plo5 kk10ds

Hi,

a 4bet at these stakes is 99% of the time AA, therefore the only correct way for you to play is to call the 4bet preflop (not to fold), and ship the flops where you have enough equity vs AA. Jamming here is a spew.

Regards,

Skod

Hi Skod,

hope you can look at some of my first hand postings I put up today; one of them is about this exact issue that is mentioned here. I for one do NOT understand your advice here, to not jam I understand, but if put my opponent's on aces here and we are HU, I cannot understand (your advice) of flatcalling the 4 bet of $1,93 which would then lead to a pot of 2*$1,93 = $3,86 going in to theflop with the smallest effective stack than remaining is that of hero:

$5,23-1,93= $3,30 going into the flop and the flop pot being $3,86 which means that the flop SPR is now: 3,30/3,86 =0,85

Now knowing your opponent has, as you put it, AA here 99% of the time, why would you ever call to see a flop if that results in a flop spr of 0,85????
Play fit or fold or : ) : ) : ) required equity against a hand we know we are a preflop dog against and with an spr of 0,85 + we have no post flop implied odds. Imagine what a powerful position AAxx is here once he got it to an spr of 0,85.

How often will a hand that is behind preflop be statistically be ahead postflop...never. Call to see if we get the required equity vs a hand that we know dominates us into a spr = 0,85 situation?? Of course when the flop spr =0,85 we only need %30 equity to break even, but should we really consciously put ourselves in situations where we are hoping to have 30% equity on flop that can't be right...I would prefer to play KKTTds only in hi spr situations once I know which hand I have to crack, but to flatcall here and take another look at theflop knowing that AAxx will be ahead most of the time even though he will push any flop and I will have to see if I liike my equity here???...most of the times, statistically speaking, the flop will still be in favor of the preflop favorite, so like I said, I don't fully understand your advice here.

Once I know opponent has aces, I cant shove, I cant call creating a spr of 0,85 so to me, it is a clear fold.

Kind regards,

FDM

Originally posted by FlyingDutchm1n
Hi Skod,

hope you can look at some of my first hand postings I put up today; one of them is about this exact issue that is mentioned here. I for one do NOT understand your advice here, to not jam I understand, but if put my opponent's on aces here and we are HU, I cannot understand (your advice) of flatcalling the 4 bet of $1,93 which would then lead to a pot of 2*$1,93 = $3,86 going in to theflop with the smallest effective stack than remaining is that of hero:

$5,23-1,93= $3,30 going into the flop and the flop pot being $3,86 which means that the flop SPR is now: 3,30/3,86 =0,85

Now knowing your opponent has, as you put it, AA here 99% of the time, why would you ever call to see a flop if that results in a flop spr of 0,85????
Play fit or fold or : ) : ) : ) required equity against a hand we know we are a preflop dog against and with an spr of 0,85 +we have no post flop implied odds. Imagine what a powerful position AAxx is here once he got it to an spr of 0,85.

How often will a hand that is behind preflop be statistically be ahead postflop...never. Call to see if we get the required equity vs a hand that we know dominates us into a spr = 0,85 situation?? Of course when the flop spr =0,85 we only need %30 equity to break even, but should we really consciously put ourselves in situations where we are hoping to have 30% equity on flop that can't be right...I would prefer to play KKTTds only in hi spr situations once I know which hand I have to crack, but to flatcall here and take another look at theflop knowing that AAxx will be ahead most of the time even though he will push any flop and I will have to see if I liike my equity here???...most of the times, statistically speaking, the flop will still be in favor of the preflop favorite, so like I said, I don't fully understand your advice here.

Once I know opponent has aces, I cant shove, I cant call creating a spr of 0,85 so to me, it is a clear fold.

Kind regards,

FDM

What do u mean? Double suited rundowns have >50% equity on the flop on 40% of flops.

Of course there are times where calling the 4bet would be -EV because the 1. you won't hit 30% equity on enough of flops or/and 2. Your average equity when you do stack off on the flop isn't enough to compensate for the preflop call.

Play fit or fold or : ) : ) : ) required equity against a hand we know we are a preflop dog against and with an spr of 0,85 + we have no post flop implied odds

With some super strong Ace crackers like rundowns it's pretty clearly +EV to call the 4bet pre if villain only 4bet AAxx, even though we know statistically we are behind preflop. As ANY villain with AA will shove flop <100bb deep after 4betting, we do in fact have some implied odds, as we are guaranteed to get his remaining stack if we win at showdown. 66bbs is still significant. Also we are not calling here to plan to outplay the opponent postflop, so despite the spr of 0,85 we can still be profitable just by playing fit fold with certain hands.

