Range construction breakdowns

    • jules97
      jules97
      Bronze
      Joined: 10.06.2012 Posts: 1,449
      My plan is to keep adding to this thread with more range breakdowns like the following. Starting with just different flops. Then as I get more comfortable, I'll add different positions & spots in a hand. Then finally different opponent tendencies and ways how I can skew my ranges based on this. If people want to critique and/or join and post their own that would be great, if not, I'll just plug away. :f_biggrin:


      Let's start with:
      BB cold calls BTN open and looking for a flop x/r range.

      BTN opening 50%

      Hero's BB cold call range 46.3%


      Flop:8 7 J


      Value x/r range: (green lines on chart)

      code:
      Hands	Combos
      
      88	3
      77	3
      9Ts	4
      9To	12
      78s	2
      78o	7
      
      not sure about
      J7o
      J7s
      J8o
      J8s
      78s
      78o
      


      Total 31 combos

      Bluff x/r range: (purple lines on chart)

      code:
      Hands			Combos	Reason
      
      QTo			12	Draws to nut GS, blocks straight, can barrel turn
      QTs			4	Draws to nut GS, blocks straight, can barrel turn 
      Q9o			12	Draws to nut GS, blocks straight, can barrel turn
      Q9s			4	Draws to nut GS, blocks straight, can barrel turn
      A2s-A5s with bd fd 	12	Draws to nut FD
      76o			9	Worst hand that blocks bottom set
      75s with bd/fd		2	Worst hand that blocks bot/mid set, can barrel some turns
      85s with bd/fd		2	Worst hand that blocks bot/mid set, can barrel some turns
      76s with bd/fd		2	Worst hand that blocks bot/mid set, can barrel some turns
      86s with bd/fd		2	Worst hand that blocks bot/mid set, can barrel some turns
      


      Total 61 combos

      Total combos x/r
      = 92
      = 7.82% or 7.82%/46.3%
      = 16.9% of range that sees flop.

      Any criticism? Hands that could be raised for value/bluffs that arent? Or hands that should not be rasied?
      I don't know about raising J7 and J8? I just keep thinking that we block top pair which is a considerable part of Villains calling range. According to flopzilla, when J is a dead card, it only blocks worse hands that call about 3% less. So I'm guessing at least one of these should probably be raised on this flop?

      I went with 2 bluffs per 1 value ratio because that is what I think is good for a flop raise IP. I'm not sure if that is a good idea OOP. I think it seems fine, but not sure. Any thoughts on this?

      Is a 17% raising range too small for this flop and situation?
  • 93 replies
    • ZeDawning
      ZeDawning
      Bronze
      Joined: 27.02.2011 Posts: 204
      Interesting. Im sure someone better would come along with a better analysis on this. I have a few questions though;

      1. We assume BU raises 2.5bb?

      2a. Is there a specific % of x/r you wish to achieve here? For you to have a 2:1 bluff:value on a wet flop.

      2b. If we are assuming we are against unknown (so therefore this becomes our default lines), then we can usually assume that most of their cbets on this texture is going to be more value/draw heavy rather than air.
      Having a 2:1 bluff:value is going to put us in a very problematic spot imo and I would disagree with it.

      3. Do we have x/c ranges here. If not, there are better bluff hands to x/r like ATs/A9s etc (> A4s-A2s).
      Or maybe you are adding those to your x/c range?

      4. I think 17% is a bit high as a x/r% here. It is ~36.5% of the flops we see. And we are going to have a decent % of x/c. So to me, it seems a tad much on defending; dare I say, a tad spewy (simply because I would assume unknown's cbet range to have less air for us to get decent FE).

      5. Y U NO update blog? :f_biggrin: One of the better blogs I've gone through tbh.
    • jules97
      jules97
      Bronze
      Joined: 10.06.2012 Posts: 1,449
      1.
      I was assuming 2bb, but I don't think it really matters. The BB cc range doesn't really matters too much either. It's more about how to breakdown the range down later on, so as long as both are 'reasonable' it should be fine.


      2a.

      There is no specific %. I suppose overall I'd like to get it up, approaching 20% and higher if the population pool is cbetting too much.
      But it certainly depend on the flop. Some flops won't have any x/r range and some wet ones I think will probably be pushing about 30%.

      2b.
      I don't think we can make the assumption Villains cbets are value heavy. If anything I'd guess the other way around. But it's unimportant for the analysis anyway. Here, I'm just trying to get some somewhat balanced default ranges, that can be tweaked for each scenario as needed.

