hands
SB: unknown
BB: 16/10, 62 Hands

The spot does seem pretty nice for a raise. MP2 is a poster, CO is super aggressive thus he won't have a good hand if he overlimps. UTG limps quite loose with 18% and is also not too passive. Since we have position we could probably raise to ~24$. The flopplay however will be quite limited since we don't have much left than pushing due to our small remaining stack. But overall a raise should work in this spot.
Why did I nevertheless decide to limp? With a raise we will pretty often get a call preflop, if not from the blinds or UTG+2, CO with his 72 VPIP will call us almost everytime and we'll have to get it in pretty often as well. Imo we can also achieve a nice profit if we just limp with good pot odds and a almost full remaining stack left. By doing so we can take a look at the flop and then decide wether we play or not. Two things - besides the limpers - are however deciding which play is best: our stacksize and the blinds. With a stack <15BB a direct push gets interesting. With bigger stacks however I prefer the limp since we can then use our implied odds in case we hit a good hand and we'll get it in with a big equityedge (which we won't often have if we push as a cbet with QJs against the fish). Though, if the blinds are raising all the time, e.g. if it were two aggressive shortstacks pushing a lot against weak limpers we will often have to fold.
The flop is pretty perfect for us. we picked up a monster hand for an unraised pot. 2 overcards+flushdraw (+a backdoorstraightdraw Now we are in position and can react with maximum information about our opponents. Together with our euqity edge I think this creates a much bigger profit than raising in this spot. UTG+2 could lead out with a very big and range and CO will as well call quite a lot. Thus I still think we first have some foldequity left and in case we get called many outs.

Known players: (for a description of vp$ip, pfr, ats, folded bb, af, wts, wsd or hands click here)     
[tg]Position_Stack:hands/vp$ip/pfr/af/wts/ats/foldbb/w$sd;Hero$81,50:///////;UTG+2$329,50:///////;BU$196,57:///////;[/tg]
2,00/4,00 No-Limit Hold'em (8 handed)
Hand recorder used for this poker hand: Texas Grabem 1.9 by www.pokerstrategy.com.

Preflop: Hero is MP1 with J♠, J♦
UTG+2 calls $4,00, Hero raises to $20,00, 3 folds, BU calls $20,00, 2 folds, UTG+2 calls $16,00.

Flop: ($66,00) 5♦, A♦, 2♥ (3 players)
UTG+2 checks, Hero checks, BU bets $20,00, 2 folds.

Final Pot: $86,00

The hand was on the same table. UTG is again the 72/29 guy, BU plays 45/9 over 1.5 hands. Against two opponents the flop isn't that nice. Both opponents we're quite passive on the flop, UTG 0.8 AF on the flop, BU 1.3. BU also bets in 39% against missed cbets on the flop in position. This value is still passive. Considering that he'll hit the board in ~33% with a pair or better he doesn't bluff too much. We should as well consider we're not HU but 3H. Since players simply bluff most often HU the bluff likelyhood is reduced, too. If we, BU and me, were HU I could think about checkraising AI. Even though BU is on the more passive side I think I can get it in with more worse hands on his side by checkraising. On the other hand the board does provide enough draws to cbet the flop and in case we get called the turn again.
Let's however get back to the hand as played. Probably, if I take my stacksize into account a push could have been possible. But its close. I checked however since I simply don't expect BU to bluff that often, so I planned to check/fold the flop and reevaluate on the turn. With a 3rd nuts backdoorflushdraw this play gets more interesting as well. I can improve my hand with another diamonds and would go broke. also if there's no diamond and UTG does not bet, I would place a value/protection bet (commiting me to the pot).
Consequently against passive players this is rather check/fold flop, reevaluate turn. against agressive opponents I however like checkraising pretty much.

regards,
xarry

Adv SSS Coaching - 08/26

Known players: (for a description of vp$ip, pfr, ats, folded bb, af, wts, wsd or hands click here)     
[tg]Position_Stack:hands/vp$ip/pfr/af/wts/ats/foldbb/w$sd;Hero$283,00:///////;BB$1015,00:///////;[/tg]
5,00/10,00 No-Limit Hold'em (7 handed)
Hand recorder used for this poker hand: Texas Grabem 1.9 by www.pokerstrategy.com.