Once I know opponent has aces, I cant shove, I cant call creating a spr of 0,85 so to me, it is a clear fold.

In holdem this might be true but in PLO this is a very big spew. AAxx lose so much of their preflop edge on the flop and the fact that AAxx will always shove on the flop gives u much better odds to call. With KKTTds here I'm not sure without doing calculations but you definitely can't be folding double suited rundowns pre if u know opponent has aces, in case that's what you are thinking.

And yes, getting >40% of your stack in pre with AAxx is unexploitable and profitable in the long run. That doesn't mean that you always fold pre vs a 4bet from AAxx, because we already have dead money in the pot from our initial 3bet. From the 3bet onwards, there are still +EV decisions facing a 4bet.

Hi Tommygecko, first off thank you for your reply.

Hands like kkttds are good but I prefer them when I know one opponent has AAxx in either:

a) higher spr situations
b) Multiway pots.

Otherwise, premium rundowns are the way to go as you also suggested in your reply, but here I was really talking about having KKTTds as your starting hand
and not premium rundown ace crackers.

I would be more inclined to call vs known aces with a premium ace cracker rundown. However, if you fill in KKTTds vs AAxx you will still see on 50% of flops you will flop >26% equity which imo is not the best of prospects I think.

I tried filling in KQJTds vs AAxx and it came up with >38% equity on 50% of flops. For QJT9ds it was slightly better with >42% equity on 50% of all flops which means they flop much better vs AAxx. I naturally prefer ds rundowns once I know my opponents has aces over double pocket pairs, but still I prefer playing them with a flop spr higher than 0,85 especially when I know that when deep enough, this opponent will keep on firing on multiple streets with the worst of it, whereas here, he cannot make a mistake mathematically pushing any flop with a final 85% FPSCBet as with a (flop) SPR of 0,85 he will only needs >30% equity to break even which against KKTTds he will get the majority of the time (77% of all flops).

Thanks again,

FDM

There is an old thread called Master's degree in equities that shows how you can calculate the EV for preflop call (or the 4bet with aces). I'm on my mobile so I can't search and link it now.

Here it is: Master's degree in Equities

And Kreatief has a nice post somewhere that is really helpful too.

check this out: Brining flop SPR down to 1: unexploitable?

Calling with KKTTds vs AA** range it's near BE / slightly +EV with SPR 0,85:

EV (posflop)= %flops we call * ( total pot * avg equity % - flop call) =
= 0,45 * (10.46*0.63 - 3.3) = 1,48

EV (total) = EV (posflop) - call PF = 1.48 - 1.35 = +0,13$

This means that for lower SPR's it should be a fold and for higher SPR's a clear call...

Originally posted by RuiBouquet
Calling with KKTTds vs AA** range it's near BE / slightly +EV with SPR 0,85:

EV (posflop)= %flops we call * ( total pot * avg equity % - flop call) =
= 0,45 * (10.46*0.63 - 3.3) = 1,48

EV (total) = EV (posflop) - call PF = 1.48 - 1.35 = +0,13$

This means that for lower SPR's it should be a fold and for higher SPR's a clear call...

Thanks

If the SPR is lower, we need less equity on the flop. You can't just say that if the SPR is lower we need to fold. Cos when the SPR gets low enough (=stack sizes) it's even +EV to shove preflop.

Originally posted by Kyyberi
If the SPR is lower, we need less equity on the flop. You can't just say that if the SPR is lower we need to fold. Cos when the SPR gets low enough (=stack sizes) it's even +EV to shove preflop.

Shove is better than fold only in really lower SPR's.

KKTTds vs AA** has around 40% equity.

So, if the SPR would be lower than 0,27 OTF (3$ effective stacks) the better play is to shove.

But between 0,27 and 0,85 the better play is to fold imo.

Let's see with SPR 0,5 (effective stack 3,86$):

1) if we shove:

EV (shove) = (eq vs AA * (pot - shove)) - ((1 - eq vs AA) * shove)=
= (0.40 * 7,72 - 3.28) - (0.60 * 3.28) =
= 1,776 - 1,968 = - 0,19$

2) if we call: (0.25 needed equity OTF)

EV (posflop)= %flops we call * ( total pot * avg equity % - flop call) =
= 0.528 * (7,72 * 0.59 - 1.93) =
= 1,385

EV (total) = EV (posflop - PF call = 1,385 - 1,35 = 0.035$

3) if we fold:

EV= 0

This result was unexpected to me, so I tried to see what happens on other SPR's.

