Brining flop SPR down to 1: unexploitable?

I dont have odds_oracle here right now, so Ill take another example which is kinda equal:

We will analyze the EV from both views: from the SB who always has AA** and will shove every flop (unexploitable) and from heros view, who will always play perfectly on the flop.

Lets start with Hero:

First of all we have to find out what equity hero needs on a flop to go broke:

Money in Pot, when allin on flop: 18,61 + 6 = 24,61
Invested: 6

Odds: good cases : bad cases→ 6 : 24,61 = 1:4,1
Required equity: good cases / all cases = GC/(GC+SC) → 1/(1+4,1) = 0,196 → 19,6%

So hero needs 19.6% Equity on the flop to go broke.

How often does he have at least 19.6% Equity on the flop?

Hero does have at least 19.6% Equity on the flop in 68% of all cases.

What is his average equity when he has at least 19.6% equity?

His average equity on flops where he has at least 19.6% equity is about 50%.

Now lets calc the EV:

EV = p(fold) * (-preCost) + p(call) * (p(win) * (totalPot) - (preCost+postCost))
EV = 0,32 * (-6,2) + 0,68 * (0,5 * 30,61 - 12,2)
EV = 0,32 * (-6,2) + 0,68 * 3,105
EV = -1,984 + 2,1114
EV = 0,1274

So he is slightly +EV

Now the same for SB:

EV = p(fold) * prePot+preCall + p(call) * (p(win) * (totalPot) - (preCost+postCost))
EV = 0,32 * 9,81 + 0,68*(0,5*30,61 - 14,8)
EV = 0,32 * 9,81 + 0,68*0,5
EV = 0,32 * 9,81 + 0,34
EV = 3,1392 + 0,34
EV = 3,4792

His EV is 3,48$.

Now: Whats the EV for SB if hero folds, because he knows that SB always has AA?
Its the pot to the time where SB shoves:

EV = 0.75 + 2.6 + 0.1 + 0.25 = 3.7

So we can see that the EV for him is slghtly higher if everyone folds when he shoves every flop.
This means: He is losing a little money when shoving every flop and villain playing perfectly. But he will never be -EV here. Hero cant exploit that. Even if he plays perfectly vs this very specific range, SB will always be +EV.
SB could even be more +EV if he knows heros exact range and knows when he has to fold flops, but thats pretty tough.

summed up: Shoving every flop with AA with an SPR of around 1 or less is clearly +EV but not always maxEV!

EDIT:

This is kind of a GTO play. GTO cant be exploited and can only be counterd with GTO. But GTO does not mean its maxEV.

Example:

We play rock-paper-scissor.
I play GTO, which means I randomly pick one of the possibilitys of rock, paper or scissor.
You cant exploit that. No matter what you do. If you dont play GTO (picking randomly), you will lose to me. If you play GTO, we will draw.
On the other hand: If I play GTO but know you are always picking paper, then my GTO would be 0 EV but always taking Scissor would have a higher EV and would be maxEV.

Wow great answer thanks! I was just thinking today about THIS:

"What is his average equity when he has at least 19.6% equity?"

I use the omaha equilab from pokerstrategy but as far as I am concerned, I can only calculate the average equity (like preflop all streets will show the same equity of course : ) and I can get a graph for "when do I have at least 19,6% equity" BUT I CAN'T (I mean it is not mentioned in the omaha equilab tutorial video) do this...so I wanted to ask you, if you don't mind answering, if you have the basic or the professional version of propokertools because I would love to be able to calculate avg. equity when at least x% equity but the pro version is 89$ versus the basic version only $19.

I also wanted to ask you, I know that mathematics don't lie, but I would like your opinion on getting ourselves into a situation such as this where once you call you only need x% avg. equity (generally a low value) and then once we get this, should we really fistpump when we get it all in as long as we get BE equity?!?! What I mean is, should we really consciously get ourselves into situations were we are very rarely dominating our opponent when all in on flop and then just be happy it when we have 25% equity and that it was a break even play or something...I hope you understand my question, I mean should we really aim to get ourselves into situations were we have the worst of it very often, and then be happy when we get our break even equity? Sounds like calling dominated preflop and calling all in dominated on flop which, perhaps mathematically correct once we hit the flop, but doesn't sound so appealing to me as I don't think that is such a great situation to consciously get ourselves into and I would rather be the dominating side on both streets...

Thanks for answering,

FDM

Hey,

I bought the professional version of OddsOracle for the exact reason you were asking for
First, you can solve that with PQL, like in the screenshots. You can also use the questions from OddsOracle for most cases (but not all). See the differences:

http://propokertools.com/odds_oracle/license_key

And its well worth the money if you want to improve and really understand WHY its a good decission. Have you seen the movie "Matrix"? The oracle once said to Neo: "You dont chose, you have allready chosen. Now you only have to understand why you decided that way!". Just copying decissions from videos wont make you a better player in the way you want it

Ok enough of this, just buy the tool, its great ♦

To your second question:
See it this way: In NoLimit Hold'em, you have very few big pots but if you have youll have alot of equity if you are good. In plo you have way more big pots but smaller equity edges. It may add up to the same result, but its just tougher to play perfectly here. This is where variance comes in. And yes, if I know its a profitable spot, Ill push it as hard as I can.
I really dont care about variance in a way where I run alot below EV. What I do hate about variance in PLO is that I often dont know if I am just running into top ranges or if I make bad decissions based on bad defined ranges. Tough to deal with this task...

Hope this helps a bit

Thanks for examining this.

But short answer? ♦ Yeah it's unexploitable... Leave the supermath to people who actually like it ♦

Regards,

skod