      2:1 is the ratio used so that, I can have somewhat balanced frequencies to barrel the turn and then barrel the river. Where on the turn about half bets are bluffs, and on the river only about 1/3 bets are bluffs. Obviously this also depends on raise/bet size.
      To change this I'd need to hear a convincing arguement why I should change this ratio from the same ratio when being IP and making a raise? Intuitively, I think the only difference it makes is when OOP hero has to have a x/f range on river, where IP he can x behind and sometimes win at showdown. Significant enough to change the ratio? Maybe? tricky

      3.
      Yeah, I just ignored them by leaving them out of the x/r range. For example I didn't x/r top set in the above post, it was part of the x/c range. Same goes for all those other TP hands. They all go into the x/c range. One thing I have been thinking about, is when I should x/raising TP/TK or TP/GK hands on the flop in situations like this, BB v BTN where ranges are so wide? I don't know. On what boards, what runouts and from what hands can I expect to get value? I don't know. But I think with ranges this wide and with pretty much the many regs I see using high cbet strategies, they'd really have to be defending some pretty trashy shit.

      4.
      It's not 36.5%. I already did that calculation. It's 17%. The total x/r range as a % of all starting hands only 7.82% so 7.82/46.3(range that sees flop) = 17%

      I'll probably start blogging again in a couple months. It's a bit hard right now for a few reasons.
    • jules97
      jules97
      Bronze
      Joined: 10.06.2012 Posts: 1,449
      BB cold calls BTN open and looking for a flop x/r range.

      BTN opening 50%

      Hero's BB cold call range 46.3%


      Flop:A J 8

      Value x/r range
      code:
      88	3
      J8o	7
      J8s	2
      A8s	2
      A8o	7
      
      Total	21


      Bluff x/r range
      code:
      Hand		combos	Reason
      
      9To		12	worst OESD	
      9Ts		4	worst OESD	
      KTs 	 	4	nut GS
      KTo		12	nut GS
      Kh8h		1	nut bd/fd + 8 blocker
      Kd8d		1	nut bd/fd + 8 blocker
      85s w bd/fd	2	worst bd/fd with 8 blocker
      86s w bd/fd	2	worst bd/fd with 8 blocker
      J5s w bd/fd	2	worst bd/fd with j blocker
      J6s w bd/fd	2	worst bd/fd with j blocker
      
      Total 		42


      Total combos raised
      =63
      =5.35%

      5.35/46.3
      =11.6% x/r range that sees flop

      I think that % looks ok, flop is not only somewhat dry. But the double broadway flop contains a lot of our hands that 3bet preflop and don't make it to our flop x/r range, such as AA, JJ, AJs, AJo.

      Our x/c range would be capped at something like ATs, but we'd also have some gutshots, OESD's & bd/fds that can turn and river ok. I don't think it's the end of the world to be a little capped here as it's a small pot in a pretty horrible flop. If someone was capable of overbetting a blank turn we could always strength our x/c range.
    • ZeDawning
      ZeDawning
      Bronze
      Joined: 27.02.2011 Posts: 204
      Originally posted by jules97
      2b.
      I don't think we can make the assumption Villains cbets are value heavy. If anything I'd guess the other way around. But it's unimportant for the analysis anyway. Here, I'm just trying to get some somewhat balanced default ranges, that can be tweaked for each scenario as needed.
      I still do think he will not cbet 100% of his range into this texture. The lesser he CBs here, means the lesser he has cut down on air. Even if he goes as far as CB 90%, it means he has cut down on ~6-7% of air ->he may xb w some value hands.

      Well to go for a balance default range, I would look at villian's CB frequency on this flop; which you and I probably disagree on :f_biggrin:
      Unless ofc you are looking at it GTOish.

      Originally posted by jules97
      2:1 is the ratio used so that, I can have somewhat balanced frequencies to barrel the turn and then barrel the river. Where on the turn about half bets are bluffs, and on the river only about 1/3 bets are bluffs. Obviously this also depends on raise/bet size.
      Ok I get that. You are trying to be unexploitable as possible.
      My issue here is, aren't there a lot of cards on this texture which could come on T/R which will negate most of your barreling (board pairing/4 card GS on board. A/K should be alright with your barreling range)

      Originally posted by jules97
      To change this I'd need to hear a convincing arguement why I should change this ratio from the same ratio when being IP and making a raise? Intuitively, I think the only difference it makes is when OOP hero has to have a x/f range on river, where IP he can x behind and sometimes win at showdown. Significant enough to change the ratio? Maybe? tricky
      I thinking more in terms of flop and turn. You raising flop puts villian in a very uncomfortable spot imo. It will be difficult for him to continue w a smaller SD value hand. Even if he does call flop once, your T barrel is going to make him fold a lot more hands -> it could be a blank T or a scare card T.

