Heads up 5/10 - Am I playing to tight

[Scott Y.]

Don't play these stakes heads-up without an impressive rake plan. If you do play, figure out ways to make your opponents squirm (on all streets) without putting yourself in too many bad equity situations.

If you play this way you will never, ever win. Against anyone. Inevitably you'll make an absurd # of mistakes, whereas your opponents won't make many at all.

[TxRedMan]

[ QUOTE ]
Don't play these stakes heads-up without an impressive rake plan. If you do play, figure out ways to make your opponents squirm (on all streets) without putting yourself in too many bad equity situations.

If you play this way you will never, ever win. Against anyone. Inevitably you'll make an absurd # of mistakes, whereas your opponents won't make many at all.

[/ QUOTE ]


yeah the rake is ridonkulous.

[Buzz]

Comic - Yes, I think folding here is playing too tightly.

You're slightly behind a random hand, roughly 48 to 52 as simulated. I think you have to be behind more than roughly 42 to 58 to have a good fold here.

I would think of it as possibly risking $25 to possibly win $35 (and 25/35 is roughly the same ratio as 42/58).

Even if Villain has an ace plus three random cards, Hero is only behind roughly 44 to 56.

If Villain has a pair of aces plus two random cards, then Hero is behind roughly only 43 to 57,

In general a bet from your opponent after you have already checked probably doesn't mean much. From the viewpoint of your opponent, a bet may take the pot and if that is the case, there is no sense in letting you get a free card. Thus the bet from your one opponent in a limit game after you have checked is more or less automatic.

If you check the turn, Villain will probably bet again

To stop Villain from automatically betting after you have checked, you have to get in enough check-raises to give Villain pause. Villain has to be concerned about the possibility of getting check-raised if he automatically bets behind your check.

Or if you always simply call when Villain bets, he'll probably get wise and stop trying to steal.

But note that you shouldn't necessarily mind Villain semi-automatically betting behind you when you check. Sometimes that would be the only way to get Villain to contribute to the pot.

At any rate, yes, this particular hand is good enough to continue with after this particular flop, even though you're a slight under-dog to a random hand.

Buzz

[Gar Pike]

Buzz, I get great insights from your posts.

But,

25/35 is 1.4:1
42/58 is 1.08:1
44/46 is 1.27:1
43/57 is 1.32:1

40% overlay, almost in the best case.

Does that make it an easier lead bet?

Check/raise?

My own feelings about H/U, it's kind of like a martial art, where you combine attack/defense, feint/parry moves to get your opponent off balance. You make plays not only for their current value but for their future value in other hands.

I think check/raising here has current value, as well as future value.

I think calling here has current value, and some future value.

Folding has no current value, might set up some future value, if you plan on check-raising a better hand later.

Regards

Gar

[Buzz]

Hi Gar - I didn’t explain my reasoning very well.

The game is one-on-one, Hero posts the blind and is dealt Td7c3c2s. Villain completes the small blind and Hero checks.

There are two small bets in the pot. The flop is Qc8s7s. Villain bets and it's Hero's turn. Should Hero fold, call, or raise?

the first simulation
To get an idea of Hero's chances, I first ran a non-fold simulation of Hero’s hand with this flop versus 100,000 random Villain hands. I didn’t save the results, but I could duplicate the first simulation and would expect to come pretty close to the results of the first sim.

In that simulation, both Hero and Villain won some for high, tied some for high, won some for low, tied some for low, and scooped some. Bottom line was when nobody folded, Hero ended up with what amounted to about 48% of the pots, while Villain ended up with what amounted to 52% of the pots.

back to the betting
Let Player A be Hero and Player B be Villain.

Hero checks the flop and Villain bets. At this point there are the two small bets in the pot from the first betting round. I represented those two bets with two white chips. Each chip is worth $5.

I represented Villain’s bet into this two white chip pot with a red chip. Now there are three chips in the pot, each worth $5, and at first it may seem like Hero is getting three to one odds to call Villain’s bet. (And looking at it one way, he is).

But he’s really not getting 3 to 1 odds, because if he calls this first bet, then assuming he checks after the turn, he will probably call another bet on the third betting round, and then another on the fourth betting round. And these third and fourth round bets will be for $10 each (two chips).

