Calling Ranges
 

I'm redusting off some bits by Sklansky lately. Assume your opponent has a 3% vpip.

Thus, his range is AA-JJ & AK.

Now, looking at the charts, assuming he has moved all in on me, and I am getting 2-to-1 on the call, then I autocall with AA-TT & AK

The TT really has me pondering. Of all the hands but one, I am a severe underdog. And the only hand that doesn't have me crushed, is a coinflip. This seems very strange to me.

I have been trying to figure out why TT of all things would be in there, and the only thing I can make sense of, is 2 broadway straight blockers & counterfeit protection?

Trying to use some common sense, I feel if we add TT might as well add in 99 then. Not only is it still a coinflip vs AK, but also fairs the save vs the over pairs. In fact, the smaller our pairs are, the less of an underdog they become to the higher pairs, 4.1 - 4.5 dog range.

Now if Sklansky says you can call with TT here, then I'll believe him. Just looking for further explanation. Am I somewhat right on my guesses?

Re: Calling Ranges
 

Using the great program Poker Stove and plugging in the hand ranges you will see that you are 2 to 1 dog against his range. Hence you are indifferent between calling or folding, because your expectation if you call is: 1 time you will win 2 dollars and 2 times you will lose 1 dollar, thus zero dollars. Your expectation if you fold is always zero.

PokerStove output:


equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 33.654% 33.45% 00.20% 137471700 828360.00 { TT }
Hand 1: 66.346% 66.14% 00.20% 271824540 828360.00 { JJ+, AKs, AKo }

Re: Calling Ranges
 

First of all, I presume you're talking about Sklansky and Miller's book. If Sklansky had authored a solo book on NLHE, we'd be debating what it meant because it would be incomprehensible. So be glad Ed was involved in the project.

The key is that you're getting 2:1. With TT, you're about 55:45 against 16 card combos, and 20:80 against 24 card combos. That works out to about 28:72 by my calcs, which is not quite enough, but I'm probably slightly off somehow. I'll go double check the book. (EDIT: It could be the fact that TT's more like 57:43 against AK with no suits in common, but I don't think that would account for the difference.)

At any rate, it's close to a call for that range.

Re: Calling Ranges
 

Ok, doing some more thought and tests on it, I guess it's right. TT is indeed the cut-0ff. Pretty interesting how even when being a 4.5 dog against all hands but 1 there, just having a 2-1 roi vs a single 50-50 hand is enough to make up for it.

Re: Calling Ranges
 

[ QUOTE ]
4.5 dog against all hands but 1

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, there's part of the problem. It's not "one hand"; it's 40% of the possible range, because unpaired hands are almost three times easier to make than paired hands.

If you take out, say, AK with the ace of diamonds, then TT is a no-brainer fold and JJ probably becomes a fold too.

Re: Calling Ranges
 

[ QUOTE ]
If you take out, say, AK with the ace of diamonds, then TT is a no-brainer fold and JJ probably becomes a fold too.

[/ QUOTE ]
This makes me wonder if 3% man would be better off with AA-1010, AKs.

Re: Calling Ranges
 

Good question. Against optimal opponents you'd probably do even better with some mix of semibluffs like:

AA-JJ, AKs, AKo unless the same color, 66 "pointed" ([img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img][img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]), 98 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]

Of course you'd want to change those around periodically to avoid being oddly readable.

Re: Calling Ranges
 

"Sorry man, i had AQp i was gonna fold but i put u on 66p"

Re: Calling Ranges
 

Haha... that's a GREAT simulation of people who think hand reading means you just come up with an optimistic guess at what your opponent has and then "put him on that hand."

Re: Calling Ranges
 

And on the other side of the coin, if your opponent pushes all in on any 2 RANDOM CARDS, you would THINK it is profitable to call with any 2 random cards especially due to the over-lay. However, the charts show there are a couple exceptions even still to what you can call with here.

You wouldn't think so though on common sense.