      OOP, the villian is in a more comfortable situation on those streets w the holdings he has.

      On 3. Hmm. Our x/r range is obv also very much dependent on our x/c range. Too lazy to do my own ranges on this. Atleast I can (wrongly?) critique :f_p:

      4. Yeah my bad. I thought it was 17/46.3 :f_mad:

      Originally posted by jules97
      There is no specific %. I suppose overall I'd like to get it up, approaching 20% and higher if the population pool is cbetting too much.
      I guess from your line of thought on this topic, we can look at our MDF on his cbet sizing and then tweak our ranges.
      70% CB -> minimum to defend - 59% (which we could use as a default as the general cb on this texture should be higher)
      50% CB -> MDF 66.6%
      etc

      Hope my math was right this time :s_frown:

      If villian does bet 70%, our minimum defending range goes to ~60% (x/r + x/c), then I guess you aren't too far off w your x/r range.

      Having said that though, I'd look it at a in a combo aspect i.e. This is BU vs BB. We can also take a similar situ with SB vs BB. We are IP and OOP.
      Lets say we are going to only defend 60%. So maybe IP, I might go 70% and OOP 50%.
    • pauln
      pauln
      Bronze
      Joined: 15.03.2010 Posts: 191
      This is really fascinating for me so far! I'm just starting to learn about this sort of structured approach to exploiting population pools.

      Do either of you guys know of some good resources to help me learn more?
    • jules97
      jules97
      Bronze
      Joined: 10.06.2012 Posts: 1,449
      What I'm trying to do doesn't really have anything to do with population reads or exploitable reads. I'm just trying to become familiar with some solid ranges, assuming a perfectly balanced opponent, away from the tables so I can do it more automatically at the tables.

      Widening and narrowing ranges to fit exploitable reads is the easy part imo. Knowing what's a deviation from ideal to find the exploitable read is the tough part.

      So lets do another one.


      BTN opening 50%

      Hero's CC range 49%

      Flop: A Q 5

      Equity 54.6% : 46.4% BTN:BB

      code:
      Hands			Combos
      
      Value
      
      55 			3
      K2ss:K8ss 		6
      All lower flushes	15	
      
      Total			24
      
      Nut FD
      
      Ks5x:KsJx 	21
      
      Bluffs
      
      Js7x:JsTx	12
      QxJs 		3
      KxJs 		3
      Qx6s 		3
      Qx7s 		3
      Qx8s 		3
      Ax2s:AxTs	24
      
      Total		51


      Total combos raised
      =96
      =7.24%
      =15% of total range

      I think this one is pretty straight forward. I took the nut flushdraws raised out to the side because given their equity the can just be mostly value, but not quite 2 bluffs per hand I think.

      For value only raising 1 set and flushes, leaving a few of the nut flushes for later streets.

      With bluffs, we use all the blockers to the 2nd nut flush. Some Ax:X hands to block top pair & flushes.

      Then to fill up the bluffs we use some Qx:X which block a few QQ sets (very very marginal help)and some weaker flushes.
      We could just use some T:sXo hands instead of the Qx:X, but it gets a bit confusing to think about as we've already used about half of these anyway and it's just easier to think about starting from a different location. The difference I'm sure is pretty close to insignificant.
    • GingerKid
      GingerKid
      Black
      Joined: 05.08.2007 Posts: 5,530
      Nice thread jules, hopefully you will keep on doing this, I am interested also.

      For the draw heavy board, 87J I agree with ZeDawning that most of villians will not cbet pure bluffs, but only draws and showdown value hands.
      In that case, since hero is agro regg, with balanced raise range and barreling frequencies (assuming you play disciplined most of the time), villian will not fold much on flop at least. So heros value hands will have more EV than on other boards, and very bad ev for bluffs. So I agree that it makes sense to exploitatively reduce number of bluffs.