Who knows what will happen each time? Hero may catch well and may be betting or raising or check/raising himself. But with his hand after this flop, once he calls that second round bet, I think he also calls a third round bet and then probably also a fourth round bet (although I can think of some two-card combinations for the turn and river such that Hero probably folds to a fourth round bet).

Of course that is not the way it goes in a real one-on-one game. Player A checks or bets and Player B responds by checking, folding, betting, or raising. And then it is player A’s turn to react to Player B’s move. And so forth. Then after the turn and again after the river, they repeat the same betting process again. And all sorts of things can happen, depending on what both players do and what cards the turn and river are.

But basically after the flop, the two players are playing for the amount in the pot, and if they continue, they are risking more chips to possibly win the increased amount in the pot.

But anyhow, to keep things as simple as possible, let’s assume Hero checks each time, Villain keeps up the pressure with a bet, and Hero calls. In that case, starting with the second betting round, both Villain and Hero will have put five more $5 chips into the pot that had two $5 chips in it after the first betting round.

If we make these additional chips of Villain red and Hero’s additional chips blue, then at the showdown there will be two white, five red, and five blue chips, all worth $5 each.

Thus I’m thinking if there is one bet each round, once Hero calls the second round bet, Hero will be putting 5 chips into the pot to possibly win 7 chips. In terms of dollars, Hero will be putting $25 into the pot to possibly win $35.

There of course are a multitude of possible outcomes just in terms of the dollars bet into the pot, not simply $25 to possibly win $35. That’s only what it will be if Hero checks, Villain bets, and Hero calls each time. I don’t think that’s generally a very good way for Hero to play, but maybe some of the time Hero will bet and Villain will call. Or maybe some of the time Hero will bet and Villain will fold or raise. And maybe there will be bets and raises and re-raises.

So there is a range of possibilities. Could be if Hero calls Villain’s 2nd round bet, there will be no more betting. In that case, Hero is risking $5 to possibly win $15. Or could be there will be ten or more bets, raises, and re-raises on the third and or fourth betting rounds. In that case, Hero is risking $205 to possibly win $215.

But the extremes of the range ($5 to win $15 and $205 to win $215) are unlikely. $25 to possibly win $35 seems ball parkish. (I’m obviously ignoring the rake).

At any rate, rightly or wrongly, I want to use $25 and $35 as the ratio numbers. But instead of adding up to 60, I want them to add up to 100, so that I can compare the ratio to the percentages as provided by the simulator.

25/60 = 5/12 = 0.416

And then 25/35 must be 0.416/0.584, or in terms of whole numbers that add up to 100, 42/58 seems closest.

comparing the hand odds to the pot odds
And so I wrote:[ QUOTE ]
I think you have to be behind more than roughly 42 to 58 to have a good fold here.

[/ QUOTE ]However, in terms of the simulation of Hero’s hand against 100,000 random hands for Villain, Hero was only behind, as I recall, something like 48,162.5 to 51,837.5 (which I rounded off to 48,000 and 52,000 to get the 48/52 ratio).

Then, supposing that Hero might be up against a Villain holding AXYZ or AAYZ, I ran two other simulations, to get 44/56 and 43/57.

liberties with the math and assumptions
As you can see, I took liberties with the math and made a ton of assumptions and approximations, along the way, starting with Hero possibly risking $25 to possibly win $35.

to specifically respond to your post
[ QUOTE ]
I get great insights from your posts.

[/ QUOTE ]Thanks.

[ QUOTE ]
But,
<ul type="square">25/35 is 1.4:1
42/58 is 1.08:1
44/46 is 1.27:1
43/57 is 1.32:1[/list]
[/ QUOTE ]Well.... no.
<ul type="square">25/35 is 0.714:1
42/58 is 0.724:1
44/56 is 0.786:1
43/57 is 0.754:1[/list]
[ QUOTE ]
40% overlay, almost in the best case.

[/ QUOTE ]”Overlay” is not a familiar term to me. I don’t recall ever having used the term (although I’ve heard it and read it). I’m guessing that by “overlay” you mean an odds to 1 bet greater than the event warrants. Right?

If you’ll buy it that Hero is maybe risking $25 to win maybe $35, then Hero’s pot odds are 35/25 = 1.4/1 or 1.4 to 1.

All right, I think I see where you’re getting the 40% overlay.... from the 1.4 to 1. Right?

