This site uses cookies to improve your browsing experience. By continuing to browse the website, you accept such cookies. For more details and to change your settings, see our Cookie Policy and Privacy Policy. Close

Feedback Thread for the Quiz "How Do You Play against Aggressive Midstacks?"

  • 3 replies
    • destyyy1
      Joined: 05.07.2011 Posts: 18
      31 % Sit and Go and MTT its better for me.
    • vengeance77
      Joined: 18.04.2010 Posts: 10,139
      31% for SNG/MTT player is good for me to:) , but on #7 and #9 i think that we have 100% possible profitable call for set value, because we need minimum 10%/+-2.5% variance/ of the smallest stack of 7.5% set possibility for profitable call. On these situations we have to call 6% and 7.5% of her stack to play for another part to 100%.:)
      It's just my opinion.
    • fryandspicy
      Joined: 27.05.2010 Posts: 440
      ^^^4Realz?!? I got 97%

      ... But in fairness played around with equilator a while ago so my 3bet knowledge is pretty solid :s_cool:

      Set mining isn't profitable imho. We need to stack them too often. Call20 only works if you have a decent stack to pot ratio because there's more room to outplay your opponent when you miss. imho. In MTTs it's probably fine because people go broke with air so often you can realistically stack someone more than half the time you hit.

      EDIT: Some maths on set mining - we hit a set 11.75% of the time. The other 88.25% we lose 2.52 big blinds. So when we hit we need to make 18.93 big blinds in order to break even. Assuming our opponent will go broke when he hits any part of the board (~30% of the time?) and cbet/folds the other 70% of the time we make on average (40*.3 + 3*.7) = 14.1 big blinds. If we were deeper stacked our opponent would be more inclined to sometimes barrel, and/or we could sometimes float or raise flop when we missed, so we make money. Versus a midstacker these options aren't as readily available i don't think.

      EDIT 2: Assuming our opponent cbets 100% of the time (unrealistic) he needs to go broke 43% of the time (unrealistic) for us to break even.