      However, if you have balanced barreling frequency as you described, villians hands like overpairs will have -EV call down (how ever he plays them) even if all your bluffs have 0 equity on flop vs his hand. On the other hand, his combos that block your combos like Jx, 7x, 8x, 9x, Tx have profitable call down vs your range, because you have in that case more bluffs (nuts combos blocked). So I think it comes to the question what combos are mayority in villians range, the ones he blocks your nuts, or the others. On this board, I would say most of his defend combos are blocking your nuts, so you will play whole range vs his whole range -EV. Because of that I think it makes sense to reduce number of bluff combos.

      For example, if the board is 457, villians defend range will mostly be draws and overpairs, so his mayority of combos are not blocking your nuts and you can keep 2:1 ratio imo. If board is A89, again, most of villian hands are blocking your nuts.

      I didnt read this anywhere, thats just my opinion, and would like to hear other opinions about that because it seems very important and logical to me, but I am not sure.
    • G0ldFish89
      G0ldFish89
      Bronze
      Joined: 16.03.2014 Posts: 57
      epic thread
    • Dublimax
      Dublimax
      Bronze
      Joined: 22.11.2008 Posts: 2,233
      You are x/r hands as a bluff that are way too strong
    • GingerKid
      GingerKid
      Black
      Joined: 05.08.2007 Posts: 5,530
      Originally posted by Dublimax
      You are x/r hands as a bluff that are way too strong

      agree, imo doesnt make sense to turn into bluff 2nd pairs that are good vs villians BU cbet range. Maybe makes sense vs early positions where so low 2nd pair needs more protection and opponent has strong range.
    • FFRRAANNKKIIEE
      FFRRAANNKKIIEE
      Silver
      Joined: 30.12.2010 Posts: 3,107
      Just saw this thread jules,

      really nice idea :)

      Will be following this for sure.

      Kind regards,
      Fran
    • GingerKid
      GingerKid
      Black
      Joined: 05.08.2007 Posts: 5,530
      Originally posted by FFRRAANNKKIIEE
      Just saw this thread jules,

      really nice idea :)

      Will be following this for sure.

      Kind regards,
      Fran
      Would be nice if some coatches would comment on this. It is the best thread I found in forum, but maybe the coatches are writing down the notes on the ranges defined above and ideas so that they can use it in games :)
    • jules97
      jules97
      Bronze
      Joined: 10.06.2012 Posts: 1,449
      Originally posted by GingerKid
      Nice thread jules, hopefully you will keep on doing this, I am interested also.

      For the draw heavy board, 87J I agree with ZeDawning that most of villians will not cbet pure bluffs, but only draws and showdown value hands.
      In that case, since hero is agro regg, with balanced raise range and barreling frequencies (assuming you play disciplined most of the time), villian will not fold much on flop at least. So heros value hands will have more EV than on other boards, and very bad ev for bluffs. So I agree that it makes sense to exploitatively reduce number of bluffs.

      This may be an accurate read about an average player in a certain player pool. But I'm assuming villain is defending balanced. If this read was accurate, it's still ok for hero, it just means villain will be over calling flop raises and then over folding later streets or over calling later streets. So hero would make more money regardless. Ofcourse, if this read was accurate, it would be better off just stacking ones raising range (either bluffs or value depending on his later streets fold/call) and barrelling a tonne of turns and rivers. But that defeats the purpose of what I'm trying to do for the moment.


      However, if you have balanced barreling frequency as you described, villians hands like overpairs will have -EV call down (how ever he plays them) even if all your bluffs have 0 equity on flop vs his hand. On the other hand, his combos that block your combos like Jx, 7x, 8x, 9x, Tx have profitable call down vs your range, because you have in that case more bluffs (nuts combos blocked). So I think it comes to the question what combos are mayority in villians range, the ones he blocks your nuts, or the others. On this board, I would say most of his defend combos are blocking your nuts, so you will play whole range vs his whole range -EV. Because of that I think it makes sense to reduce number of bluff combos.

      For example, if the board is 457, villians defend range will mostly be draws and overpairs, so his mayority of combos are not blocking your nuts and you can keep 2:1 ratio imo. If board is A89, again, most of villian hands are blocking your nuts.

      I didnt read this anywhere, thats just my opinion, and would like to hear other opinions about that because it seems very important and logical to me, but I am not sure.
      I see your point about blockers in villains 3b calling range and have no idea just how important it is. I have a feeling that on wet boards, having bluffs with equity that hit a lot of turns and rivers can negate a big chunk of this. But yeah, I have no idea how much. For example, what makes a great blocker for villain on the the flop, might very well be useless on the turn and/or river.
      Say, in th J:s8:h7, villain calls the flop raise with a J9 and is feeling pretty good, if the turn or river bring a 9,T,Q,K,A, flush or pretty much anything but 2-6 villains going to be in a pretty gross spot where his blockers don't really help too much.