Preflop: Hero is SB with T♥, A♠
5 folds, Hero raises to $33,00, BB raises to $99,00, Hero raises to $283,00 (All-In), BB calls $184,00.

Flop: ($566,00) Q♠, J♦, 8♦
Turn: ($566,00) K♦
River: ($566,00) 7♠

Final Pot: $566,00

BB stats:
VPIP 24 - PFR 18 - Fold BB to steal 73% (call 18%, resteal 9%) - 3bet vs open from SB 14% - Hands 2.9k

In most cases we don't have to wonder wether to fold or push ATo in SBvsBB blind battles. With a stacksize like in this hand it is however not that clear any longer. Against many opponents you can consider folding if they resteal.
If we take a look at BB stats we quickly see he's quite agressive. He is also defending the blinds aggressively. What I want to stress is the difference between resteal vs steal and the 3bet vs open from SB. The resteal vs steal includes all hands where BB 3bets vs a steal from CO, BU and SB. Of course players don't 3bet the same range against those 3 positions. Against CO they will be a bit tighter than vs BU. Despite players 3bet more aggressively against SB steal - mainly since they have position. Thus even if you don't have the 3bet stats vs different positions you can estimate what they could be. In this case starting with 9% average we could assume ~12-13 vs SB and ~6-7% vs CO. Nevertheless having more accurate stats will give you the possiblity to adapt better. Also individual tendencies may let your estimated 3bet% vary from the real value.

Should we go broke now or not? The pot odds for an all-in (I don't assume BB will fold after his 3bet) are 283$+33$-3$ rake : 250$, thus ~1.25:1 and we therefore need 44,4% equity to be break even.
It is now intersting which range we can assume for BB resteal. There are different ways to do this. We could simply assume a 14% 3betting range.
This is ~22+,A4s+,KJs+,ATo+,KQo. Our ATo has only 42.7% equity against this range so we could consider a fold with this assumptions. Another way would be to include my average SB ATS which is 47%. BB will not always 3bet 14%. Against an 8/8 shorstack with a 20% SB ATS this would be wrong. But against 47% ATS he will just loosen up greatly. How much? Well, I always try to find out which hands he can 3bet with an edge against 47% range (22+,A2s+,K2s+,Q4s+,J5s+,T6s+,96s+,85s+,75s+,64s+,53s+,42s+,32s,A2o+,K8o+,Q8o+,J8o+,T8o+,98o). This could ~22+,A2s+,A7o+,KTs+,QTs+,KJo+. Definetely this range may vary frome opponent to opponent. Especially if he takes foldequity into account for his resteals. Then there could be different holdings in his range, e.g. more speculative hands which still remain a good equity in case they get called. But what we can easily say is: he will 3bet with more than 14% against our steal. If he 3bets the 22+,A2s+,A7o+,KTs+,QTs+,KJo+ range ATo has 49.1% and we should call/push now.
In order to make a correct decision in this spot its vital to know your opponent and he 3betting tendencies. If you gather reads about resteling hands he's showing in BBvsSB then you'll be able to put him on a more accurate range in future.

Known players: (for a description of vp$ip, pfr, ats, folded bb, af, wts, wsd or hands click here)     
[tg]Position_Stack:hands/vp$ip/pfr/af/wts/ats/foldbb/w$sd;MP1$401,68:///////;Hero$74,00:///////;SB$520,10:///////;[/tg]
2,00/4,00 No-Limit Hold'em (8 handed)
Hand recorder used for this poker hand: Texas Grabem 1.9 by www.pokerstrategy.com.

