[bilbo-san]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yo, initial raiser is very short.

Even beyond that 18/12 = raising decent aces/pairs in EP, cold calling pairs from any position, cold calling good aces/suited broadyway from most any position and a reasonable-tight mid/late position opening range.

Add cold calling short stacked late position raisers with suited connectors (eg- meaning he's cold calling any raiser with suited connectors) and his VPIP almost certainly goes above 18. Go as low as 56s and one gappers and that VPIP is going well above 18 real fast.

[/ QUOTE ]

According to Pokerstove, this is 14.2% of hands:

77+,A2s+,KTs+,QTs+,JTs,T9s,98s,87s,76s,65s,AJo+,KQ o

Eliminate KTs and the A2s-A9s, and you get 11.8% of hands. OH LOOK, what a coincidence, this guy seems to think that 12% of hands are "good" hands and raises them preflop.

This also looks like a lot of what I always see from these guys cold-calling from the blinds with. So my experience + pokerstove lead me to believe that SCs are within his range.

But, I dunno, you could just blindly trust your back-of-the-envelope equations instead.

[/ QUOTE ]

I love you magically start at 77 instead of 22. Not to mention any notion of a reasonable-tight mid/late open (KJ/KT/QJ/QT/etc) A++ argumentative/incorrect post, like always. [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Add 22-66, and you get to like 13.5%. Oh yeah, and I DID mention that it depends on his mid/late VPiP (the looser that is, the more positionally aware he is, and the tighter he is from EP to "stay tight" at 18%). I WROTE that, in THIS thread. Are you just ignoring it to piss me off?

Anyway, I was referring to your back-of-the-envelope math:

[ QUOTE ]

Add cold calling short stacked late position raisers with suited connectors (eg- meaning he's cold calling any raiser with suited connectors) and his VPIP almost certainly goes above 18. Go as low as 56s and one gappers and that VPIP is going well above 18 real fast.

[/ QUOTE ]

In actual fact, if you add ALL the one-gappers down to 64s, and remove some offsuit stuff, you are about 18%. 18% in pokerstove includes stuff like ATo, KTo, Q9s and K9s that he likely won't play. Remove that stuff and add all the SCs and one-gappers (down to 6-high) and all the pairs, and it's a pretty damn reasonable estimate of his range. Don't just make [censored] up and tell me it adds up to > 18% "real fast".

Of course I am arrogant and argumentative. That's because you are usually wrong but write as though your opinion is definitive, and offer no factual support. That gets a rise out of me.

My argumentative, arrogant, opinions-disguised-as-statements-of-fact are usually at least backed up by some real math and some stuff worked out from pokerstove.

And furthermore, I don't berate others for being argumentative/arrogant unless I simultaneously pretending that I am not (this post being a case in point).