This is a continuation (lol) of last week's discussion about continuation betting ranges.
http://www.flopturnriver.com/blogs/t...-betting-17512
Discuss.
This is a continuation (lol) of last week's discussion about continuation betting ranges.
http://www.flopturnriver.com/blogs/t...-betting-17512
Discuss.
Fantastic. I got a little epiphany after that o.o
Nice article. I think the main points (from the examples) can be said in a more simplistic way 'bluff more if he's tighter postflop, value bet more if he's a loose caller'.
This is more simplistic, but it looses a lot of the point which is to think about all of your range instead of just one part of it (ie: continuation betting). If your opponent is "tighter post-flop," then you shouldn't just bluff more, you should also value bet less. If you think about it in terms of the strength of your range, it's includes both of these changes. As we start to expand and look at continuation betting in terms of more than two ranges (taking into account future streets), then the more simplistic view you gave will not carry over as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by jackvance
Agreed. This is a much higher level and comprehensive theoretical explanation of continuation betting, which encompasses the things I said, which is as far as I remember the way I learned it from FTR when I started playing poker, which is why I mentioned it. Looking forward to more articles.
Good to hear. Could you elaborate a bit?Quote:
Originally Posted by JKDS
Nice article spoon.
It's a pretty basic concept but explained well. Without a firm grasp of these basics people don't have a hope of advancing so it's great to have someone break it down concisely. Looking forward to the expansion of the topic as it's so fundamental to poker and something we all do and no doubt don't think about enough.
Supplemental Information
On the topic of when it's better to check to induce a bet compared to when it's better to bet yourself, it can be useful to look at a model situation. The most basic scenario for this is being OOP on the river with one bet left heads-up. I've attached a zip file with a simple spreadsheet that gives you the EV of this situation based on a handful of variables. This will allow you to look at different situations and the EVs of those situations without having to do any math.
I get what you are saying but my problem is i don't use any software to see my opponents tendencies online (lol i am old school i can here the laughs not joking ) are there any good programs you can recommend ?
Nothing I've talked about has anything to do with using software. There are other ways to get reads and to figure out how your opponents are playing. With that having been said, you're at a huge disadvantage without it. PokerTracker and Hold'em Manager are the two big poker software programs out right now. Use the search function and figure out which one you want.Quote:
Originally Posted by steelsatin
Thanks spoonitnow i have heard of those two !
Nothing incredibly special here. Ive been looking at this from a microscopic level forever, and neglected to see the macroscopic one. After reading this article, the concept just clicked.Quote:
Originally Posted by spoonitnow
Villain is positionally aware.
Poker Stars, $0.02/$0.05 No Limit Hold'em Cash, 5 Players
Hero (SB): $14.07 (281.4 bb)
BB: $5.26 (105.2 bb) 14/11 | 3.9% 3b | 83% fold to steal | 58% fold to cb | 31% agg freq | 900 hands
MP: $6.04 (120.8 bb)
CO: $7.53 (150.6 bb)
BTN: $5.11 (102.2 bb)
Preflop: Hero is SB with Q:diamond: 7:diamond:
3 folds, Hero raises to $0.12, BB calls $0.07
Flop: ($0.24) T:spade: A:club: J:spade: (2 players)
Hero bets $0.15
I'm really struggling with what direction my cbetting range needs to go vs. this type of player. I'm thinking it should be somewhat on the weak side especially on this flop as he's folding 22-99, and probably T9 if he ever has that. However he's continuing with a ton of hands too, like TJ+, A5s-AQs, like A8o-AQo probably, his Ks's, sets, etc.
Maybe we're looking to cbet a weaker range on drier boards vs. this player? Boards like K92r or Q73r, etc. ? And have a stronger range on this board? Thoughts?
Here's another spot, with the same villain as above.
Poker Stars, $0.02/$0.05 No Limit Hold'em Cash, 5 Players
Hero (CO): $14 (280 bb)
BTN: $5.90 (118 bb)
SB: $2.06 (41.2 bb)
BB: $5.35 (107 bb)
MP: $5 (100 bb)
Preflop: Hero is CO with T:spade: T:diamond:
MP folds, Hero raises to $0.15, BTN calls $0.15, 2 folds
Flop: ($0.37) J:diamond: A:club: 2:diamond: (2 players)
Hero ??