Preflop: Hero is CO with Q♥, A♥
UTG+2 folds, MP1 calls $4,00, 2 folds, Hero raises to $16,00, BU folds, SB calls $14,00, BB folds, MP1 calls $12,00.

Flop: ($52,00) J♠, 8♦, T♥ (3 players)
SB checks, MP1 bets $24,70, Hero raises to $58,00 (All-In), SB folds, MP1 calls $33,30.

Turn: ($168,00) 2♣
River: ($168,00) J♣

Final Pot: $168,00

MP1 stats:
VPIP 11%, PFR 4%, MP openraise 4%, MP limp 11%, AF overall 1.4, only 517 Hands

SB stats:
VPIP 22%, PFR 11%, call open SB 15%, 3bet vs CO 3%, 2.3k Hands

This hand gets interesting through the donkbet from MP1. Without it we can easily cbet/call or push this flop since we got at least 8 outs, plus 1 Overcard and a backdoorflushdraw. Facing the bet its not that clear any longer. Calling shouldn't be an option. If the turn is a rag for us we are anyway commited but we did not use our stack to achieve at least a tiny bit of foldequity. We can not excpect MP1 to fold often if we make a minraise-push, nevertheless SB will fold more often and there are some strange things possible like a disconnect for MP1 or simply that he's playing like a moron and bet/folds a bluff ect.
How can we decide wether to push now or to fold? An easy way would be to assume MP1 directly bets us all-in and to assume SB always folds. We then simply have to determine the pot odds and give MP1 a range for his donkbet. If we have an equityedge we should push.
Let's start! MP1 limps 11%, openraises 4%. This means he should openraise the big pairs and AK. Therefore a possible limping range could be 99-22,AJs-A5s,KJs+,QJs,JTs,T9s,98s,AJo-ATo,KJo+ (11.2%). Which hands will he donk with probably? maybe something like this: 99-88,AJs-A8s,KJs+,QJs,JTs,T9s,98s,AJo-ATo,KJo+. Our AQs has 48.7% equity against this betting range. And how much do we need? The pot odds for an all-in would be 58$+52$-3$ rake : 58$ = 1.84:1 and therefore the breakeven equity is 35.2%. We have a pretty big edge which should even compensate for those cases where SB has also picked up a good hand. Thats why I'll leave him unconsidered.

regards,
xarry!

Adv SSS Coaching - 09/02

Known players: (for a description of vp$ip, pfr, ats, folded bb, af, wts, wsd or hands click here)      
[tg]Position_Stack:hands/vp$ip/pfr/af/wts/ats/foldbb/w$sd;Hero$58,95:///////;BB$40,00:///////;[/tg]
1,00/2,00 No-Limit Hold'em (8 handed)
Hand recorder used for this poker hand: Texas Grabem 1.9 by www.pokerstrategy.com.

Preflop: Hero is SB with 6♥, 9♦
6 folds, Hero raises to $5,00, BB calls $3,00.

Flop: ($10,00) 7♥, K♠, 8♥ (2 players)
Hero checks, BB bets $5,00, Hero raises to $53,95 (All-In), BB folds.