The odds against Hero, as simulated, if Villain has random cards, are 52/48 or 1.08 to 1. Thus the implied pot odds Hero is getting (1.4 to 1) are greater than the odds against Hero. Therefore Hero has a favorable bet.

Even if Villain has a pair of aces plus two random cards, the odds against Hero, as simulated, are 57/43 or 1.33 to 1. Hero still has greater implied pot odds (1.4 to 1) than the odds against him.

[ QUOTE ]
Does that make it an easier lead bet?

[/ QUOTE ]I don’t think Hero should necessarily lead bet, because Hero should not want to be raised. I did the simulations against a Villain holding at least two random cards. In actuality, Villain can see the flop and how well it fits his hand, and Villain has position. Villain could have a great flop fit (rather than random cards) and could either raise or trap.

[ QUOTE ]
Check/raise?

[/ QUOTE ]I prefer check/call here. Please note that I don’t generally like check/call - but I think it’s the proper tactic in this particular situation.

[ QUOTE ]
My own feelings about H/U, it's kind of like a martial art, where you combine attack/defense, feint/parry moves to get your opponent off balance. You make plays not only for their current value but for their future value in other hands.

[/ QUOTE ]I agree with you 100%.

[ QUOTE ]
I think check/raising here has current value, as well as future value.

[/ QUOTE ]Again I am in 100% agreement.

[ QUOTE ]
I think calling here has current value, and some future value.

[/ QUOTE ]I agree.

[ QUOTE ]
Folding has no current value, might set up some future value, if you plan on check-raising a better hand later.

[/ QUOTE ] I think I understand what you are saying. In other words, if Hero folds here, Villain will be more likely to bet position after Hero checks on future hands. I think that’s true. But there are many hands yet to be played. Hero will have plenty of hands/flops that do not fit as well as this one. Thus Hero will have many future opportunities to check/fold. Many times check/folding would be the correct play for Hero. Indeed after this very flop, if Hero held
K[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], J[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], 7[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], 2[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], it would be the correct play for Hero to fold.

But although we can find some value in any more Hero makes, I believe Hero’s best move in the situation posted is to check/call.

Regards

Buzz

[Gar Pike]

Happy Friday, Buzz.

I see I didn't read your post as well as I should have. You were thinking that, on average(or, as a good hand analysis starting assumption), Hero will wind up spending $25 over the course of the hand for a $35 return.

I inverted the hand percentages, they should have been

1:1.4
1:1.08
1:1.27
1:1.32

I was getting the "overlay" from difference between the pot odds, 1.4, and the (admittedly best case) hand odds to win, 1.08

It looked to me like you were saying the 2 were roughly equal, I didn't think they were.

And wondered if you thought that made any difference to your suggestion that check/call was the best move.

If I understand you right, you'd check because you didn't want to get raised, but call a bet because you had favorable odds to continue.

Fair enough, but I don't see how that fits into the feint/parry mode of HU play. Unless you'd do the same thing with something like As2s9T.

IS it being OOP that should make one play more straightforwardly? Would you bet OP's hand if the positions were reversed?

As far as I can tell, the fewer players, the less it is about the actual cards and odds, and the more it is about how I can manipulate their perception of how their cards compare to mine. I bet strong hands and weak ones, and I check strong hands and weak ones. Not always in the same ratio, at different times.

I read somewhere that game theory suggests that the optimum bluff betting percentage was the inverse of the pot odds. HU, that means between up to 1/2 the time, on the flop.

Do you think a bet here is purely a bluff? I think there is actual value in a bet, here, so I should be more inclined to bet.

Regards,

Gar

[Buzz]

Hi Gar. Happy Friday to you too.[ QUOTE ]
You were thinking that, on average(or, as a good hand analysis starting assumption), Hero will wind up spending $25 over the course of the hand for a $35 return.

[/ QUOTE ]Something like that. It’s hard to project because there are so many different possibilities.

[ QUOTE ]
If I understand you right, you'd check because you didn't want to get raised, but call a bet because you had favorable odds to continue.

[/ QUOTE ]No. I wasn’t thinking about checking because Comic has already checked. I was simply thinking about what to do next when Villain bet after Comic had checked. Should Comic have checked or not? I didn’t even think about that. The issue in my mind was purely whether Comic was playing too tightly or not. (I thought he was but tried to reason it out, and decided that he probably had favorable odds to call).

