my balance article coments/questions

[meeloche]

If you have any comments/questions feel free to post them here and I will respond and we can have a discussion about it.

cross posted from nutsinho's thread:

Balance

Simple Definition as it applies to poker: Taking the same line as a bluff as you would for value, example a cbet on an AK9 board with 78o.

The point is not to bluff 50% of the time and value bet 50% of the time on the example board, but to credibly represent a hand in your value range every time you bluff. As you move up in stakes and you begin to play against people who are thinking about more details than the colour of their cards you have to play in a way that they cannot exploit you. Basic example: A TAG villain opens from the CO and you call out of the BB with a certain range. The flop comes 2s7h8h. You check because that’s what you do with your entire range of hands. TAG villain cbets for ¾ of the pot. If you only c/r here with 88, 77, 78and 22 (which are definitely in your range in the BB) you are exploitable. By doing this you allow villain to play perfectly against you. He can cbet this board 100% of the time and make a profit because he knows the only time you c/r is if you have a set or top 2 and if you call you either have a weak made hand or a draw which he can barrel you off of on appropriate turn and river combinations. When you widen your c/r range on this board to include draws, over pairs, tptk and air. Villain is in a much more difficult spot. The basic adjustment is that he will usually make is to do 2 things. He will play his nutted hands very aggressively and the rest of his range passively. This change in behavior helps you play perfect against him with your range of hands.

Mid-Stakes and High stakes poker is a game of adjustments. In the above paragraph I talked about a simple example of how widening and balancing your c/r range on a certain board texture creates a difficult situation for villain and forces him to play his hand in a way that is easy to read. When you meet villains that have this knowledge already they are going to be adjusting to this. This brings perceived ranges into the equation and my next point.

Being perfectly balanced in all situations isn’t always the most +ev situation. There are situations where I don’t need to have air in my range because villain assumes that I have air in my range so my nutted hands still get paid off. An example of this is in blind versus blind dynamics versus aggressive mid stakes regulars. For example: it is folded around to me on the button and I open to 3bb, the SB folds and an aggressive regular who can be spewy at times 3 bets to 10bb. What I know about the villain is that he is very aggressive preflop. I know that he is aware that I’m raising a wide range on the button and that he knows that I know that this is a good spot for him to 3 bet me light. Therefore this is a good spot for me to 4 bet him light and he knows this. I know this particular villain will assume that I have air in my 4 betting range based on my preflop stats and the fact that I am a regular and open a wide range on the button. This would not make it a profitable 4 bet bluff spot since he is liable to 5 bet jam on me with a wideish range. The EV that I would gain by him knowing that I can have air here is lost because he already thinks that I have air in my range. So I can fold all the hands that I don’t want to felt and 4 bet only my value range. I don’t need to balance my 4 betting range in this spot because my perceived range already has air in it.

When you are thinking about balance you have to realize there is a lot more to it than just taking the same lines for value and for bluffs. When playing against thinking players looking to exploit you, your perceived range is much more important than your actual range. As you play with good players more who are adjusting to your actual range as they learn about it you can modify it in a way to exploit them. Unlimited holdem is a complicated game, but as long as you are adjusting to others players range and exploiting them you will always be +ev.

[Sir Pawnalot]

I am too stoned right now to write a reply.

All I can say is that this post is the best I have seen in a very long time.





I have now watched that penguin at least 50 times.

[ZwiFT]

I am too stoned right now to write a reply.

All I can say is that this post is the best I have seen in a very long time.





I have now watched that penguin at least 50 times.

[ ] Stoned
[x] Retard

[meeloche]

umm thanks?

[ZwiFT]

umm thanks?

No thank you.

What do you think about creating a perceived 3bet range (in regs view), with 3betting fish, or tagfish that don't adjust. Or maybe some utg+1 solid players. Creating a perceived wide 3bet range to get value from reg's that are gonna 4bet light sb vs bb, co vs bb/blinds etc, and maybe pay you off to your "perceived" 5bet shove range.

[bjsaust]

I want to comment, but its pretty much...good article, not much to comment on. I really liked it meeloche. Thought it was well laid out, clear, concise and useful.

[Sir Pawnalot]

This is an excellent post.

I believe that an essential part of poker is to polarize equity- chance of winning hand by showdown and fold equity.

What I mean is that if our hand is not so good (low equity), but our chances of successfully representing a strong hand is high (high FE) we can represent profitable.

When we have a strong hand (high equity) we can try to find ways to reduce FE.

I do not believe in adding 79s, for example, to your range just because you want to have a balanced range. I want to add those hands when I have high FE- meaning when I have a tight image, or I have won several pots with big hands (irrational, but we play people), or that I know other players have a weak range, or that other players are weak.

If we only make credible bluffs our opponents will have a hard time not to tilt against us.

[Renton]

i kinda disagree with the 4bet bluff example.

I believe in that situation you should definitely still have a bluff frequency. If someone is 3-betting the shit out of you from the blinds, then 4bet bluffing is gonna be profitable vs them. No one is enough of a nutcase to 5bet all in THAT lightly. Now you can still unbalance your range toward value, but I think to not be bluffing there with some regularity is probably not that great.

Supposing that the player was 5bet shoving often enough that it rendered a 4bet bluff unprofitable, well then at least in that case you should be 4betting to induce with hands like 88 or AJ for sure.

[meeloche]

umm thanks?

No thank you.

What do you think about creating a perceived 3bet range (in regs view), with 3betting fish, or tagfish that don't adjust. Or maybe some utg+1 solid players. Creating a perceived wide 3bet range to get value from reg's that are gonna 4bet light sb vs bb, co vs bb/blinds etc, and maybe pay you off to your "perceived" 5bet shove range.

Yeah I mean you should be exploiting people at the table every time you play. If people don't adjust to your 3 betting then 3 bet the shit out of them. If regs are adjusting as a result then tighten up you're 3 betting range to more value hands vs them. Careful of over analyzing it though, regs playing 6+ tables may not notice that you 3 bet the fish 3 times this orbit but they will notice you picking on them. You want people to think you can be capable of having bluffs in your range everytime you bet or else you're doing it wrong.

[meeloche]

I want to comment, but its pretty much...good article, not much to comment on. I really liked it meeloche. Thought it was well laid out, clear, concise and useful.

Thanks.

[meeloche]

This is an excellent post.

I believe that an essential part of poker is to polarize equity- chance of winning hand by showdown and fold equity.

What I mean is that if our hand is not so good (low equity), but our chances of successfully representing a strong hand is high (high FE) we can represent profitable.

When we have a strong hand (high equity) we can try to find ways to reduce FE.

I do not believe in adding 79s, for example, to your range just because you want to have a balanced range. I want to add those hands when I have high FE- meaning when I have a tight image, or I have won several pots with big hands (irrational, but we play people), or that I know other players have a weak range, or that other players are weak.

If we only make credible bluffs our opponents will have a hard time not to tilt against us.

For sure but you don't need to wait to showdown a good hand to add in bluffs. You're image is always good when you first sit down at a table with everybody unless you have some serious meta game going with other regs. If you do end up ruining your image temporarily then you can adjust by tightening up. You can sorta feel what the game flow is at the table if you're paying attention. Just remember who you're winning pots off and how you're doing it. If you feel like you're running the table over and people are going to play back then slow down, if you haven't played a hand in an orbit cause you've been dealt shitty cards then feel free to press the gas a bit. Figure out who you think is also paying attention to this cause most people aren't and it doesn't matter if you've raised 3 times in a row they're still going to fold unless they have a hand. People generally won't play back at you unless they are put in a spot that makes them uncomfortable and you keep putting them there. Otherwise they'll just keep playing their game.

[meeloche]

i kinda disagree with the 4bet bluff example.

I believe in that situation you should definitely still have a bluff frequency. If someone is 3-betting the shit out of you from the blinds, then 4bet bluffing is gonna be profitable vs them. No one is enough of a nutcase to 5bet all in THAT lightly. Now you can still unbalance your range toward value, but I think to not be bluffing there with some regularity is probably not that great.

Supposing that the player was 5bet shoving often enough that it rendered a 4bet bluff unprofitable, well then at least in that case you should be 4betting to induce with hands like 88 or AJ for sure.

I agree, I tried to pick an extreme example of a spot where 4 betting air wouldn't be profitable as a time where you wouldn't have a bluff in you're range. I guess I could have gone in more detail and mentioned weighting you're ranges in a lot of different spots but I think that's a post in itself. There are definitely times where I will weight my range more towards a bluff cause xyz player always believes me on this board texture or vise versa.

[Sir Pawnalot]

I finally found a soul brother here on FTR!

Paying attention to those minor details which give valuable information is probably what separates winners from pwners.

"For sure but you don't need to wait to showdown a good hand to add in bluffs."

No- thats the beauty of polarizing equity and FE! When we add in bluffs early our FE is reduced- thus giving more EV with strong hands.

Both combinations are excellent: Equity++/FE-- or Equity--/FE++

I try to manipulate players/table dynamics so that I can spend most of my time with polarized equity and FE.