Hello Xarry!
I noticed several players asked you to upload a hud layout in yesterday's coaching. can you please post a link to it here when you have a bit of spare time ?
thanks in advance & congrats on your coachings. I always struggle to make it in time for the wednesday one 
http://www.file-upload.net/download-1652937/HM-HUD.rar.html
I hope I included all neccessary files. But don't forget. I play BSS with this HUD, too. Thus you don't neccessarily need all stats I use in order to play SSS.
Thanx, xarry2.
If you could also spend some time explaining in which situations you pay attention to which stats it would be awsome
Thanks a lot, xarry! I have a decent layout atm, but I was waiting to test yours since my first coaching I attended so will defo try it out in the morning ♠_biggrin:
@ mafaz: I'm not sure if this could be optimally integrated in a gold coaching session as most of the people who reached this status are already familiar with the stats...
Still, I understand and agree with your point in a way. I am sure a theoretical video about using hud & statistics would be very useful for beginners.
all the best!
Michael
Im not a begginner thought and i kinda know which stats are needed when But since xarry2 knows something more and interprets them a lot better it would be nice to know Anyway probably better just to attend more of his coachings
Adv SSS Coaching - 05/13
Well, since I didn't find pretty interesting hands from last wednesday's coaching I'll (as requested :)) talk a bit about the most important stats and how to use them with SSS. If you have any questions concerning stats during my coachings then of course feel free to ask me. Often situations are pretty common to me and therefore I maybe don't explain every stat I use to you - even though they are possible new to you.
First I want to quote an old post from this thread concerning reliability of stats depending on hand count:
How many hands do you set as "minimum" to reraise on stats?
Rule of thumb1: the closer your decision gets the more hands you need
Rule of thumb 2: the more infrequent the action underlying the considered stat is the more hands you need
ad 1: Why should we play marginal hands where we aren't sure if the stats determining our action and EV are true at all?
ad 2: e.g. restealing against an ATS of 25 over 500 Hands can still be wrong (or risky) if we actually just have 10 out of 40 steal situations for our opponent within these 500 Hands.
This means stats like the VPIP or PFR become accurate pretty fast. ATS and fold BB to steal less faster. But 3bet% or c/r Turn% take many, many total hands to be halfway accurate. Thus you should always take into account which sample size stands behind the stat you want to use. (usually your tracker program can show you this, i.e. ATS 25% (10 out of 40 cases).
from 0 to 30 Hands:
you should almost never base your decision on the stats you get. it could mean anything. together with a read you've picked up during these few hands you can judge your opponent though. if you've seen him limp/calling K4o or making a reraise with A3 you could say that he's either way too loose or in the 2nd case way to aggressive. but nevertheless if you have 32/25 stats from your aggressive opponent you can't assume his average PFR is 25. You can just assume that he's pretty agressive and put him on rather loose raising/reraising ranges if you play against him.
Another possibility is to assume that your unknown opponent plays in average like the typical opponent on the limit you play. That's again very unprecise but better than having no reads at all. That's why I always try to find out some typical ranges/stat values for my current limit.
from 30 to 100 Hands:
you can now slowly use basic values like VPIP or PFR but again be aware of marginal situations where only precise stats guarantee profit. Again additional reads or typical values can help you.
In addition I often try to peg my "half-known" opponents as typical opponent types I learned to know in the past through experience. Try too take a look at the stats and remember which actions/plays are more likely for this type than others. Especially when the values are extreme (either very passive like 9/5 or 38/4 or 46/33 even less hands say more since its less probable that they are due to coincidence.
from 100 to 500 Hands:
VPIP and PFR are now usually halfway accurate and you have like +/-5% variance. however I start making plays with like 5% edge. again my decisions are strengthened by reads and notes.
from 500 to 1000 Hands:
VPIP and PFR now usually only have like +/-1-2% variance and I make closer reraises or calls against reraises. Usually ATS/foldBBtosteal also get halfway accurate now. But as I said before its always important to consider the actual samplesize you have for your stat. c/r Flop or aggression factor are even unsecure but can be used as a help in many semi-close situations.
1000+ Hands:
most basic values are now pretty realistic, nevertheless we have some variance. Plays where like only 1% or less edge determines the outcome shouldn't be made though. thats just risking to much.
For doing that I really like to have like 5k+ hands. That's why I recommend to every shortstackstrategy player to use a datamining software or regularly download mined hands for the limits you play. Especially for SSS stats are of vital importance and we basically can never have enough, unless our computer or software dislikes them...
Well, I made up my mind and chose typical spots for a SSS-Player in which stats can be a big help:
- Reraise
- Steal
- Resteal
- Isolationraise (for us: raise against one limper if we are in late position)
- Flop cbet
- Unraised Pot
(If you want to add more just post them here and I'll state my opinion concerning important respective stats)
Reraise:
Most of you will take a look at the PFR in such a situation. This is an important value but be aware: the PFR is made out of raise 1st in and 3bet. Thus often players who 3bet less have a 10PFR for example but a higher raise 1st in value. For it is the raise 1st in value however which tells us most about the raising range of our opponent it is most important when considering a reraise. If possible you should also take the different position stats into account.