[ QUOTE ]
Fair enough, but I don't see how that fits into the feint/parry mode of HU play. Unless you'd do the same thing with something like As2s9T.

[/ QUOTE ]You’re right. It doesn’t fit the feint/parry mode. It’s just the parry mode.

Should Hero, holding Td7c3c2s, and acting first bet after a Qc8s7s flop? I think Hero should mix up his play. Sometimes he should bet this flop and other times he should check. Heads-up, even though Hero is slightly behind a random hand, a check-raise is not out of the question.

But whatever is written in the above paragraph was not part of my thinking when I wrote my response to Comic (and to you). Maybe it should have been, but I was purely concentrating on whether Comic should continue after this flop or not, on whether Comic was playing too tightly or not.

[ QUOTE ]
Would you bet OP's hand if the positions were reversed?

[/ QUOTE ]Usually I would bet this hand/flop if I had position and my opponent checked, but not always. Usually I would bet with position even though I would recognize that Hero was probably behind.

[ QUOTE ]
As far as I can tell, the fewer players, the less it is about the actual cards and odds, and the more it is about how I can manipulate their perception of how their cards compare to mine. I bet strong hands and weak ones, and I check strong hands and weak ones. Not always in the same ratio, at different times.

[/ QUOTE ]Yes. It’s more or less the same with me. Heads-up the game plays more like heads-up Texas hold ‘em than full table Omaha-8. It’s completely different.

[ QUOTE ]
I read somewhere that game theory suggests that the optimum bluff betting percentage was the inverse of the pot odds.

[/ QUOTE ]Interesting. I’ll have to spend some time thinking about that.[ QUOTE ]
HU, that means between up to 1/2 the time, on the flop.

[/ QUOTE ]In a limit game, there will be two bets in the pot - but then if Villain calls, you’re immediately getting 3 to 1 pot odds. However, that’s deceptive because there are more cards and more betting rounds to follow.

[ QUOTE ]
Do you think a bet here is purely a bluff?

[/ QUOTE ]No. I’d call it a semi-bluff. I think we semi-bluff in Omaha-8 much more than we bluff. In Texas hold ‘em, you’ll often have no connection whatsoever with the flop. but in Omaha-8 there is usually some connection with the flop. When you have no connection with the flop whatsoever in Omaha-8, usually your opponent will, making pure bluffing more foolhardy than wise, even one-on-one.

[ QUOTE ]
I think there is actual value in a bet, here, so I should be more inclined to bet.

[/ QUOTE ]I haven’t ever played one-on-one Omaha-8 with anyone who wasn’t a good poker player. When I bet the flop in a one-on-one Omaha-8 game, as I probably usually do, my opponent is not usually going to fold. Sometimes he will fold, as when the flop is KQJ of spades and he holds 5432 of hearts, but usually he’ll either call or raise.

In this particular case, Hero is a slight under-dog to Villain with a random hand. There is no such thing as a random hand; what I mean is there are (slightly) more hands that Villain can hold that are better than Hero’s hand than hands Villain can hold that are worse.

At any rate, I would recognize Hero’s hand as one that was probably slightly behind a “random hand.” (It lacks high card strength). With an under-dog hand would I want to make the pot bigger or not?

Probably not, but I might bet sometimes anyhow (part of the feint and parry). I’d much rather bet a hand containing a pair of aces or even a single ace, but I’ll bet various other hands so that it won’t always obvious when my hand contains an ace. Betting this hand sometimes, even though it is probably not the favorite seems better than always check/calling it.

Will Villain fold to a bet? Maybe, but rarely.

Try this: Pull Hero’s cards and the flop out of a deck. Then shuffle up and deal out four card hands until you run out of cards. With how many of these hands would you continue in a heads-up match? Honestly, I just did this and I would have continued with every single one of them! I don’t think that would always be the case.

In a full game I’d fold most of those hands, but heads-up I’d usually at least see one more card. And so would any opponent who would be in a heads-up match with me.

At any rate, I still think check/call is the best option with Hero’s hand after this flop, but I can see mixing up one’s play by also raising or even check/raising some of the time. However, anything other than a check/call would be purely to mix up one’s play.

Regards,

Buzz