      I suppose some of those tools like propokertools and CREV could work this stuff out, but that's beyond me at the moment.
    • jules97
      jules97
      Bronze
      Joined: 10.06.2012 Posts: 1,449
      Originally posted by GingerKid
      Originally posted by Dublimax
      You are x/r hands as a bluff that are way too strong

      agree, imo doesnt make sense to turn into bluff 2nd pairs that are good vs villians BU cbet range. Maybe makes sense vs early positions where so low 2nd pair needs more protection and opponent has strong range.
      What hands are too strong?

      Are these 2nd pairs really better than villains cbetting range?
      I gave villain a cbetting range of about 58% on this flop 7:d8:hJ and 8:s5 has 45% equity, 7:s5 has 43% equity. And very rarely are they going to improve. Sure hero has good odds, but it's not going to easy to realize this equity. Even if we give villain a cbetting range of 70%, these hands only have 48% and 45% equity respectively. Hero could instead be floating with gutshot/overcard hands that have a good chance to improve and can also do something on turns & rivers.

      Perhaps there are better hands to use as blocking bluffs. But losing these from a x/c range is no great loss imo. And it's not like there aren't plenty left anyway.
    • GingerKid
      GingerKid
      Black
      Joined: 05.08.2007 Posts: 5,530
      Originally posted by jules97
      BB cold calls BTN open and looking for a flop x/r range.

      BTN opening 50%

      Hero's BB cold call range 46.3%


      Flop:A J 8

      Value x/r range
      code:
      88	3
      J8o	7
      J8s	2
      A8s	2
      A8o	7
      
      Total	21


      Bluff x/r range
      code:
      Hand		combos	Reason
      
      9To		12	worst OESD	
      9Ts		4	worst OESD	
      KTs 	 	4	nut GS
      KTo		12	nut GS
      Kh8h		1	nut bd/fd + 8 blocker
      Kd8d		1	nut bd/fd + 8 blocker
      85s w bd/fd	2	worst bd/fd with 8 blocker
      86s w bd/fd	2	worst bd/fd with 8 blocker
      J5s w bd/fd	2	worst bd/fd with j blocker
      J6s w bd/fd	2	worst bd/fd with j blocker
      
      Total 		42


      Total combos raised
      =63
      =5.35%

      5.35/46.3
      =11.6% x/r range that sees flop

      I think that % looks ok, flop is not only somewhat dry. But the double broadway flop contains a lot of our hands that 3bet preflop and don't make it to our flop x/r range, such as AA, JJ, AJs, AJo.

      Our x/c range would be capped at something like ATs, but we'd also have some gutshots, OESD's & bd/fds that can turn and river ok. I don't think it's the end of the world to be a little capped here as it's a small pot in a pretty horrible flop. If someone was capable of overbetting a blank turn we could always strength our x/c range.
      Makes no sense to bluff jx 8x, what do you
      Expect to fold worse? It is surely +ev call so why bluff with hands
      Which are +ev. Imo it is better to bluff
      All nut bdfd (until you reach 2:1 ratio) because you can at least
      Barrel some turns and have descent equity.

      Also t9o is imo better call because it is surely
      +ev. If you bluff raise all your hands which would
      Be +ev call, you probably have problem defending
      60% range, and if you do defenf it, probably big
      Part of call range is -ev
    • GingerKid
      GingerKid
      Black
      Joined: 05.08.2007 Posts: 5,530
      Originally posted by jules97
      Originally posted by GingerKid
      Originally posted by Dublimax
      You are x/r hands as a bluff that are way too strong

      agree, imo doesnt make sense to turn into bluff 2nd pairs that are good vs villians BU cbet range. Maybe makes sense vs early positions where so low 2nd pair needs more protection and opponent has strong range.
      What hands are too strong?

      Are these 2nd pairs really better than villains cbetting range?
      I gave villain a cbetting range of about 58% on this flop 7:d8:hJ and 8:s5 has 45% equi
      ty, 7:s5 has 43% equity. And very rarely are they going to improve. Sure hero has good odds, but it's not going to easy to realize this equity. Even if we give villain a cbetting range of 70%, these hands only have 48% and 45% equity respectively. Hero could instead be floating with gutshot/overcard hands that have a good chance to improve and can also do something on turns & rivers.