Note: Villain has bet the flop when checked to 80% of the time
I'm not sure where middle pair hands should fit into my cbet/checking ranges vs. this type of player. I think we are being exploited if we c/f like 88-TT and our jacks. Is this even a concern at this limit? On this board I'm probably more inclined to have a weaker cbetting range vs. this opponent as it is somewhat drier, meaning my checking range will be stronger. I think vs. this opponent the two ranges have to get a lot closer in terms of strength? So where does that leave our middling pair hands?
As usual everything described is really quite obvious, the difficulty is actually being able to recognise and do it.
But the spoonitnow is in the detail:
pointing out not just the obvious, but both sides of it.Quote:
Originally Posted by spoonitnow
Another great guide, thanks again spoonit.
[OK - late for class...sorry Teach]
Some questions:
Could you expand on how you would go about structuring your range in these spots, with particular attention to draws?
As per you Ex. #1, we open with {88+,A2s+,K9s+,Q9s+,J9s+,T9s,98s,87s,AJo+,KQo}, the 36/14 calls OTB, and the Flop is QsTs6c.
On this board we have:
* 33/164 combos of TP/TK, O.Pairs, 2Pairs and Sets.
* 57/164 combos of junk or weak draws
leaving:
* 74/164 combos of weak made hands and medium-to-strong draws
So to have a strong betting range, are we just looking at TP/TK, O.Pairs, 2Pairs and Sets? Or is this too strong versus such a passive Opponent?
What about the rest of our range here? Are we check/calling the good draws and check/folding the rest?
I'm of the opinion that medium-to-strong draws are much more like TP+ than they are like weak made hands. Along similar lines, weak made hands are more like junk/weak draws than they are like medium-to-strong draws. Hope that helps.
Kinda
So, in this spot, with an opponent who is going to be putting in quite a bit of money when he’s facing bets, we should be betting with a strong range and our strong range would consist of medium-to-strong draws, TP/TK, O.Pairs, 2Pairs and Sets? Yes?
Which kinda begs the question "what are we trying to acheive by betting the flop w/ 8s7s?". It can't be for value as there's nothing much weaker in his range, and it can't be a semi-bluff as we've established that the guy won't be folding anytime soon.
Not trying to be a smart-arse nor nuffink; just trying to get my brain around this.
Thankin' yew
TT-22,AQs-A4s,KTs+,QTs+,JTs,T9s,98s,87s,76s,AJo-ATo,KQo You guys think this is an appropriate flatting range for villain IP?
What if you fire on the turn?Quote:
Originally Posted by DoubleJ
he'll likely call againQuote:
Originally Posted by spoonitnow
and will do the same on the River
So there's a very good chance that we'll get paid off big time OTR whenever we hit (~45% of the time) vs. losing Flop and Turn bets 55% of the time.
any good?
still not sure how the Flop bet complies with the conventional interpretation of a a Value Bet, tho...
Here's another one...
to me, checking the Flop with a strong range sounds a lot like Slow Playing, which i'm always being told not to do
what am i missing?
The reason you're meant to value bet constantly and not slowplay hands is because most people at microstakes are fish and far too loose passive.
Let's say someone is folding to loads of cbets but betting almost all the time when you check. Then why would we bet with our strong hands? He just folds the majority of the time, whereas when we check he's almost always going to put money into the pot.
The bit about hands like 87s (may be wrong, or not what is meant)
If the flop pot is $1 and we bet $0.60 with 45% equity when villain is calling 100% then we lose a little bit, however when we do hit our flush we can bet again and it'll be a bigger bet and we'll have loads equity (a guess) so it's still +EV to do.
It also makes us harder to play against if we are playing people who are better. You don't want to be in a spot where a decent villain is going to be like "well he'd always check these hands so he never has a flush in this situation".