- SPR 0,4 (effective stack 3,47$):

1) if we call: (0.22 needed equity OTF)

EV (posflop)= %flops we call * ( total pot * avg equity % - flop call) =
= 0.65 * (6,94 * 0.49 - 1,54) =
= 1,21$

EV (total) = EV (posflop - PF call = 1,21 - 1,35 = - 0.14$

2) if we fold:

EV= 0

- SPR 0,6 (effective stack 4,25$):

1) if we call: (0.27 needed equity OTF)

EV (posflop)= %flops we call * ( total pot * avg equity % - flop call) =
= 0.49 * (8,5 * 0.59 - 2,32) =
= 1,32$

EV (total) = EV (posflop - PF call = 1,32 - 1,35 = - 0,03$

2) if we fold:

EV= 0

- SPR 0,7 (effective stack 4,63$):

1) if we call: (0.29 needed equity OTF)

EV (posflop)= %flops we call * ( total pot * avg equity % - flop call) =
= 0.46 * (9,26 * 0.63 - 2,7) =
= 1,44$

EV (total) = EV (posflop - PF call = 1,44 - 1,35 = 0,07$

2) if we fold:

EV= 0

- SPR 0,9 (effective stack 5,40$):

1) if we call: (0.32 needed 1equity OTF)

EV (posflop)= %flops we call * ( total pot * avg equity % - flop call) =
= 0.45 * (10,80 * 0.63 - 3,47) =
= 1,50$

EV (total) = EV (posflop - PF call = 1,50 - 1,35 = 0,15$

2) if we fold:

EV= 0

- SPR 1 (effective stack 5,79$):

1) if we call: (0.33 needed equity OTF)

EV (posflop)= %flops we call * ( total pot * avg equity % - flop call) =
= 0.44 * (11,58 * 0.62 - 3,86) =
= 1,46$

EV (total) = EV (posflop - PF call = 1,46 - 1,35 = 0,09$

2) if we fold:

EV= 0

My conclusions:

- shove is only +EV if SPR < 0,27
- with SPR > 0,27 and < 1, the EV(call) doesn't have a linear behaviour
- it seems better to call with SPR > 0,7 and to fold with SPR between 0,27 - 0,7 (this isn't proved cause with SPR 0,5 the EV (call) ~ EV (fold) but with SPR 0,6 it's - EV to call)

Hi RuiBouquet thank you for your post.

A few things come to mind when reading your answer.

1- I really must get propokertools as this avg equity when => equity on flop is immensely valuable.

2- in a raked world, especially on 5plo on stars where they rake 3,9% with a cap of $,50 it might be -EV to make the call with only $0,13 profit.

3- I still don't fully understand this principle of a certain course of action being both profitable for player A and player B. Imo this scenario we discussed right here will be more profitable over the long run for the AA** hand right? I mean in this case, KKTTds is a good hand and with the knowledge of how much equity we will flop when at least flopping the 0,85spr required 31% equity, we can make the call, but I still wonder how far you can take this...

If you take a really black and white example, when you hold a hand that you think is dominated, and you have to decide whether to call a preflop raise by opponent, and should you make the call, you will be in a flop spr situation of 0,1 and then the logic of calling with a hand that you know is heavily dominated simply because ONCE we reach an spr of 0,1 and then we only need a minimum amount of equity, which we will flop the majority of the time, is this really a +EV play then? To me it sounds like calling a big pf raise with a bad hand which is the first mistake, but then once you get to the flop you only need 10% for it to be profitable and should we really fistpump then when we flop on average 15% equity?? Wouldn't anybody just prefer to be the AA** type hand which was able to bring the spr down to <1 in the first place?

I am not saying KKTTds is an example of a bad hand, but I have seen so many players call big raises with garbage to the point where the spr was so low that calling any subsequent flopshove would be "profitable" (as they would have the required break even equity of this extremely low spr situation)but then I have just such a hard time imagining this is OVERALL (the flop call maybe, but the combination of the preflop call and flop call not) a profitable play and that the mistake was to actively put yourself into this situation in the first place. A hand that only has 25% equity vs another hand would also not like to stack off vs the other hand, so why call to the extent that it is a virtual all in (preflop all in is like spr = 0 and now we are discussing for example an spr of 0,1)? It is like talking to a ugly girl in the club which you shouldn't have done it in the first place, but then once you take her to the "flop" you are like ok shit now I might as well take here home (call flop shove) but then the next morning you wake up next to her (you got stacked) and then you wonder how and more importantly why you got yourself into this situation in the first place?