[NL2-NL10] TT nl400

    • Aimboy
      Aimboy
      Bronze
      Joined: 03.06.2008 Posts: 11,940
      PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $4.00 BB (9 handed) - Poker-Stars Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com

      saw flop

      UTG+1 ($400)
      MP1 ($487)
      MP2 ($412)
      MP3 ($400)
      CO ($90)
      Button ($400)
      SB ($510.60)
      Hero (BB) ($80)
      UTG ($497.35)

      Preflop: Hero is BB with 10, 10
      UTG bets $12, UTG+1 calls $12, 4 folds, Button calls $12, 1 fold, Hero raises to $80 (All-In), 2 folds, Button calls $68

      Flop: ($186) 2, A, 7 (2 players, 1 all-in)

      Turn: ($186) 9 (2 players, 1 all-in)

      River: ($186) 8 (2 players, 1 all-in)

      Total pot: $186 | Rake: $3

      raiser: 14/10 (9% from UTG1), fold to 3bet 90
      UTG1: 13/10, 3,3 3bet, 7 cc, fold to 3bet 78
      BU: 16/14, 4.5 3bet, 5 cc, fold to 3bet 89

      I don't really know should I count my equity in squeeze situations, so your help would be very usefull here :D
  • 10 replies
    • RahXephon1
      RahXephon1
      Bronze
      Joined: 14.04.2009 Posts: 972
      I think it's a great spot for a squeeze. The original raiser and limper folded as planned and since button didn't raise I put him on a hand that doesn't include his top 4% jj+AK+ well at least the pairs, If he's weak he'll call preflop to see if he will hit.

      About your equity. The bigger part of the money you make is when everyone folds. Since here there are two callers, at least a call is expected because of the great pot odds, but not from a very strong hand.

      You could calculate your EV in a spot with a raiser and a caller by estimating how much of his range the original raiser will call (example he or with 10% but will probably call with the top 3% of his range). If original raiser folds you almost always expect the first caller to also fold (since he didn't raise in the first play probably has a marginal hand, it's nice to check that he's not too passive because then he could have a monster which he plays by calling). In this case you have almost 70% fold equity. Let's say 65% and 33,7% equity against a player that calls you with the above range.

      Your expected value in this case is around 17$ (4bb) which is very good. The move remains profitable if your FE gets to as low as 40% could be even lower since then you would get called by even worse hands. I hope my calculations are not that off target since I don't have an equilator here and can only use Xarrys charts.

      P.S. off course those assumptions make sense only with an accurate samplesize of the opponents. And i'm also very interested in Buttons hand, as I would be really surprised if he held QQ+.
    • dandycal
      dandycal
      Bronze
      Joined: 10.10.2008 Posts: 1,711
      I think in this case we can expect the Cold Callers to fold most of the times - though sometimes they'll probably call with a JJ or something.

      That being so, we can calculate your EV against the first raiser:

      Pot is $12x3 + $6 blinds = $42
      Total pot is $80*2 + $24 deadmoney +$6blinds - $3rake = $187
      Money you'll invest: $76

      If he's calling you with TT+, AQ+
      50%*42 + 50%(40%*187 - 76)
      21 - 0.6 = +$20.4

      If he's calling you with JJ+, AK+
      66%*42 + 34%(33%*187 - 76)
      27.7 - 4.85 = +$22.85

      hmm, if I haven't made any mistake, I guess this is it...
    • RahXephon1
      RahXephon1
      Bronze
      Joined: 14.04.2009 Posts: 972
      Dandycal, shouldn't rake be discounted in the first case since if there is no flop there shouldn't be rake (at least on Full tilt it works like that). And the cost of our call should be just 76$ since the BB is already in the pot.

      Is this right? (I'm not really sure because i usually just use the chart and don't calculate manualy).

      So with 50% it would be +4,4$ and with 66% 13,88$.
    • Aimboy
      Aimboy
      Bronze
      Joined: 03.06.2008 Posts: 11,940
      Thanks for your answers guys, I was quite sure I have to push here but I didn't know how can I corectly count EV here.

      Originally posted by RahXephon1
      P.S. off course those assumptions make sense only with an accurate samplesize of the opponents. And i'm also very interested in Buttons hand, as I would be really surprised if he held QQ+.
      It was 66.
    • dandycal
      dandycal
      Bronze
      Joined: 10.10.2008 Posts: 1,711
      @RahZephon1: You're right! I've edited the calculations ;) It's amazing how our FE profit increases on NL400+ because of max $3 rake, we got dead money just with the blinds.
    • RahXephon1
      RahXephon1
      Bronze
      Joined: 14.04.2009 Posts: 972
      Originally posted by Aimboy
      Thanks for your answers guys, I was quite sure I have to push here but I didn't know how can I corectly count EV here.

      Originally posted by RahXephon1
      P.S. off course those assumptions make sense only with an accurate samplesize of the opponents. And i'm also very interested in Buttons hand, as I would be really surprised if he held QQ+.
      It was 66.
      Well nice hand indeed then :s_cool:
    • Gerv
      Gerv
      Bronze
      Joined: 07.05.2008 Posts: 17,678
      Hi,

      Well determine Pot, ES, DM first:
      P= $42
      ES=$80
      DM=$3+-$3+$12+$12 = $24

      Assume UTG+1,BTN will fold since they mostly setmine and theoritically speaking ccallers will never call will QQ+

      estimate AQ+,TT+ (4.7%) // AK+,JJ+ (3%) as callingranges you can define your fold equity by 1-[4.7/9] = 48% & 66% vs AK+,JJ+

      Vs AQ+,TT+ callingrange your EV = +$17.31 (4bb per hand long term)
      Vs AK+,JJ+ CR , your EV = +$22.34 *(5bb)

      I used both Excel of Xarry2 + my manual calculation so either me or Dandy is wrong since I come up with bigger numbers :D

      Conclusion: Sqz!

      - Gerv
    • dandycal
      dandycal
      Bronze
      Joined: 10.10.2008 Posts: 1,711
      I had totally forgotten to add our own stack to the total pot in my equation.. it's fixed now, our results still differ a little because I used slightly different percentages (50% rather than 48%), but they are much closer now :]
    • Gonzo394
      Gonzo394
      Bronze
      Joined: 29.12.2007 Posts: 2,181
      Hi guys,

      I agree that this is a squeezing spot holding TT here, but i don't like your way of calculating your EV here.

      You assume a foldequity of (at least) 48%.
      Then with those 2 coldcallers you would need 20.35% equity against the calling range to be breakeven.
      If the calling range would be JJ+,AK that means you have a positive EV with such wonderful squeezing hands like Q2o and 95o.


      Maybe you don't like to squeeze with 95o, even if your calculations result in a positive EV. (But then: Why do you even make these calculations in the first place?) How about 22 then? Ducks would perform quite well if they get called by JJ+,AK. Suppose you get called. Would you still think you have 100% FE against the potential "setminers" the next time you squeeze?
    • Gerv
      Gerv
      Bronze
      Joined: 07.05.2008 Posts: 17,678
      I do not think that we can define a legitimate hand of coldcallers to call our sqz. Therefore I treat this hand as a hand without history.

      That answers your last line about 100% FE against potential setminers.

      defining calling ranges & thus FEQ is the only thing we have to assume, that's why it is mostly important to simulate different scenario's to expand our possibilities and opportunities

      - Gerv