Room for Improvement - Equity on the flop: Finding leaks

  • Fixed-Limit
  • FL
  • Shorthanded
(14 Votes) 5916

JOIN NOW TO VIEW THE FULL VIDEO

Free membership

Join now
 

Description

In this video, Cornholio will look into flop situations. How much equity do you generally have on which flops? How much equity do you need to make your call profitable? How do you continue playing the hand afterwards. These questions and more will all be answered in this video. On top of that, Cornholio discusses leaks that he found on himself and other Fixed Limit players. Learn from their mistakes, and avoid these mistakes yourself.

Tags

Equity series thematic video Theory Video

Comments (8)

newest first
  • Nivlem

    #1

    Enjoy the video, guys! Please also leave your questions, comments and feedback below in the comment area.
  • onerking

    #2

    Very thank ya for this vid! Surprise me how many hands could I folded incorrectly on some boards.
  • madorjan

    #3

    I definitely think you should take into account that when we peel the flop in most of these examples we HAVE TO get to showdown against worse hands pretty much always in order to realize our whole equity, that will definitely not happen (especially when you suggest we can fold the turn). The 37% guideline is built on the effective odds we're going to get to showdown from the flop, therefore assuming we're calling down. Peeling (calling to improve, fold if we don't) with some of these hands would be a terrible mistake (unless we know that Villain will never ever bluff the turn).
  • datsmahname

    #4

    100% c-bet is a very important assumption. I was glad when that was pointed out.

    I agree with madorjan that looking at the flop in a vacuum can leave us without a plan for late streets.

    Making a marginally profitable flop peel can cost us a significant amount if we are not playing the turn and river very well with weak holdings.

    K9o I would 3-bet preflop
  • YohanN7

    #5

    The 37%-38% guideline only says that call-call-call is better than folding directly. A mix containing call-fold and call-call-fold may be better. Certainly, we don't exclude call-raise or call-call-raise if we hit something nice along the way?

    We are in position, so we could pretty much float 100% without risking much if we wanted to. I don't say that we should, but the pressure is on the opponent, not us.

    Many players fire a second barrel only if they miss the turn (or have a good made hand). Against such players call flop-fold turn is probably not a good idea. Others are more honest. They must be called more often on the flop. Then calling off on every float we make is certainly a mistake. Paying 2 big bets to chase some long gone flop equity doesn't sound right. There is a new situation after the turn card.

    /Johan
  • Cornholio

    #6

    Hey. Thank you for leaving your Feedback!

    #3: we have to make clear what we mean with 'peeling' and 'calling because of equity' and so.
    I don´t suggest to 'peel' a lot of hands in the meaning that I always expect a 2nd barrel and always want to fold ui.
    But in Situations when Villain is likely to check a lot on the turn und when we think this check is unbalanced (too often weak for example), calling with a very wide range can be highly +ev.
    Since we are not playing against opponent with well balanced and almost optimal frequencies we should have an exact look on how the ranges change with every decision and play acordingly, i think.

    #4 I agree, if you call light very often on the flop, you face tough decisions afterwards very often. However, there are two things to consider:
    1. We can improve our play on later streets in those situations by making range and EQ analysis and try to figure out how players Turn and River-c-betting-behaviour looks like.
    2. Even if you loose money on later streets by poor play sometimes, theres a cut line when folding the flop definetly is a mistake.
    So if you fold because you think you have 37, but you have 41, thats a problem for sure :)

    #5: I wasn´t talking about call raise or call call raise, but obviously its in any gameplan, both as a bluff and for value.
    And I agree and tried to point this out in the video, too- we should analyse the situation isolated again after making a flopcall and don´t talk ourselfs in wrong turncalls, if we have new information about the range.

    No matter how we continue, i hope you agree it can lead to mistakes if you judge your equity incorrectly on the flop (if its more than just 1 or 2% at least..). And this is actually what the Videos are supposed to help with mainly :)
  • madorjan

    #7

    Thanks for the answer.

    I just mean in most of these situations (especially these BvB spots) Villain will probably check a mixture of 'bluffs' and weak bluffcatchers on the turn, therefore making it impossible for us to call down when he bets (they'll bluff less than optimal, therefore we should fold), and making the flop peel unprofitable.

    Let's say that on the turn, the correct ratio of valuehands vs bluffs is 75:25 - in this case we're indifferent between calling down and folding. However, if the opponent bets less bluffs on the turn by just 1% for example, we have to fold the turn, not realizing our SD-equity against 24% of his betting range, that we hoped to catch with our hands, (and not realizing our drawing equity against 75% that is also contained in our HCEQ) and in exchange, we realize our draw equity against a small part of his overall range. Therefore it makes our call a 'peel'. That is not profitable in most of these spots.

    And just to be clear, I don't suggest that in any of the examples I'd fold, because I wouldn't, I'm just saying that the hot-cold equity as a reasoning (or guideline) sounds faulty to me (unless we want to simplify our decisions to this point, which is a mistake IMO, but it's definitely a question of faith I believe).
  • Cornholio

    #8

    Hey!

    "I'm just saying that the hot-cold equity as a reasoning (or guideline) sounds faulty to me (unless we want to simplify our decisions to this point, which is a mistake IMO, but it's definitely a question of faith I believe)."

    I absolutely agree to this point, and I actually did the theory Video (http://de.pokerstrategy.com/video/23733/) because of this reason: People are using the equity argument to much and too simplified for their flop decisions.

    However, one can point out the following: folding the flop with EQ > X on the Flop must be a mistake, no matter which opponent and how leaky the Turnplay is.
    And therefore it´s important to have a good ability to judge the flop equity correctly.

    "I just mean in most of these situations (especially these BvB spots) Villain will probably check a mixture of 'bluffs' and weak bluffcatchers on the turn, therefore making it impossible for us to call down when he bets (they'll bluff less than optimal, therefore we should fold), and making the flop peel unprofitable."

    If Villain bets the turn not often enough for us to have a profitable Turncall, that does not necesarilly mean that calling the flop is incorrect.
    Because if he checks the turn that often, we win a lot of hands we would have lost with a flopfold: Either on the turn with betting (the call has a 'float'-aspect then, too) or with checking down a better hand.

    So the Flopcall very often has different reasons that all come into play a little bit and different scenarios with likelyness X can appear that have to be summed up and might make up for a +ev flopcall. I called this 'ui winchance' and 'implied bluff value' in the theory Video.