OK, so it is Slow Playing, but as in Precision-Guided Munition vs. Carpet BombingQuote:
Originally Posted by ImSavy
Slow playing in general is extremely good under a particular set of circumstances. Reference http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slow_play_%28poker%29 for Sklansky's treatment from Theory of Poker.Quote:
Originally Posted by DoubleJ
The key criterion that applies to what we're talking about here is, "The player must believe that he will drive out opponents by showing aggression, but can win a big pot if the opponents stay in the pot."
The idea that I'm presenting that you're asking about is that if your opponent is extremely unlikely to put money in with one line, that's an indicator that it could be better to put good hands (ie a strong range) in another line. So if your opponent is folding something crazy like 75-80 percent to a continuation bet in a particular spot, then it can easily be [though it won't always be] better to check with a strong range.
The premise of all of this is pretty simple: Play in a way that gets the money in when you have a good hand.
I'm only advocating a ton of slow playing as a hyper-exploitative measure in very specific situations like the ones ImSavy described. If your opponent is folding a ton when you bet and betting a ton when you check, then you get a fuckton of value by checking a strong range and betting with a weak range.
super-cool little doggies
thx
any comment on this bit: http://www.flopturnriver.com/pokerfo...66#post2158366 ?
With semi-bluffs early in the hand (ie: the flop), you need very, very little fold equity to be making a ton of money, and this is especially true if your implied odds are huge (eg: if they are not often folding when you hit).Quote:
Originally Posted by DoubleJ
On the turn, you need a little more fold equity, and whatever the turn card is can help you to achieve that at times. It's not such a big deal to just check if you know (for whatever reason) that you have no sizable fold equity whatsoever. However, do not overestimate how much fold equity you need in these spots to have a positive expectation if you aren't being raised often. Let me work out a quick example:
Say you have eight outs on the river, and you're putting in a $12 bet into a pot of $18. Say you get raised 5%, Villain folds 25% and Villain calls the other 70%. If there is no future betting, then your EV is:
EV = (0.05)(-12) + (0.25)(18) + (0.7)(8/46)(12+18) + (0.7)(38/46)(-12)
EV = -0.06 + 4.5 + 3.65 + -6.94
EV = 1.15
On top of that, you're getting value on the river from the times you get in a big ass bet into that fat $42 river pot.
Suppose that of the times you hit, you get in a $30 bet just 40 percent of the time that's called. Your extra EV from that is (0.7)(8/46)($30)(0.40) = $1.46.
If you're never beat on the river (and Villain never puts in more than $30 on the river), then your EV would be in the range of $2.61 which gives your turn c-bet in that situation an ROI of about 20%.
We definitely won't be ABC valuebetting every time we hit. If we know villain is weak, or has a tendency to bluff when you show weakness, time to mix in slowplays. Against people who are observant, we want to strengthen our checking range, so that we can't be read so easily. Remember that it is very easy to play against someone who will indiscrimately value bet every time. Tight aggressive people tend to play like this.
Reasons why we will want to value bet our hands at micro and not bother too much with slowplays:
- Our value range is probably better balanced than the other people at the table, so because of this and bluffing, we can create an aggressive playstyle. This pressures people who face it, and force some to make big mistakes, like going broke on a big bluff or calling you down. Both on the frustration of "he can't have it every time". Same counts for an aggressive 3betting-style, but this is difficult to balance, so only tread there if you know what you're doing (ie, have good ranges for doing so).
- Some people will have difficulty laying hands down before the river, and will call an allin on turn a lot looser than they play on the river.
- Other people won't be phased by your aggressive playstyle (usually the multitabling regs). Recognize those people and exploit their tendencies. Here it can be ok to slowplay.
great post spoon
thoughts on the impact that flop check-raising has on cbet vs check ranges?
Suppose we're check/raising with a weak range against someone with a high c-bet percentage. To adjust, they will need to be folding less often. There are three ways they can achieve this:Quote:
Originally Posted by daven
1. Add strong hands to their range
2. Remove weak hands from their range
3. Call or raise with worse hands
Because most or all of their strong hands are already in their c-betting range, #1 is unlikely. A combination of #2 and #3 are how the adjustment (if one is even made) is likely to go down. More on adjustments and counter-adjustments is coming up in future installments.