      Perhaps there are better hands to use as blocking bluffs. But losing these from a x/c range is no great loss imo. And it's not like there aren't plenty left anyway.
      45% equity is great when your pot odds
      Are 25%. I dont think he
      Bluffs turn with bdfd and maybe not all gs. What you
      Will fold on flop by raising is about same hands
      Which give up turn
    • GingerKid
      GingerKid
      Black
      Joined: 05.08.2007 Posts: 5,530
      Originally posted by jules97
      What I'm trying to do doesn't really have anything to do with population reads or exploitable reads. I'm just trying to become familiar with some solid ranges, assuming a perfectly balanced opponent, away from the tables so I can do it more automatically at the tables.

      Widening and narrowing ranges to fit exploitable reads is the easy part imo. Knowing what's a deviation from ideal to find the exploitable read is the tough part.

      So lets do another one.


      BTN opening 50%

      Hero's CC range 49%

      Flop: A Q 5

      Equity 54.6% : 46.4% BTN:BB

      code:
      Hands			Combos
      
      Value
      
      55 			3
      K2ss:K8ss 		6
      All lower flushes	15	
      
      Total			24
      
      Nut FD
      
      Ks5x:KsJx 	21
      
      Bluffs
      
      Js7x:JsTx	12
      QxJs 		3
      KxJs 		3
      Qx6s 		3
      Qx7s 		3
      Qx8s 		3
      Ax2s:AxTs	24
      
      Total		51


      Total combos raised
      =96
      =7.24%
      =15% of total range

      I think this one is pretty straight forward. I took the nut flushdraws raised out to the side because given their equity the can just be mostly value, but not quite 2 bluffs per hand I think.

      For value only raising 1 set and flushes, leaving a few of the nut flushes for later streets.

      With bluffs, we use all the blockers to the 2nd nut flush. Some Ax:X hands to block top pair & flushes.

      Then to fill up the bluffs we use some Qx:X which block a few QQ sets (very very marginal help)and some weaker flushes.
      We could just use some T:sXo hands instead of the Qx:X, but it gets a bit confusing to think about as we've already used about half of these anyway and it's just easier to think about starting from a different location. The difference I'm sure is pretty close to insignificant.

      Here is imo your raise range very strong and +ev
      All hands but it is only 15% range and
      You need to defend more than 45% more. Have are you
      Going to do that, if you raised almost
      All draws, so you probably fold on spade turn
      Or river almost whole range.

      So i would call nut fd 2/3 combos and 2nd nut fd,
      And raise rest, also would raise kj, kt with
      No spades because we can hardly float +ev and if we
      Raise those we can give up on blank turns
      And bluff spades, because we improved our fd combos and
      Villian will fold many ax combos.
    • Dublimax
      Dublimax
      Bronze
      Joined: 22.11.2008 Posts: 2,233
      Originally posted by jules97
      Originally posted by GingerKid
      Originally posted by Dublimax
      You are x/r hands as a bluff that are way too strong

      agree, imo doesnt make sense to turn into bluff 2nd pairs that are good vs villians BU cbet range. Maybe makes sense vs early positions where so low 2nd pair needs more protection and opponent has strong range.
      What hands are too strong?
      Quite a few but the most obvious ones are the Ax on AQx mono board.
      You have top pair why would you turn that into a bluff?
    • ZeDawning
      ZeDawning
      Bronze
      Joined: 27.02.2011 Posts: 204
      Hey man,

      I'm curious as to your objective on this exercise. I assume this is to make your postflop plays as balanced as you can vs unknown player/villian who plays balanced.

      I've been working at my postflop plays recently and I'm also looking at lines to take vs unknown/good reg postflop.

      My question is; does this range breakdown really help you achieve w/e you are trying to achieve?
      I mean, you are looking at specific board textures on specific positions and are looking to x/r and x/c specific combos.
      Would you really be able to recall these once you are in that situation?

      I would think that maybe it would be more useful to look at it in this way,
      -Board? -Texture? -Position? -Initiative? -Villian range? -Our hand?
      eg.
      -Qh7c4d -Dry -No -Yes -SCs/Broadways/PPs -AJhh

      Best line to take:
      Barrel F/T and give up on R if no A/K. Maybe barrel R if T gave an undercard (like 8/6) and R was a blank for a SC.
      Why? -> Villian calling F/T is unlikely to fold R. Probably has a Qx which might not fold to a third barrel after calling twice.

      Something like this might make it easier to understand and remember when we are facing similar spots as these can apply to many positions.

      Good thread anyways :f_p: