Re: Something you guys dont do enough
 

very good post, ty skier.

with the range you assigned for the shortie's button open, roughly what pfraise% would this guy have overall?

Re: Something you guys dont do enough
 

yah my ranges could be off esp theur calling range, but i just kinda threw this together to illustrate that shoving a wide range on them is profitable and not wrong.

As one guy pointed out in SSNL, it is possible that the top of the range is making up for a small loss for the bottom of the range, though I think this is not the case in this situation.

Maybe in a bit I'll post a few examples where they have more chips but you can just use my math to figure out the same.

Also, this is mostly for the shortstackers we all know and hate, not the shortstacking fish since the "regulars" are the ones with the high steal %.

Re: Something you guys dont do enough
 

this is a very flawed post. you compare how profitable our 3betting range { 22+, A2s+, K6s+, Q9s+, J9s+, T9s, 98s, 87s, 76s, 65s, A2o+, KTo+, QTo+, JTo } to their calling range { 99+, AQs+, AQo+ } in the first example. you say that we're going to make money when we shove. great.

but our 3betting range includes hands like AA that we're obviously shoving with obviously +EV. we just need to look at how we do with the bottom of our proposed range, a hand like JTo. if we're making money with AA, losing money with JTo, and making money on net then our range is still bad. we should only be pushing the individual hands that make money against his range (maybe a little more for meta).

Re: Something you guys dont do enough
 

[ QUOTE ]
if we're making money with AA, losing money with JTo, and making money on net then our range is still bad.

[/ QUOTE ]

if we're making money on net, cause he's folding a decent amount, given his attempt to steal is fairly high which was stated in op, how is our range still bad?

Re: Something you guys dont do enough
 

Man, now I have to readjust to this?

FU skiier.

Re: Something you guys dont do enough
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
if we're making money with AA, losing money with JTo, and making money on net then our range is still bad.

[/ QUOTE ]

if we're making money on net, cause he's folding a decent amount, given his attempt to steal is fairly high which was stated in op, how is our range still bad?

[/ QUOTE ]

We make more money if we don't shove hands that are -EV on their own. Good point, raise it in the SSNL thread if you want.

Re: Something you guys dont do enough
 

skier- good math, but 40% is waaaayyy too high, and probably only true for exactly LittleZen.

Most shorties opening range UTG looks like 77+ AQ+ i would think if not tighter.

I think this mostly applies in the CO/BTN where they will open hands as weak as 87s and KTo occasionally. good post tho for sure.

also, someday someone should examine blind play vs shorties- i tend to minraise or go 2.5x when they r OOP

Re: Something you guys dont do enough
 

[ QUOTE ]
this is a very flawed post. you compare how profitable our 3betting range { 22+, A2s+, K6s+, Q9s+, J9s+, T9s, 98s, 87s, 76s, 65s, A2o+, KTo+, QTo+, JTo } to their calling range { 99+, AQs+, AQo+ } in the first example. you say that we're going to make money when we shove. great.

but our 3betting range includes hands like AA that we're obviously shoving with obviously +EV. we just need to look at how we do with the bottom of our proposed range, a hand like JTo. if we're making money with AA, losing money with JTo, and making money on net then our range is still bad. we should only be pushing the individual hands that make money against his range (maybe a little more for meta).

[/ QUOTE ]

very good point. need some adjustment to these ranges and to mainly check the hands on the margin.

Re: Something you guys dont do enough
 

sauce, im talking about specifically button and sb (and sometimes co). not utg.

schwza, while you are right i did [censored] up in the presentation a bit, my point was that pretty much anything with reasonable equity will show a profit by shoving over these guys.

So, let's take two of these hands

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 25.650% 25.02% 00.63% 406080276 10283238.00 { A2o, JTo }
Hand 1: 74.350% 73.72% 00.63% 1196617440 10283238.00 { TT+, AKs, AKo }


and we see that on avg we get 25.6% equity

0=4.5x - 8.63 +8.63x
8.63 = 13.132x
x= 0.66

So he needs to fold only 11% more than our collective range showed to breakeven (we have a lot more equity against a looser calling range as well) so it's still very likely profitable.

Some people suggested that their calling range might be flawed:

So if we use this range:


equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 29.968% 29.21% 00.75% 894397800 23087820.00 { A2o, JTo }
Hand 1: 70.032% 69.28% 00.75% 2121026112 23087820.00 { 77+, AJs+, AQo+ }

we fill in our equation

0=4.5x - 6.85 +6.85x
6.85 = 11.35x
x= 0.603

Which still isn't much

So if they are opening { 22+, ATs+, KTs+, QTs+, JTs, ATo+, KTo+, QTo+, JTo } (17.9% of hands) they are folding 65% of the time.

edit: was wrong to use A2o and Jto together since one does better than the other but im sick of redoing this [censored].

Re: Something you guys dont do enough
 

[ QUOTE ]
Man, now I have to readjust to this?

FU skiier.

[/ QUOTE ]

hahaha

nice skier