(for further reading I can recommend the review of 11/02 on page 5 of this thread)
Steal:
Most important to estimate the foldequity for your steal is the fold BB to steal. (or fold SB to steal). Further it can be helpful to know how your opponent defends if he doesn't fold. Does he call mostly or does he 3bet mostly? These are important questions you have to ask yourself before stealing. Against players who 3bet mostly you can basically steal ~any2 if you have the foldequity. You won't play postflop often thus your hand playbility isn't that important. On the other hand, if you get called mostly then you should chose mostly stealing hands which have postflop potential and playability. Especially if you steal in the SB this is important! If you face a "calling" opponent then knowing some postflop tendencies is also decent. I like to know how he plays against cbets on the flop (see cbet part) and maybe whats his went to showdown. E.g. if I see an opponent with foldBBtosteal of 70%, call 25%, 3bet 5% and a WTS of 28 I will definetely tighten up my steal hand requirements and focus on hands which I can play postflop. In this case its pretty important since the 28 WTS indicates our opponent is going rather often to the showdown. Thus we can not only rely on our foldequity with a flop cbet but really need to pick up made hands often enough.
Btw, If you don't have enough hands to have a reliable foldBBtosteal then use the VPIP/PFR in order to get a first evaluation of your opponent.
Resteal:
Attempt to steal is the stat of our choice here. It tells us about the range of our opponent. here it is relly important to only use the respective ATS, i.e. CO/BU or SB ATS. If you want to know if you can throw in a foldequity based resteal then you have to consider the fold vs 3bet stat. A value above 70% is really tight and making "semibluff resteals" gets interesting. Nevertheless the whole steal/resteal toppic lives from players images and histories. Any stat is an average value thus it is almost never exactly the one which applies to the specific sitaution in which you use it. As a result you should always try to modify the stats you get with additional information. In a steal/resteal situation it would be like: well, I've been restealing a lot against him the last rounds => the actual fold to 3bet% will maybe be lower than the one you get on average. your opponent will probably try to adapt and "fight back" against you. its the same as if I once had to show a resteal with T9s. The respective opponent will usually remember that and so do I! I write this into my notes in order to alwys know if there'S anything which may alter the average stat. In this case I would also use a fold to 3bet% which is lower than the average one. the opponent will give me less credit due to our history (T9s...)
btw, newest HM versions also show this value for all different positions/constellations.
Isolationraise:
If you like to know more about the theory of i-raising then scroll back in this thread. I've posted many hands/thoughts concerining the different strategic aspects of this play.
Which stats do I use? Most important is the limp% in the specific position of your opponent. someone who limps tight will hold stronger hands in average than someone who limps loose. Also interesting is the limp/call%. Often you see players limping loose but folding often when they get raised afterwards. Thats espcially nice since we'll often gather the money preflop.
When isolating I also like to know how agressive my opponent is. if he does only raise like 3% in EP but limps 10% there will be strong hands in his range (like AJ or AQ, maybe even AK, as well as 99 or TT) Best is to have opponents which limp loose but aren't too passive. Thus we can mostly be sure not to play against slowplayed monsters. Concerning this the limp/reraise% is also interesting. Some opponents limp/reraise pretty often. Knowing this can save you much money!
Flop cbet:
as you may probably know already the fold to flop cbet stat is most important. players who fold more than 65% are good victims for cbetting hard. its also good to know if your opponents call cbets or raise them more often. if you for example know your opponent calls your cbets most of the time than cbetting with unimproved hands which could improve on the turn is very decent. since the opponent will mostly play c/c flop, check turn we can see the turn and decide if we want to see a free river or make a 2nd barrel. If we are OOP its also nice to know how he plays against missed cbets. If a playe jsut bets in like 30% against a mist cbet IP then we can leave out many marginal cbets on the flop. our opponent won't punish us and will check behind often. Thus we can still see the turn but without paying for it. The checkraise/flop% is also important. I often checkbehind marginal hands in oder to avoid a checkraise forcing me to give up my (unimproved) hand and hopw to pick up something on the turn.
Unraised Pot:
Well, you should use a variety of stats here. the fold to flop bet stats is good to know. players who fold in more than 60% are good victims for stealing an unraised pot. However you should take some other stats into account. Mostly its the limp% or VPIP% as well as PFR/raise 1st in of the opponent's position. With these stats you can put him on a range which could stand behind his preflop limp.
Sometimes its good to know the bet vs missed cbet value also. Its not exactly matching but in situations where I plan to checkraise an unraised flop I often like to know this stat for the last acting opponent. There's another stat called steal limped pot. Players who often try to do this are good victims for flop checkraises since they will often - as the stats indicates - just be on a steal.
I hope I could give you a first introduction to the most important stats for SSS. Concering the surrounding strategies I recommend to read this thread 
I deliberately didn't include much strategic information here. But you will find loads of it here, I promise
regards,
xarry
Since I'm doing a study trip next week I'm unavailable for coaching on june 4th. Thus the next coaching will be on wednesday june 10th.
see u then
xarry
Adv SSS Coaching - 05/27
Today I'd like to talk a bit about downswings. I'm currently reading The Poker Mindset from Taylor&Hilger which inspired me for this post. Imo its a really good book treating many important psychological and mental fundamentals for poker players. One chapter is about "downswings". Since there are often posts/questions about downswings from ps.com members this is imo a very important topic since coping with a downswing maybe the the most difficult thing in poker.
btw, the authors state that downswings don't even exist from a theoretical perspective. nevertheless using the term "downswing" in its discussion for describing a period of time where you experience poorer-than-average results due to variance is a practical solution.
many players may say: "now i'm on a downswing."
in fact, as we will see this approch to "downswings" of this statement may hide some fundamental faults.
