Quote Originally Posted by bjsaust
I get what you're saying, they still just come down to equity and ranges though. Commitment threshold (which is their main drive behind SPR) basically means dont get into a position where your equity is such that you'd consider folding with 3:1 odds. So I dont see folding AJ in that hand as being bad because of SPR, I see it as bad because if you think you're so far behind is 3-bet range that you need to fold with good odds, then raising in the first place was bad.

Same thing, just a different way of looking at it I guess.
Of course! But you can't look at it in terms of ranges because it gets really complicated. Like if you change ONE variable like the stack sizes the ranges change. So you have to set up four ranges, {pf range}, {bet range}, {call a raise range}, {shove range} to analyse this situation, and if you change the stack sizes they all change
even preflop, he might have a lot more pps in his range the deeper he is, and more suited connectors

and to calculate ranges for each stack size is difficult and ONLY applicable to this one opponent (and the post-flop ranges are only applicable to this board)
a way to simplify these calculations is to calculate his ranges for a certain stack size
and then we can say "we're behind here when he has 120BB and the pot is 9BB on the flop", in other words when his SPR is 13.3

then we can calculate the break-even point where we don't care between flatting and shoving
let's say that is at 5.6 SPR (because we did all the range analysis)

now say we're involved in a different hand with him and the flop is QJ7ss and we have AQ and our SPR is 4
since we did the analysis for another board and it was profitable to play for stacks at 5.5 SPR, it's PROBABLY profitable to play for stacks here with an SPR of 4

that's the point - it simplifies really deep analysis.