Final Pot: $68,95

BB stats:
VPIP 9%, PFR 8%, fold BBtosteal 80%, (call 7, 3bet 13), 1.1k Hands

I've been stealing a lot against this SSSP from Germany. For like 5-6 times he just folded quickly to my steals. Thats why I just steal 2.5BB. An orbit before he started defending with a 3bet against my steals on another table. Nevertheless I like to continue putting him under pressure in order to see in which way (if at all) he is adapting to my constant steals.
Even though I didn't expect him to do so he calls my steal. With the good pot odds he's getting its often the best way to defend. Thus this could be a first adaptation from him against my steals. If this happens more often in future I shouldn't steal 96o or similar holdings with 2.5BB. The likeliness that I get called is just too high now. In those cases I will often have big problems playing postflop OOP with a trash hand.
The next interesting point is the range with which he could call me. I assume he will 3bet with all strong hands but call more with hands with a good playability. for example many medium broadways like JT or KT. In addition he could call some hands like Q8s/Q9s or J8/J9s as well as some suited connectors. Concerning pocket pairs I think that he'll 3bet most of them except maybe the low ones like 22-44.
Looking at this board hands he could hit here are KJ/KT/K9, 87, 98, 97, 76, (75), T8, Q8, J8, T9. Now whats our best line here? I decided for playing checkraise All-In. Imo our EV and foldequity is much higher with this line. If we made a cbet he can raise almost all hands I listed above profitably. Considering the pot odds I'd get for an all-in bet/calling the OESD is critical. If I cbet 6$ and he pushs 35$ I get 10+6+35-3 : 29 = 1.66:1 and thus I need at least 37.7% equity to call. Against the hands from above (KJs-K9s,Q8s,J8s,T8s+,97s+,87s,75s+,KJo-KTo,T9o,98o) I however only have 32.9%. And the range here is already on the looser side. Also if he additionally pushs with flushdraws I have to discount 2 outs. Overall we just can't play bet/call with those pot odds. Nevertheless I think my hand is strong enough to go broke - with a checkraise. The big advantage is that he will not only bet the hands from above but also many weak hands which can't call a push or even pure bluffs. Further he will have problems bet/calling all hands fro mabove against my checkraise. Thus I will have much more foldequity! A simple calculation could tell as more about the EV of checkraising AI: (I use the foldequity calculator from my chart collection)

Pot:
what we can win directly if he folds is 15$ (-~1$ rake) =>14$

effective stack:
35$

deadmoney:
besides his stack of 35$ we can win 10$ from the pot. since there will be rake the deadmoney is however only 10$-3$=7$

our equity is:
well I don't now if he will call all hands from above, I assume probably only this: KJs-K9s,T9s,98s,87s,KJo-KTo,T9o, here we have 29.9% equity. to create a safety lets assume 29% equity in case we get called.

blind/bet: = 0 since we did not invest anything on the flop

The complete formula is:

EV = Pot*Foldequity + (1-Foldequity)[(eff.Stack+Deadmoney)*Equity – ((eff.Stack-Blind)*(1-Equity))]

EV = 14*Foldequity + (1-Foldequity)[(35+7)*0.29 – (35*0.71)]

The break even foldequity is: 47.5%

Reaching this is pretty easy. I he just had the initial range of KJs-K9s,Q8s,J8s,T8s+,97s+,87s,75s+,KJo-KTo,T9o,98o (7.2%) and calls with KJs-K9s,T9s,98s,87s,KJo-KTo,T9o (4.5%) we already have 37.5%. In reality he will bet with much more than the 7.2%. And we will easily reach like 60-70% foldequity.

As illustration some EVs:

50% FE: 0.67$

55% FE: 2$

60% FE: 3.33$

65% FE: 4.67$

70% FE: 6$

As you have seen taking into account all your different possible lines is sometimes crucial for winnings or losses.

regards,
xarry

Hi, i cant download succesfully the equity calculator for excel, when i download it, it says me some parts of the file just dont match whit the original extension, so could you please give me another link to try? Thank you very much

PD: it supose to be like this:

but actually it appears this way:

hi!

you could try the link in the first post of this thread. I included the calculator into the chart collection. and as we tested on wednesday this link still works

if this doesn't work ask again, and I'll upload it again.

cu
xarry

Adv SSS Coaching - 09/09

Known players: (for a description of vp$ip, pfr, ats, folded bb, af, wts, wsd or hands click here)     
[tg]Position_Stack:hands/vp$ip/pfr/af/wts/ats/foldbb/w$sd;Hero$80,00:///////;BB$947,80:///////;[/tg]
2,00/4,00 No-Limit Hold'em (7 handed)
Hand recorder used for this poker hand: Texas Grabem 1.9 by www.pokerstrategy.com.

