[NL2-NL10] Nl 50 FR (7,7) limp, raise, 3bet, call: push or fold?

    • Tim64
      Tim64
      Black
      Joined: 02.11.2008 Posts: 7,697
      Known players:
      Position:
      Stack
      BB:
      $28.93
      MP2:
      $14.01
      Hero:
      $9.44

      0.25/0.5 No-Limit Hold'em (6 handed)
      Hand recorder used for this poker hand: PokerStrategy Elephant 0.67 by www.pokerstrategy.com.

      Preflop: Hero is BU with 7:heart: , 7:diamond:
      MP2 calls $0.50, 2 folds, Hero raises to $2.75, SB folds, BB raises to $9.00, MP2 calls $8.50, Hero raises to $9.44 (All-In), BB calls $0.44, MP2 calls $0.44.

      Flop: ($28.57) 6:heart: , 2:club: , A:heart: (2 players)
      BB bets $19.49 (All-In), MP2 raises to $4.57 (All-In).

      Turn: ($52.63) Q:club:
      River: ($52.63) 8:diamond: (1 players)


      Final Pot: $52.63

      I'm obv folding if I'm just up against BB. Once MP2 calls, though, given their loosish stats, I thought I was priced in. Now I'm not so sure...

      I give BB (generously) a 3bet range of 99+, AKo+ (~5%; - though it may well be looser v BU steal) and MP2 a cc range of around 16%. Against this, my 77 have 17.5% equity with 'enumerate' method on Equilator, and 26.5% via 'monte carlo' method.

      First, which Equilator method should I use and why are the results different?

      Second, to call costs me:$6.69 for a pot worth $18.43 (2* my stack $9.44 + $0.25sb - 5% rake) so pot odds of ~2.75:1

      So, I think that my odds are at best 3.7:1 vs pot odds of 2.75:1. On that basis, my call was clearly -EV. Can someone - like Dandycal or Gerv ;) - who is halfway decent at maths confirm whether I've done the calculations correct? I'd be really grateful... Any thoughts on whether my estimated ranges are ok also welcome - neither player has good hand sample...

      Interestingly, against their actualy hands my equity is 44% since I was flipping against both, but I guess I can't take any comfort from that...?

      Third, if, after a decent hand sample, you know a player's pfr, can you estimate his 3bet range from it? Is it about 1/3? e.g. pfr = 15% so 3bet = 5%, or what? (Elephant runs so slowly on my machine that by the time the popup window has popped up for me to see villain's 3bet stat, i've been timed out... :f_cry:



      Thanks
      Tim
  • 5 replies
    • Gerv
      Gerv
      Bronze
      Joined: 07.05.2008 Posts: 17,678
      Hi,

      First of all you should raise to pot+1 = $2.25 in my opinion with just one limp.
      Limp/call3bet is like what the hell but I think I give him like a decent 12% which is 77+,ATs+,KTs+,QTs+,JTs,ATo+,KJo+~ like

      Concerning Monte carlo vs Enumerate All:
      What PokerStove does is to run simulations. It doesn't calculate, it simulates. So when you run a simulation, it's going to pit the hands and ranges that you put in, on the board that you put in (if any), randomize all the unknown variables many times, and tell you how often on average the different players win. There are two ways it can do this:

      "Enumerate all" goes through every possible combination, in some kind of order. For some scenarios, this is very fast since there aren't so many possible combinations. Most cases where you only have two players involved, for instance, doesn't take Poker Stove many fractions of a second to calculate. But when you have three or more players involved in a pot, the number of possible cases has grown exponentially, and it may take a long time for the program to run every single combination of possibilities. That's when using "Monte Carlo" comes in handy: It randomizes the simulations.

      Basically, this means that instead of following a pattern and grinding its way through every possible holding, it's going to just randomly run simulation after simulation. Because computers are so fast these days, we're going to get a huge number of samples (millions) in just about a second. It's true that we've substituted precision for speed, but if you let Monte Carlo run for awhile it's going to pretty quickly stabilize towards the true value. Often, these approximations are good enough.
      Your break-even equity should be: $9.44*2+$0.25+$2.75*0.95 against ($9.44-$2.75)
      =
      $20.78 : $6.7
      = 24.4 % BEQ

      now Monte carlo method gives you:
      equity win tie pots won pots tied
      Hand 0: 24.438% 24.30% 00.14% 22042889 127302.33 { 77 }
      Hand 1: 48.729% 48.04% 00.69% 43581293 624550.83 { TT+, AKs, AKo }
      Hand 2: 26.833% 26.10% 00.74% 23675847 666779.33 { 66+, A9s+, KTs+, QTs+, JTs, ATo+, KTo+, QTo+, JTo }
      And Enumerate All gives you at some point also the same % (Gazillion games as sample !!)


      Last but not least, You can put the 3bet % statistics on your hud and one's PFR can be 30 but his 3bet% can be then 1% so seeing his 3bet% as a percentage of his PFR is nowhere accurate ;)

      Best regards,
      Gerv
    • Tim64
      Tim64
      Black
      Joined: 02.11.2008 Posts: 7,697
      Thanks, Gerv.

      I forgot to add my original raise into the pot available to win. Doh...

      One last qn: how do you get from Pot Odds ($20.78 : $6.7) to the break even equity (BEQ of 24.4%)? I'm a bit confused about that step...

      Thanks again

      Tim
    • dandycal
      dandycal
      Bronze
      Joined: 10.10.2008 Posts: 1,711
      Hey Tim,

      Pot odds = $20.78 : 6.7 which is 3.1:1


      BEQ = 1/(1+ pot oods) << very useful formula for us to know by heart.
      That is 1/(1+3.1) = 1/4.1 = 24,4%

      I can always use formulas better when I understand them. So, your pot odds of 3.1:1 means that you invest $1 to get $3.1. Your BEQ is the % of the total (1+3.1) that you must win to be break even. We know you must win $1 to break even, for that was your investment, so now we must figure the % that $1 means in a pot of 4.1.

      the 1/(1+pot odds) equation gives you exactly that :P
    • dandycal
      dandycal
      Bronze
      Joined: 10.10.2008 Posts: 1,711
      BTW, thanks a lot for the explanation on the Equilator's methods, Gerv! I never knew the difference ;)
    • Gerv
      Gerv
      Bronze
      Joined: 07.05.2008 Posts: 17,678
      No prob , I dont know how fast you clicked on cancel since at some point (sample is 1 billion+ I think?) the variance is negated due the n (=number of samples)

      - Gerv