let's take a look at the following graph:
between hand 64k and 73k the player experienced way less winnings than the actual trend. shortly after hand 64k the player may have said "i'm on a downswing now". however there lies on of the first fundamental faults. "downswings belong to poker and you will experience them pretty often but maybe you don't really recognize pretty small ones. as soon, however, as you keep loosing pots where you we're in front over aperiod of time you say the downwing has started. the fault is to assume they are an entitiy, have a certain shape, size or recurring frequency. often players think "i'm on a downswing but I think it has bottomed out".
our player may have thought this around hand 69k when he won a party of his looses back. but shortly after the small "up" it wasgoing down again and all hopes/positive beliefs of our player may have been gone. in reality however, just because you had better results in the last sessions does not say anything about the coming results. as well saying like " I've lost 20 stacks now, so the results must turn around soon" is totally wrong. downswings don't have a fixed or maximum size. the authors also give this example: "I'm not due to another dwonswing for a while". again just because you we're suffering a downswing recently doesn't mean the next one will come next year.
the fundamental thought which helps you understanding downswings is:
Downswings are just an observed pattern in random data
The human mind likes to see patterns - and it likes to make estimations for future happenings based on those patterns. in many fields this leads to good results. the reason is that there are underlying rules in nature for example. just take a look at the seasons of the year. humans have observed how the pattern of temperature/day light ect change and concluded to the 4 seasons / 12 months ect. since there is a rule which is defined through the course of our planet around the sun the whole thing workes out. in poker however, there is no way to predict results. even if you always make the correct decisions maximizing your EV in the long-term it is absolutely not guaranteed to make winnings in short term - and long term is really long...
taylor and hilger recommend the following:
you need a pen and a paper and a coin for this. write the number 100 at the top of a piece of paper. toss the coin several times. every time you toss a head take 9 away from the total and every time you toss a tail add 10 to the total. toss the coin many times, keeping track of the total as you go. in the longterm you would expect the total to increase, but because the expected increase is so small (and in poker it is btw often even smaller!) you will observe long periods where your total appears to be going down. this is a neat illustration of how downswings work in poker"
it won't be difficult to label some periods of this experiment with what we call "downswing". maybe some of you may go broke - even though they have a positive EV.
In addition to the variance also bad play can contribute its party to the lenght of a downswing. if you feel like in a "downswing" you may also play this way. this means: you loose confidence in your abilities and always have a negative feeling, like: I should not call the flushdray, its anyway not working currently. or it could even get worse; you start to tilt because you've been loosing much before. if this is added to a "normal" downswing then it can easily getting a huge one. you should always try to focus on making correct long term decisions. if you however try to get back what you've lost (maybe you had a NL 200 bankroll before the downswing) you risk loosing even more. especially if you start playing NL 400 because of that...
as always in life its not worth worrying about things which already happened. if you focus on playing well then you will get to the point where you were before in the end. but if you want to force this development in the short term you're prone to making mistakes over mistakes and will loose even more.
the big problem is that playing poker doesn't really make much fun if you loose. thus putting much efforts into improving your game can be a big help. not only will it distract your thoughts from running bad currently but if you manage to improve your winrate just a bit you will in average overcome the downswing much faster than with the old winrate. in addition you may get more self confidence and will play better on the tables again.
I hope I could give you a short introduction to this topic. you will find much more in the book from taylor and hilger. i can just recommend The Poker Mindset. having the correct "mindset" is almost worth more than strategy. the strategy is the part which we can control. but dealing with the psycological and mental problems of poker is much more difficult sicne we have much less control over it.
"Poker is a combination of luck and skill. people think mastering the skill part is hard, but they're wrong. The trick is mastering the luck."
- Jessie May (from Shut Up and Deal)
Great and helpful post for the "hard times" of the poker players.
And "Poker is a combination of luck and skill. people think mastering the skill part is hard, but they're wrong. The trick is mastering the luck." is a nice touch in the end.
Dear Xarry, first of all I would like to thank you for the great work.
However I have to qualify your very first post in this thread Adv SSS Coaching - 05/14. In my opinion there is an error in your calculations. First of all your winnings are 30+352 as stated above, however later on you calculate with 30+23+352. Furthermore, you should take the rake into account. Even if he folds the hand will be raked, and there is also rake if you go to showdown.
The formula would be:
EV = FE*(152$-3$) + (1-FE)[(30$+352$-3$)*Equity - 329*(1-Equity)]
0% FE:
EV= 0%*(152-3)+100%*(40%*(382-3)-60%*329)= -45.80 $ instead of -35.5 $
20% FE:
EV= 20%*(152-3)+80%*(40%*(382-3)-60%*329)= -6.84$ instead of +2.08$
30% FE:
EV= 30%*(152-3)+70%*(40%*(382-3)-60%*329)= 12,64$ instead of +20.82$
So if you give yourself 30% FE you are earning ca. 1bb. Am I right?
Hi EvaPoker!
thx for your feedback! I took a look at the post again. Its true that I didn't take rake into account. I should do it. But as you did you just have to distract 3$.
The basic Formula for my winnings I stated (30+352) was wrong however.
What can we win if our opponent calls the push? 30$ from the pot, 352$ from our opponent and! the 23$ which we already invested into the pot. (they don't belong to us any longer)
Consequently the results we're correct, except that I left our rake. And yes, with your values we would win ~1BB with 30% FE.
I edited the post and added that I didn't take rake into account. I hope this it's fine for you I didn't recalculate everything.
Regards,
xarry
Adv SSS Coaching - 06/10
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$44,65:///////;BB$192,63:///////;BU$206,00:///////;[/tg]
1,00/2,00 No-Limit Hold'em (9 handed)
Hand recorder used for this poker hand: Texas Grabem 1.9 by www.pokerstrategy.com.
Preflop: Hero is MP3 with Q♣, A♣
4 folds, Hero raises to $6,00, CO folds, BU calls $6,00, SB folds, BB calls $4,00.
Flop: ($19,00) 6♠, 2♣, K♦ (3 players)
BB checks, Hero checks, BU checks.
Turn: ($19,00) Q♦ (3 players)
BB bets $5,50, Hero calls $5,50, BU calls $5,50.
River: ($35,50) 7♣ (3 players)
BB checks, Hero bets $15,00, BU calls $15,00, BB folds.
Final Pot: $65,50
First of all I'll shortly take a look at the stats of our opponents and try gather information about their possible range:
BU is playing 19/11 and is a regular player. HE coldcalls ~10% on the button and 3bets 3%. Thus we can mostly erase JJ+ and AK out of his range. on the other hand with 10% calling range which is already on the looser side he could have 22-TT, AT-AQ, KQ, KJ, QJ, QT, JT, and maybe some other lower suited connectors like 87-T9.
SB is pretty unknown I only got ~50 Hands with 26/8. We can't read accurate information out of this small handcount but we can try to get a tendency. I would say he tends to be loose/passive. With the good pot odds he gets for a call his range can be very big, containing all sorts of pockets, connectors, suited Aces/Kings and much more. Postflop I had a WTS of 50% and AF of 1.2 in total for him. But of course these values underly an immense variance over such a small samplesize. Thus you should use such unaccurate values only as a hint, and never as a fact on which you base your whole decision.
Preflop we could argue about raising to 3.5BB due to the looser Button and the BB. On the other hand CO and SB where pretty tight with 11/7 and 12/6. IMO, In the end it doesn't make the difference. We could say that we pretty missed the flop. HU I cbet here against most opponents. But 3 Handed (BU folds to cbets in 60% on the flop) and with a loose tendency for BB I rather speak for checking. With more information about BB placing the bet is okay. By doing so we maybe get to see the turn more often then if we check. With a backdoorflushdraw/runner runner straight draws and at least the Ace overcard (the Queen may be good sometimes, too) we have outs left - which makes it interesting to see the turn. Maybe we could also consider how often BU bets vs missed cbets. If this value is anyway low we have an easier decision here. Checking won't automatically mean we give up the hand. BU will also checkbehind most of the time then and we see the Turn for free. Since BU had a value of 36% which isn't aggressive I in the end decided to check instead of cbetting. And btw, If we were in position on that flop I would almost always checkbehind - only if both opponents fold to cbets very often and hardly checkraise I would bet. But I would just be sad to be forced to give up our remaining equity against a checkraise on this flop.
This turn usually improves our hand quite a lot. Since BU checked behind on the flop its really unlikely he has a K. Slowplayed sets of 66 or 22 could be possible but are also quite unlikely. Usually most players simplay want build the pot with those hands. Thus we mostly have to consider the BB. He could easily have the K. Now that he bets weak we have a hard time. If we just call we don't protect from possible draws and if e.g. a third diamond comes on the river and we face another bet it is pretty ugly to call again. On the other hand if we raise we commit ourself to the pot but we can easily be behind against a K. Again it is crucial how much information we have. If we knew more about BB and about the hands he makes such bets with we can adjust our play accordingly. Against aggressive and loose opponents I like the raise much more. They will have more draws in their range and will also give us a payout with worse hands still. Our opponent here however seems to be pretty passive. Thus I decided to call. I don't have to pay a high price moreover. Against a standard 2/3 potsize bet jsut calling gets more expensive again.
To sum up, either raising or folding are possible. However this totally depends on your opponent. I would like to add that if my remaining stack was smaller I would rather prefer to raise (push) the turn. I don't risk too much and the likeliness that I get called by worse hands also increases.
BU who calls, too can be on a draw and a Q mostly.
Now that BB checks on the river he could be on a unimproved draw, a K or a Q. I decided for valuebetting. The reason is I beat almost all other Qs. BU won't have a K. Thus only BB could have one. With the additional information about BB loose 50% WTS he could even call with hands worse than a Q, maybe a 6 or medium pockets like 88-TT. Considering the betsize I think it should vary between 50-60% potsize. More scares away weaker hands, less invites to strange moves maybe. Getting a raise on the river would be very ugly.
Finally, it is interesting to know that BB folds. Probably he was on a draw. BU had AQ btw.
regards,
xarry
Originally posted by xarry2
The basic Formula for my winnings I stated (30+352) was wrong however.
What can we win if our opponent calls the push? 30$ from the pot, 352$ from our opponent and! the 23$ which we already invested into the pot. (they don't belong to us any longer)
Hi Xarry, you had 362 preflop, posted the small blind and completed.
362-5-5= 352, so you have only 352$ on the flop. Obviously, you cant win more than you stack from your opponent + pot . The 352$ in the handhistory already includes your 23$ bet.
Hi EvaPoker,
I hope I'm right but I still stick to my last post. its true I have 352$ at the flop, thus the maximum I can win from my opponent ist 352$. what I can win in addition is the pot. and the pot just before my all-in move is: 30$+23$. the 23$ no longer belong to me, however if my opponent calls my all in he still has to bring the full 352$.
I'm pretty sure about this In case I'm not just tell me and I'll have another closer look at the hand.
regards,
xarry
hmm, I think we talk at cross purposes somehow. the pot on the flop without any flop action is 30$. now I make a bet of 23$, thats why the money I can loose at max is 329$ (see the second part of the formula) what my opponent however has to bring if he calls my all in is 352$. and thats what I can win from him no matter which bets/raises I make on the flop. the starting stack on the flop is what I can win. if my opponent folds I however win the 23$ + 30$ + 99$.
I hope you get my point. I'm very confident its correct
Originally posted by xarry2
Rule of thumb 2: the more infrequent the action underlying the considered stat is the more hands you need
Towards the bottom of this page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binomial_proportion_confidence_interval
there are four web-based calculators which quantify this rule.
Eg. BU has open-raise 20%, 20 times in 100 opportunities. Go to the fourth calculator on the Wiki page. Enter 20 in "passed" and 100 in "tested". Select a Confidence interval from the dropdown and go.
Using an 80% CI we get roughly 15-25% (given as decimals). This means that if we somehow knew that someone had an OR from BU of 20% then when faced with 100 raising opportunities from the BU you would expect to find their OR from BU stat to be somewhere between 15 and 25% in 8 cases from 10.
Adv SSS Coaching - 06/17
Yesterdays coaching was really nice. Thanks for your interesting questions!
I remember we've been talking much about reraising with consideration of fold equity more than equity against the open raising range. I had a nice spot fur such a "semibluff reraise"
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 CO with 5♦, 5♠
2 folds, MP2 raises to $6,00, 5 folds.
Final Pot: $9,00
MP2 stats: vpip 14, pfr 11, fold vs 3bet overall 68%, fold vs 3bet in MP 83%, MP openraise 17%
If you take a look at these stats you quickly see you face a TAG, however one with some preflop weaknesses. he folds pretty much to 3bets. thats our first indicator for good foldequity. in addition he already loosens up in MP. 17% range is quite aggressive and consequently there are many weak hands in his range. let's now use the EV calculator from my chart collection (see first post of this thread) and evaluate wether we can throw in a semibluff reraise here.
pot:
right at the point where we act we can win MP2s raise and the blinds => 9$
effective stack:
=> 40$
deadmoney:
if you take a look at the underlying formula you see that deadmoney belongs to the postflop part where our reraise gets called. thus the deadmoney is 3$ from the blinds. thats what we can win in addition to the money from MP2. however I always include rake at this point. if I discount 3$ maximum rake the final deadmoney is 0.
equity:
our equity in case we get called depends on MP2 calling range. since he folds often to three bets this range will be quite tight. possible is AK/JJ+ or AQ/TT+. lets evalue both cases in the following. vs AK/JJ+ 55 have 33.2% and vs AQ/TT+ they have 37.1%. other opponents may call looser but this one shouldn't be calling looser.
foldequity:
this also varies together with the calling range. MP2 openraises 17% in MP. AK/JJ+ euqal 3% and thus we have 82% foldequity if he only calsl with this range. if he calls with AQ/TT+ which is 4.7% we still have 72% FE.
blind/bet:
this value is zero since we didn't invest any money so far.
our 2 EVs are:
vs AK/JJ: +4.96$
vs AQ/TT: +3.59$
Both EVs are pretty nice for us. What else can we say about factors influencing our EV? Besides our opponents position and stats which both are most crucial for the EV we could consider:
our position:
the earlier our position is the more players we have left to act. thus the likeliness of better hands waiting behind us is increased. Thus I would say its best to throw in such semibluff reraises in late positions.
history:
such a move will only be profitable if our image is clean. If we once had to show such a reraise to MP2 or have been making fancy plays on this table before our credit will definetley be smaller. as a result our achieved foldequity will be smaller, too. thus you should really use such moves very rarely and at the right point. in additon you should be very familiar with calculating the EV like I do here. just copying a play without full understanding will almost always turn out to be -EV!
our hand:
given the 82% or 72% foldequity we can determine a break even equity and thus a range with which it is profitable to make this move.
with 82% FE we have an astonishing result: we can basically resteal any2.
even with 0% equity our EV is the following: 0.82*9$ - 0.18*40$ = 0.18 even with 72o which has 19.9% equity against AK/JJ+ our EV is 3.05$
against AQ/TT+ our break even equity is ~21.1%. this illustrates the great impact of foldequity on our EV. since a callingrange like AQ/TT is more likely even with this tight opponent I would say you should only make this move with hands which have 25% equity or more. creating a safety margin for better hands waiting behind us and in order to avoid high variance but only very marginally profitable plays.
this would be hands like 22+, A2s+, A2o+, K2s+, K3o+, Q2s+, Q9o+, J2s+, J7o+, T2s+, T7o+, 92s+, 96o+, 82s+, 85o+, 72s+, 74o+, 62s+, 63o+, 52s+, 53o+, 42s+, 43o, 32s+ => around 72% range
I don't want to point out that you should make moves with all these hands but I want to show how loose you can get If you have the needed foldequity.
opponents raisesize:
3BB openraise is okay but 4BB would be better since everytime our opponent folds we win one BB more. our EV would change to (assuming our foldequity does not change which is quite realistic):
vs AK/JJ: +6.60$
vs AQ/TT: +5.03$
on the other hand a 2BB steal would mean less profit:
vs AK/JJ: +3.32$
vs AQ/TT: +2.15$
our stacksize:
it should be clear to see that our profit will be smaller the bigger our stack is. the reason is simply that we have less than 50% equity postflop. thus the impact of the postflop loss will be bigger with a bigger stack. to say it another way: the preflop foldequity winnings have to bigger than the postflop losses in order to make profit. on the other hand a very small stack won't create enough foldequity any longer.
lets assume we have 15BB stack and our opponent calls with AQ/TT. our EV is 4.31$, already bigger than in the first case where we had 20BB stack.
with 25BB and a calling range of AK/JJ it is 4.36$, a bit smaller than with 20BB before.
I hope you all got my point: throwing in such a move is a decent additional profit. but it will only be one if you use it sparely and at the right spots. besides its vital to fully understand the mathmatics behind this move. I can just recommend to make similar calculations as I did here. Only by playing with those calculators and by modifying the parameters you will get a feeling for the EV of your moves.
regards,
xarry
Adv SSS Coaching - 06/24
Known players: (for a description of vp$ip, pfr, ats, folded bb, af, wts, wsd or hands click here)
[tg]BB$971,00:///////;Hero$175,00:///////;SB$1000,00:///////;MP2$193,00:///////;MP1$1102,00:///////;CO$1064,00:///////;UTG+1$1089,13:///////;BU$547,00:///////;MP3$1173,13:///////;[/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 UTG+2 with T♣, T♠
UTG+1 folds, Hero raises to $30,00, MP1 calls $30,00, 5 folds, BB calls $20,00.
Flop: ($95,00) 5♣, T♥, 5♦ (3 players)
BB checks, Hero checks, MP1 checks.
Turn: ($95,00) 8♦ (3 players)
BB bets $55,00, Hero calls $55,00, MP1 folds.
River: ($205,00) J♦ (2 players)
BB bets $90,00, Hero calls $90,00.
Final Pot: $385,00
MP1: Regular TAG, VPIP 14, PFR 9, AF Total 3.2
BB: VPIP 32, PFR 13, AF 3.3
In this hand I decided to slowplay my monster on the flop. Let's first talk about slowplaying, i.e. in our case not contibetting the flop with a monster. Why do you slowplay? Mostly the answer is to use the aggressiveness of other players to build the pot. Another reason is to let your opponents improve their hands to hopefully 2nd best hands. If we consider the AF of our opponents we could state they both are aggressive. Nevertheless to be more accurate you should use the single street AF stats and bet vs missed cbet. However these stats weren't reliable enough. Still I think this hand suits perfectly for a slowplay. We literally have the ultra nuts, only 2 or 1 outers are possible. In addition its not likely our opponents really hit this board. If we made a cbet vs two opponents here it would should much strenght usually. Conversely, not cbetting looks - as I like to call it - authentic. If someone does not cbet on an ace high board this is usually not authentic and suspicious. Why this? Well, most players will bet all their trash hands on such a board. Thus if they don't cbet this mostly means the have hit a monster or a hand where they play to continue without initiative. On the other hand, if I check on this T55 Flop against 2 opponents noone will doubt I have a hand like AK or AQ. Imo the authenticity of a slowplay is crucial for its success. Thus you should always ask yourself: does it look suspicious if I make no action?
Consequently I checked. I really assume MP1 will often attack the flop. He can have low to medium pockets as well as hands like AQ/AK. I assume he folds 22-44, 66, 77 and possibly 88 against a cbet from me in this spot. Though, if its checked to him he will probably bet most of these hands. My plan would be to checkraise All-in on the flop. If not the seemingly pretty aggressive BB will often do this in the Turn. His range can be very loose and after all we know from him he's too loose/aggressive. And I can still hope for a card improving their hands.
The Turn is a nice card since it allows possible straight and flushdraws. We now have the choice between raising and calling. What to do depends on the individual opponents. If your opponents see you raising a flushdraw here then you should raise the monster as well. If they see you calling then you should call. Simply: stay authentic. You could add that shoving gets more interesting with a small stack left. Calling a flushdraw is often just not profitable due to the small implieds. Moreover your opponents will often be committed with their bet. With big stacks its the other way round: you should call more often. The riverplay is pretty easy then. Against a bet I shove/call, against a check I shove. The pot is now so big that most opponents will see themselves as commited anyway.
Known players: (for a description of vp$ip, pfr, ats, folded bb, af, wts, wsd or hands click here)
[tg]MP1$92,29:///////;Hero$33,00:///////;MP3$46,35:///////;UTG+2$38,00:///////;CO$83,50:///////;BU$115,32:///////;MP2$106,74:///////;SB$178,95:///////;[/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 BB with T♦, A♦
4 folds, CO raises to $6,00, BU calls $6,00, SB calls $5,00, Hero raises to $33,00 (All-In), CO folds, BU calls $27,00, SB calls $27,00.
Flop: ($105,00) J♦, J♠, 5♣ (2 players)
SB checks, BU bets $20,00, SB calls $20,00.
Turn: ($145,00) 3♦ (2 players)
SB checks, BU bets $60,32 (All-In), SB folds.
River: ($205,32) J♣
Final Pot: $205,32
CO: SSS-Player, 13/11, CO ATS 25%, fold to 3bet 50% (54 cases)
BU: fish, 35/11, call open BU 25%
SB: rather loose/passive, 23/9
We get a very decent squeeze spot here. Let's first calculate our EV vs a CO steal alone:
25% range are ~22+,A2s+,K9s+,Q9s+,J9s+,T9s,A6o+,KTo+,QTo+,JTo. For simplicity lets assume 50% and 40% foldequity. Making an accurate estimation would btw require a consideration of my image, history, pot odds for CO to call my all-in ect. 50% callingrange would be ~66+,A5s+,A7o+. ATs has 47.6% equity then. vs 60% callingrange (22+,A2s+,A7o+) ATs has 49.1%.
EV (50% FE) = 0.5*9$ + 0.5*[(33$+3$-3$)*0.476 - 31$*0.524] = 4.23$
EV (40% FE) = 0.4*9$ + 0.6*[(33$+3$-3$)*0.491 - 31$*0.509] = 3.85$
As you can see a resteal vs CO alone would be profitable. With coldcallers which we can treat as deadmoney our profit will increase further. Well, when can we treat BU an SB as deadmoney? I would say either if they always fold or if their range is dominated by ours. The second condition is my own definition. I admit its actually not correct to use the term deadmoney for this. But for simplicity I like to use this for both conditions. The reason is, if a coldcaller does call our squeeze but in average has less equity than we it can never decrease our EV. Consequently I always try to find out the range of the coldcaller and evaluate how my squeezing hand runs against this range. Since this is mostly very complicated to do for a complete coldcalling range I focus on the top hands of these range - the hands which are dangerous for my squeezing hand. If these hands just make up a little portion of the total coldcallingrange I treat the coldcaller as deadmoney.
For BU: with 35 vpip and 11 pfr we can be sure his coldcalling range will be big. as well we can assume he 3bets the top hands (it would be best to use the BU 3bet stat for this). Thus TT-AQ shouldn't usually be in his coldcalling range. Consequently the only hand we really have to fear is AJ. Against the pockets 55-99 we aren't favorite but still have a decent flip. Thus this little portion of hands beating us can be neglected in comparison to all the other weaker hands he can coldcall.
For SB: his coldcalling range can be even bigger than BUs. He's getting very good pot odds for a call. However since he seems to be a little more passive and is OOP he will possible 3bet a bit tighter. He should 3bet JJ+ and AK. Therefore TT and AQ are additional hands beating us. But again they are just a small part of the total range.
I now want to calculate our EV for the squeeze as played. Please keep in mind that such a spot is pretty difficult to calculate. There are 3 opponents involved, they can not only push or fold, they could also call (as happened).
I will therefore only include the following cases:
(1) CO pushs, BU and SB fold.
(2) CO folds, BU pushs, SB folds
(3) CO and BU fold, SB pushs
(4) all opponents fold
I will try to put them into one big formula.
FE for CO: since he is getting better pot odds due to the dead money and since he will probably assume I can squeeze loose than resteal the foldequity will decrease in comparison to the normal resteal calculated above. CO could push with a range like this: ~22+,A2s+,A6o+,KQo. This is 17.9% and I thus have ~29% foldequity. Against his range ATs has 51.2% equity. The pot I can win preflop is 20$. What I can win postflop is always my effective stack + the coldcalls and the BB minus rake. 33$+6$+6$+2$-3$ = 44$
The first part of our EV formula only considering cas (1) will thus be:
EV = 0.29*20$ + 0.71[44$*0.512 - 31$*0.488] = 11.05$
Almost 3 times as much as the resteal EV from above. Of course this is not realistic since BU and SB won't fold in 100%. Thus our formula should be like:
EV = 0.29*X + 0.71[44$*0.512 - 31$*0.488]
According to my assumptions BU and SB will only continue if CO folds. This is the 0.29*X term. What is X? It is case (2)-(4). Well, how often does case (2) happen? It is pretty difficult to put BU on an exact range. let's just try ~25% (as indicated by the BU coldcall%) without TT+/AQ: 99-22,AJs-A2s,K9s+,Q9s+,J9s+,T8s+,98s,87s,76s,AJo-A2o,KTo+,QTo+,JTo
Probably he'll push with ~99-44,AJs-A2s,KTs+,QJs,AJo-A5o,KJo+ which is 15.1% and thus we have ~40% foldequity as well as 59.9% equity with ATs. (btw, maybe you see why its not a problem if there are some better hands in the coldcallers range. we still beat the biggest part and thus have much more than 50% equity)
Let's do SB as well. I think he can call around 30-40%. I try this: TT-22,AQs-A2s,K7s+,Q9s+,J9s+,T8s+,97s+,86s+,75s+,65s,54s,43s,AQo-A2o,K9o+,Q9o+,J9o+,T8o+,98o,87o,76o,65o (equals 37.6%)
What will he call my push with if CO and BU fold? Before answering that we have to consider the good pot odds he is getting for an All-In. The pot is 33$ from me, 12 from the CO and BU and 6$ from his coldcall. This makes 51$ pot. he only has to call 27$ and thus almost gets 2:1. As a result he will call us with many weak hands as well. Take this into account for your squeezes. The last opponent to act will get pretty good pot odds! Considering this I would state he calls with ~TT-22,AQs-A2s,K9s+,Q9s+,J9s+,T9s,AQo-A2o,KTo+,QTo+,JTo which is 25.8%. We thus have ~31% foldequity for the SB. Our equity against this range will be
60.9%.
The new formula will be constructed in the following way:
Cut Off pushs + Cut Off folds, BU pushs + CO&BU fold, SB Pushs + All Fold
Cut Off pushs => 71%
Cut Off folds, BU pushs => 29%*60%
CO&BU fold, SB Pushs => 29%*40%*69%
All Fold => 29%*40%*31%
=> 71% + 17.4% + 8% + 3.6% => equals 1 => should be correct
EV = 0.71[44$*0.512 - 31$*0.488] + 0.174[44$*0.599 - 31$*0.401] + 0.08*[44$*0.609 - 31$*0.391] + 0.036*20$ = 5.25$ + 2.42$ + 1.17$ + 0.72$ = 9.56$
Phew! Hard work but I think I calculated correctly. Of course the whole result may vary with different assumptions about callingranges ect. But I hope you got and insight into calculating such difficult spots. Overall you see that less foldequity makes a squeeze less profitable. Above we just considered the CO and treated BU and SB as total deadmoney. The EV then was 11.05$ - a bit more than the 9.56$. You see, as long as you make halfway safe squeezes it is mostly enough to just focus on the intial openraiser and his foldequity. In theory it is however - in order to be more realistic - very important to consider other players as well.
I was asked about the worst hand I would squeeze here during the coaching. Can you find out what this hand is? I recommend to determine the break even !equities! for the whole formula and then find out which hands have more than needed. Of course you can also try single hands and see how they run. e.g. 22 has: 41.2% against CO, 45.4% against BU and 46.4 against SB.
EV(22) = 0.71[44$*0.412 - 31$*0.588] + 0.174[44$*0.454 - 31$*0.546] + 0.08*[44$*0.464 - 31$*0.536] + 0.036*20$ = -0.07$ + 0.53$ + 0.30$ + 0.72$ = 1.48$
I.e. even with 22 - if our estimations are correct! - we can achieve a small profit. Try to find out the other minimum hands!
Regards,
xarry
Adv SSS Coaching - 07/01
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 BB with 8♣, 7♠
7 folds, SB raises to $30,00, Hero raises to $190,00 (All-In), SB calls $160,00.
Flop: ($380,00) 3♣, Q♦, 4♦
Turn: ($380,00) 7♦
River: ($380,00) 4♣
Final Pot: $380,00
At the end of yesterdays coaching we talked about this hand in detail. this is - as I like to call it - a semibluff-resteal. I've been writing much about these resteals before. just scroll back if you need more detailed background information. I just want to point out that this should never be standard and can only be used in special situations.
The profit from such a resteal does not come from an equity edge but from foldequity. Everytime SB folds I win 40$ and this has to compensate for the loss I make when I get called. Thus, this play can only be profitable when I got enough foldequity.
The underlying calculation would be:
EV = Pot*Foldequity + (1-Foldequity)[(eff.Stack+Deadmoney)*Equity – ((eff.Stack-Blind)*(1-Equity))]
In this case:
EV = 40$*FE + (1-FE)[(190$+7$)*Equity - (190$-10$)*(1-Equity)]
Pot = 30$+10$ from the stealraise and the BB
Effective stack = 190$
Deadmoney = 7$, since we have the 10$ from the BB minus 3$ Rake
Blind/Bet = 10$
(for a more detailed explanation I recommend my chart collection, link in the first post of this thread. in the chart collection you will also find a link to an explanatory post for the calculators)
In order to calculate our EV we however need the Foldequity and our Equity in case we get called. SB, a TAG regular had a 45% average ATS in the SB. Since I as a shortstack in the BB usually defend in only 70%-80% it is possible for my opponent to loosen up his stealing range even more. He jsut risks 25$ in order to win 15$. If this is working in more than 62.5% he's making profit. Consequently he has enough foldequity to make an any2 stealraise against me. I won't give him 100%, but lets just assume 60% stealrange. This value could be even higher but as we will see this is already more than enough for a +EV resteal.
In general it is not that easy to make accurate estimations about the stealrange of SB. What you should really consider is the history and the current table image. If you've never been restealing so far against SB his stealrange could be like 80-90%. Also if you haven't been active at the table. It is also worth noticing if your opponent is multitabling and treats you as a standard shortstack. If there is however history between you and SB, especially if you had to show a weak resteal before or just defended aggressively before it is possible that your opponent does only steal with like 30-40%. Guessing whats the case is the big challenge for steals/resteals. So never underestimate the dynamics of those spots. Even though the stats you get may say a certain thing this does often not mean you can assume exactly this value.
Well, I said I assume 60% since there was no special history and I have been rather straightforward on this table before.
60% is something like that: 22+,A2s+,K2s+,Q2s+,J2s+,T2s+,92s+,82s+,72s+,62s+,52s+,42s+,32s,A2o+,K6o+,Q7o+,J7o+,T7o+,97o+,87o (60.2%)
Now we have to evaluate what Hands SB calls against a push from us. 22+,A2s+,KTs+,QTs+,JTs,A2o+,KJo+ (24%) seems to be a realistic range. Considering my clean image so far this range is still loose. Nevertheless many other shortstacks on NL 1000 apply aggressive resteals and thus my opponent can still assume I play similarly to them. Thats why I wouldn't give him a tighter range. Again, this can change depending on your history.
You could also take a look at his calling range with consideration of the pot odds he gets for an All-In. He has to call 160$ into a 220$ pot. Thus he should call the All-In with all hands having more than 42% against my restealing range. We could estimate this: I resteal ~ 20-25%. => 22+,A2s+,KTs+,QTs+,JTs,A2o+,KJo+
The other 5-10% will often be passive defends. What will he call now with the assumption he only calls hands with 42%+ equity?
22+,A5s+,A7o+,KJs+,QJs,JTs, (this would be 16.1%)
Let's state that this will probably be a minimum calling range for an aggresisve TAG in this spot. Most players imo play looser. Thus assuming our 24% should be quite realistic.
Well, now we now all we need. The Foldequity is 100% - 24%/60% => 60% and the equity we have in case we get called is vs 24% range: 36.5%
Whats our EV?
EV = 40$*FE + (1-FE)[(190$+7$)*Equity - (190$-10$)*(1-Equity)]
EV = 40$*0.6 + 0.4[197$*0.365 - 180$*0.635] = 7.04$
Whith which foldequity are we breakeven?
With around 51.5% foldequity we are breakeven. But I didn't include that our remaining equity increases as the total foldequity decreases. Thus we would still make some profit.
Regards,
xarry