Preflop: Hero is MP3 with J♠, A♠
2 folds, Hero raises to $12,00, 3 folds, BB calls $8,00.

Flop: ($26,00) Q♦, K♠, 2♦ (2 players)
BB checks, Hero bets $15,70, BB calls $15,70.

Turn: ($57,40) 8♣ (2 players)
BB checks, Hero checks.

River: ($57,40) 7♣ (2 players)
BB checks, Hero checks.

Final Pot: $57,40

BB stats:
VPIP 32%, PFR 6%, fold BB to steal 62%, call BB to steal 38%
fold to flop cbet 53%, raise flop cbet 11% (IP 26%, OOP 0%!), WTS 28%, AF Flop 1.3, checkraise Flop 0%, Total Hands 897

With this hand I want to focus on one of my favorite topics cbetting or checkbehind???

I basically listed all important stats for such spots. But you don't neccessarily need all of them. You need the preflop stats to give your opponent a calling range, the fold to flop cbet to estimate your fold equity with a cbet and finally you need to know how your opponent plays against cbets on the flop. In this hand my evaluation of the hand would be the following:

VPIP 32, PFR 6 => my opponent seems to be rather loose passive.

fold BB to steal 62%, 3bet 0% => he will call pretty much! but so far he never made a 3bet. Thus we will also find relatively strong hands in his range like AK/AQ or JJ/TT or even QQ-AA. . Nevertheless they will make out only a small portion of the total range which will be quite loose!

fold to flop cbet 53% => we may have some foldequity left but with 53% he definetely is on the loose side. Additionally the 28% WTS is high as well. And never forget the higher the VPIP is the more looseness is indicated by the WTS. (A 10/8 player can easily have a 30-40% WTS just because he only plays strong hands. a 60% VPIP player with 20% WTS however is much looser and shows many many bad hands on the showdowns!)

raise flop cbet 11%, IP 26%, OOP 0% and therefore checkraise flop 0% => first we see if he does not fold to cbets he calls almost 4 times more often than he raises the cbet. however he so far only raises cbets IP and always check/calls the flop OOP

Well, after you've been through all these point you should take a look at your hand and the board. Most player do it the other way round and will end up just concentrating on their holdings. But your goal should always be to evaluate your opponent as accuarate as possible in order to then find out how your hand plays best in the specific spot. your hand strenght always is relative to your opponents!

If you already read some post in this thread you will now already know whats the best line?

Yes! cbet the flop! often we have value with A-hi and protect against draws. further we don't risk giving up our remaining equity since BB never checkraises. Against players who checkraise often checkbehind would be nice since we can see the turn and could improve with our gutshot, the backdoor flushdraw or the overcard. but if BB mostly check/calls we see the turn for sure and he'll mostly check to us on the turn. Then we can decide to bet again or not. against this loose opponent I would checkbehind the turn unimproved so we can see the river as well. Improved with a FD or Ace or straight I would push the turn. As played I however don't see a point betting the river. We can't valuebet and BB will never fold a Q or a K, but we still have showdownvalue with A-hi against unimproved draws for example. Thus checkbehind is the best play on the river.

Known players: (for a description of vp$ip, pfr, ats, folded bb, af, wts, wsd or hands click here)      
[tg]Position_Stack:hands/vp$ip/pfr/af/wts/ats/foldbb/w$sd;Hero$127,00:///////;SB$185,00:///////;BB$200,00:///////;[/tg]
5,00/10,00 No-Limit Hold'em (9 handed)
Hand recorder used for this poker hand: Texas Grabem 1.9 by www.pokerstrategy.com.

Preflop: Hero is BU with Q♠, J♥
6 folds, Hero raises to $127,00 (All-In), SB folds, BB calls $117,00.

