Official SSSH LC/NC Thread for October!

[yourface]

inferno, that is sick. I would have broken my mouse for sure

[Gelford]

[ QUOTE ]
they always come back

craaaaaaaaaaaaaawling back


whats up?

[/ QUOTE ]


Not much or a lot ... it depends


Since my last visit here, I've finished my degree, quit my poker pro ways of life and got a real job, so I no longer am forced to show a profit each month.


Minbet is now a possibily (the creepy crawly profits of this poker artform .. .hehe) [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[mute]

People on Party really have trouble coming up with screennames. Now there's a third guy called IFoIdForFood.

[yourface]

A+++++ weekend, would luckbox again

[vmacosta]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The Bryce is doing 'the well' in the stoxpoker coaching forum


]http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...;gonew=1#UNREAD

[/ QUOTE ]

from that thread:

[ QUOTE ]
One thing that comes up a lot in limit hold'em is that there are a lot of flops where your opponent won't have a "made" (including things like ace high) hand often enough to prevent you from showing a profit by bluffing if he just calls down. What happens, then, is that the constraint on how often you can bluff is (% make same action with "made" hand)x(opponent's price to re-bluff in relation to the pot size).

So let's say you have a 665 flop and you check-raise this with a hand that is going to showdown 30% of the time. Say on the turn your opponent's price to raise as a re-bluff is 5:2, meaning that it will need to succeed 28% (2/7) of the time to show a profit. What this basically means is that if your ratio of made hands to bluffs is 5:2 it doesn't matter whether your opponent calls or raises. If you're bluffing less he should fold, and if you're bluffing more he should raise, and if he fails to get it right it's money in your pocket. Another way to look at it is you should be bluffing the flop 9% of the time [30x(2/7)]. The more often you check-raise the flop with a made hand the more often you can bluff.


[/ QUOTE ]

He ignores the chances you get to suckout. The pair draws cancel since your opponent has ~ the same number of pair outs as you.

However, if you make all your bluffs with 3-straights (4x or 7x), you pick up a str8 draw 16/47 of the time and can often profitably call a raise in that case (let's assume its breakeven for now). So if you only choose 3-straights to bluff with then you can actually bluff (1 + 16/47) * .3 * 2/7 = 11.5% of the time. This is roughly 1/3 of the time you have a 3-straight.

If you now ignore all 3-straights, but instead only want to raise 3-flushes, you pick up a 4-flush by the turn 10/47 of the time so you can actually bluff-c/r with a 3-flush (if we assume again that you are indifferent to calling a turn raise which is a crappy assumption but oh well),

(1 + 10/47) * .3 * 2/7 = 10.4%

So if the flop is rainbow then this is ~ 1/2 the time you have a 3-flush and if the flop is 2-tone this is ~ 1/5 of the time you have a 3-flush.


There's more work to be done to figure out the optimal combo since your equity with FD > OESD > gutshot on turn. Also bigger cards are better in general. Somebody else wanna do the next step? Anybody care to point out errors in what I did?

[/ QUOTE ]

hmmm, actually i think maybe none of this matters cuz he has the same potential to pick up backdoor draws as you. But it's still interesting to try and figure out which hands should comprise the 9% bluffing range. My guess is 3-flushes with a 3,4,7,8,9 and 7x will do.

[Hobbs.]

can anybody trade 200 FT for 200 stars?

[Heisenb3rg]

Random strategy rambling below... I dont feel like doing a huge post, or making sense, so I think ill just ramble here.

Idea 1)

I disagree with stox's approach to 3-betting and widening your preflop range. He recommends only taking hands that have good equity against the initial raise...
I think it much better to call with hands such as K9s, while its much better to raise a hand like 67s.
If you pick apart this distribution it is extremly high card heavy.. Most flops contain a high card, but many dont. Why let your opponent play perfectly against you?
Sure your range is stronger, but it is also much easier to read... Also your calling distirbution is now weaker to compensate.

Low flops are going to points of weakness simply because high cards are more profitable to raise.. If you are forced to defend bluffs by calling constnatly because you are so pair weak, you allow yourself to be exploited really hard on those boards.
You are forced to be a "calling station" instead of the agressor.
It also allows them to use scare cards to minimize their losses (donking 4 to a straight with bluffs, pairs, straights and 2 pair) and all other types of strategies that you cannot use.

Note: This only applies vs hand reading AND bluff happy villains, if they rarely bluff you without hitting the flop in some way then it is smarter to make your distrbution high card heavy.. If they cant read your hand and will bluff you on high card boards, despite your range being high card heavy... then ignore this.

However, I find the effect on even a bluff happy villain is to be enraged that you 3-bet them with a suited connector and play retardedly vs you in the future.

Idea 2)
If you think you have someone "on tilt", its better to make more "value oriented 3-bets" and just get in their face instead of slowplaying.

If im in the BB , facing a raise, I like to call a lot with my good hands. However, if I think someone is steaming at me.... Ill raise every single one I think I have an edge vs (unless they are UTG and somewhat tight).
You are much more likely to be capped by garbage as well when this happens

The point of this is to get in their faces and make them feel smothered, so they make poor decisions postflop..

[Tryptamean]

good weekend for me!

[Heisenb3rg]

congrats trypt!

I need to move up where they respec my raises... (and hopefully bluff so much as to make my current showdown stats profitable [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img])

[thepizzlefosho]

[ QUOTE ]
Random strategy rambling below... I dont feel like doing a huge post, or making sense, so I think ill just ramble here.

Idea 1)

I disagree with stox's approach to 3-betting and widening your preflop range. He recommends only taking hands that have good equity against the initial raise...
I think it much better to call with hands such as K9s, while its much better to raise a hand like 67s.
If you pick apart this distribution it is extremly high card heavy.. Most flops contain a high card, but many dont. Why let your opponent play perfectly against you?
Sure your range is stronger, but it is also much easier to read... Also your calling distirbution is now weaker to compensate.

Low flops are going to points of weakness simply because high cards are more profitable to raise.. If you are forced to defend bluffs by calling constnatly because you are so pair weak, you allow yourself to be exploited really hard on those boards.
You are forced to be a "calling station" instead of the agressor.
It also allows them to use scare cards to minimize their losses (donking 4 to a straight with bluffs, pairs, straights and 2 pair) and all other types of strategies that you cannot use.

Note: This only applies vs hand reading AND bluff happy villains, if they rarely bluff you without hitting the flop in some way then it is smarter to make your distrbution high card heavy.. If they cant read your hand and will bluff you on high card boards, despite your range being high card heavy... then ignore this.

However, I find the effect on even a bluff happy villain is to be enraged that you 3-bet them with a suited connector and play retardedly vs you in the future.

Idea 2)
If you think you have someone "on tilt", its better to make more "value oriented 3-bets" and just get in their face instead of slowplaying.

If im in the BB , facing a raise, I like to call a lot with my good hands. However, if I think someone is steaming at me.... Ill raise every single one I think I have an edge vs (unless they are UTG and somewhat tight).
You are much more likely to be capped by garbage as well when this happens

The point of this is to get in their faces and make them feel smothered, so they make poor decisions postflop..

[/ QUOTE ]

I've been thinking about this same thing myself, but I'm confused about one thing. I you talking about 3-betting with position against a flop open raise, or 3-betting from the BB against a steal raise?

At times in the post it seems like you could be talking about either, and maybe your points are applicable to either situation.

anyway, thanks for the post, and I've been meaning to try applying these concepts in practice at lower stakes at a tougher table (so if it goes horribly it won't cost much).