Flop: ($259,00) 6♦, J♣, 7♠
Turn: ($259,00) 3♠
River: ($259,00) 5♦

Final Pot: $259,00

even though QJo isn't a sklansky push with 12.7BB from the BU I assumed It will still be possible to push profitably. the reason is that our opponents will have to fold better hands - and thats why you can always push looser than pure sklansky. Whereas sklansky would assume my opponents call me with every better hand/equal hand they just can't call every better hand in reality. Better hands which they will definetely have to fold are K2-K9. Maybe, if they play tighter they even fold KT or QJs. Lets calculate the EV of our play:

callingrange opponent: 22+,A2s+,KTs+,QJs,A2o+,KTo+,QJo = 25.2%
I assume I only get called by one of the blinds => thus either SB or BB call me, each with 25.2% likelyhood. the total FE is therefore 74.8%*74.8% = 55.95%. Lets assume 55% in order to create a small safety. The only case I ignore with this assumption is when SB pushs over my raise and BB calls/pushs as well.
against the callingrange we have 39.2% equity.
The average deadmoney is 7$ when SB pushs and 2$ when BB pushs. In total we have 9$:2 deadmoney in average = 4.5$

Our EV:

EV = Pot*Foldequity + (1-Foldequity)[(eff.Stack+Deadmoney)*Equity – ((eff.Stack-Blind)*(1-Equity))]

EV = 15$*0.55 + 0.45[(127$+4.5$)*0.392 – (127$*0.608)] = -3.30$

Just a question from me now: If I try to calculate the total Foldequity the following way I get a strange result, the FE is bigger than before...

=> all push cases sum up to 40.22% and thus the foldequity will be 59.78% which is more than above even though I now also count that both players call. where is my fault, I'm sure there is one but I don't get it currently!

Well, it seems like the push wasn't profitable. I'll still wait for your answers to my probability question. Maybe the results will change again. The point is: often people say you just have to divide the SB sklansky number by 2 in order to get the BU number. but this is also not realistic. shouldn't we use 74.8%*74.8% in order to get the total FE??? just taking 74.8%:2 seems to be wrong for me....
as you can see I'm confused now. I hope you can help me

Originally posted by xarry2
- SB pushs, BB pushs => 0.252*0.1 = 0.0252

If you change the 0.1 to 0.252 you get the same result for FE as in the first instance as are effectively solving a different problem with your second method. The maths and logic are correct but just a little off the mark as you have also subtly changed the problem.

ok! thx!
this means the 2nd calculation I made (with 0.1 chance of BB calling after SB already pushs) is more realistic than just 74.8%*74.8%? and in the end we have more foldequity?
thus, given that the probabilities are:

- SB folds, BB folds => thats the foldequity we search for
- SB pushs, BB folds => 0.252*0.748 = 0.188496
- SB folds, BB pushs => 0.748*0.748 = 0.188496
- SB pushs, BB pushs => 0.252*0.1 = 0.0252

we have 59.78% Foldequity. and thats more realistic than 74.8%*74.8%?

I'll calculate this values now. let's just say BB will call 66+,ATs+,KQs,ATo+,KQo (10.1%) even after SB pushed. the equities are now:

Hero: 25.9%
SB: 31.1%
BB: 43%

finally since my stack is smaller than both their stacks I don't have to take care of the rake if both call me. there is much more money in the pot than what I can win.

Thus the new EV will be:

EV = 15$*0.598 + 0.377[(127$+4.5$)*0.392 – (127$*0.608)] + 0.025[(2*127$*0.259) - (127$*0.741)] = 8.97$ + 0.377*-25.7$ + 0.025*-28.3$ = -1.43$

thus the push is still -EV. but one question, the normal sklansky break even value for QJo in the SB is 16.4BB (I hope I'm right). according to the normal rules it should be 8.2 BB on the BU.

the EV then:

EV = 15$*0.598 + 0.377[(82$+4.5$)*0.392 – (82$*0.608)] + 0.025[(2*82$*0.259) - (82$*0.741)] = 8.97$ - 6.01$ - 0.46$ = 2.5$

thats not breakeven ♦ where's the fault here??? is it that just dividing by 2 for the BU is incorrect?

Originally posted by xarry2

thats not breakeven ♦ where's the fault here??? is it that just dividing by 2 for the BU is incorrect?

Since SC #'s have a very specific definition, the "times 2" rule (of thumb) from the button is hardly likely to agree with the results from a specific calculation since the parameters are somewhat arbitary.

To put things into perspective a little, you show an EV of 1/4BB with an 8.2 BB stack. In the general scheme of things this isn't too far from 0. The errors implicit in your model (without even stopping to consider assumtions about hand-ranges) are likely to exceed 1/4 BB's by themselves.

1/4BB != 0BB => nothing much really.

Hi, Xarry

Originally posted by xarry2

I could also say all possible results consist out of the cases

- SB folds, BB folds
- SB calls, BB folds
- SB calls, BB calls
- SB folds, BB calls

The probabilities are: (assuming BB pushs after SB also pushs in 10%)

- SB folds, BB folds => thats the foldequity we search for
- SB pushs, BB folds => 0.252*0.748 = 0.188496
- SB folds, BB pushs => 0.748*0.748 = 0.188496
- SB pushs, BB pushs => 0.252*0.1 = 0.0252

=> all push cases sum up to 40.22% and thus the foldequity will be 59.78% which is more than above even though I now also count that both players call. where is my fault, I'm sure there is one but I don't get it currently!

as you can see I'm confused now. I hope you can help me

The line where you count SB calling you and BB folding is wrong because you expect BB to overcall you both only in
10 % and not 26.2 %.
Hence you should get 0.252*0.9 = 0.2268 and therefore your FE is lower than what you calculated (it actually has to be 0.748*0.748 again obviously, you can't get different results with the same numbers if both ways of calculating it are correct ;)).

(Also the line under that should be 0.748*0.252 but that's obviously just a typo, you have the correct result.)

The 2nd way you used for calculating FE is only better in the sense that now you also get the percentage that both SB and BB calls and overcalls and you can pokerstove your equity against both these ranges in a 3way pot.

You could also use ICM wizzard or similar tool for this problem. I don't have personal experience with them but I believe that you could set the 'tournament' to be a winner takes all (therefore the ICM will simply put 1 chip = $1, which is exactly true in cash games) and probably lower the SB's and BB's stacks to 15 bbs or something so that SB isn't too 'afraid' to push a big stack into the BB with marginal hands.
This way you should be able to get Nash (unexploitable) ranges (or very close ranges, but your real situation is only better since you have more FE against the SB who has to be afraid about the BB behind him if both are deep) for your pushes which are of course better than Sklansky ranges (which are like insanely tight because they exepect your opponents to allways call better and always fold worse which isn't true in reality).

Originally posted by Meiffert
The line where you count SB calling you and BB folding is wrong because you expect BB to overcall you both only in
10 % and not 26.2 %.
Hence you should get 0.252*0.9 = 0.2268 and therefore your FE is lower than what you calculated (it actually has to be 0.748*0.748 again obviously, you can't get different results with the same numbers if both ways of calculating it are correct ;)).
.

Yes, I think that is it, if you fix that first value you'll get the exact same final result for total FE: 55.95%

- SB folds, BB folds => thats the foldequity we search for
- SB pushs, BB folds => 0.252*0.9 = 0.2268
- SB folds, BB pushs => 0.748*0.256 = 0.188496
- SB pushs, BB pushs => 0.252*0.1 = 0.0252

=> 55.95% foldequity. ahhh, nice, at least this fits now

anyway we can say our push was wrong and -EV.

only if our opponents fold much more than they should it could be profitable.

=> all those things just showed me again: aspiring many sklansky pushes in your strategy isn't very profitable. most of the time you're much better off with rebuying after your stack decreases below 12BB.

thx for your help!