ToP application (raising out players)

[MattHH]

I posted this in Poker Theory but was surprised to get 0 responses. This seems like the type of topic that would provoke a lot of responses. Anyways, In ToP, Sklansky speaks of how when the pot is big, you should raise to drive out opponents even if your holding is an underdog.

The example he gives is that with 4 players total you are a 30% underdog and that if you raise you can narrow it down to 2 players and have a 45% chance of winning the hand.

I never thought I would say this, but I wish his book had more math to back this up. I am trying to understand the relationships between pot size, your odds of winning, and your profitibility based on which action you choose (whether to raise to drive out opponents or just call).

I guess I'll try to work through some examples so you guys can comment.

Let's say it's fourth street in .25/.50. The pot is $4. 3 opponents. Your hand has a 30% chance of winning with 3 opponents, a 35% chance with 2 opponents and 45% with 1 opponent. Each opponent on fifth street is good for calling one bet if you make the winning hand, and you will fold if you don't.

The opponent to your right is betting fourth street, you need to decide to call or raise

Situation 1:
You call, other 2 villains call
30% of the time you hit and win $7
70% of the time you lose .50
an average of $1.75 profit each time you call here

Situation 2:
You raise, 1 opponent cold calls, 1 folds, original bettor calls
35% of the time you win $7
65% of the time you lose $1
an average profit of $1.80

Situation 3:
You raise and only the original bettor calls
45% of the time you win $5.50
55% of the time you lose $1
an average profit of about $1.93

Situation 4:
You raise, other 2 fold, original bettor re-raises, you call
45% of the time you win $6
55% of the time you lose $1.50
average profit about $1.58

Now lets say the pot starts at $2 instead

Situation 1:
You call, other 2 villains call
30% of the time you hit and win $5
70% of the time you lose .50
an average of $1.15 profit each time you call here

Situation 2:
You raise, 1 opponent cold calls, 1 folds, original bettor calls
35% of the time you win $5
65% of the time you lose $1
an average profit of $1.15

Situation 3:
You raise and only the original bettor calls
45% of the time you win $3.50
55% of the time you lose $1
an average profit of about $1.03

Situation 4:
You raise, original bettor re-raises, you call
45% of the time you win $4
55% of the time you lose $1.50
average profit about $0.97

hmm... so it appears that if you have a "big pot" then it can be more profitable to raise IF you are not likely to get re-raised. If the pot is small it may be more profitable to be non-agressive and let fish call down. Of course, there are a lot more variables than what I included.

There has to be some sort of formula to figure out whether you want people staying in the hand or not.

I'll have to keep thinking about this one... Any opinions would be greatly appreciated. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[00Snitch]

I only skimmed your post, but your last statements are correct.

When the pot is small, you don't mind people staying in because they will be getting bad odds to call due to the pot being small.

There is a "classic" post flying around somewhere (or it might be on ed miller's site) that illustrates this. It goes something along the lines of:

You are bb with A4o, LP limps, SB completes, you check and the flop comes A82 rainbow. sb donks. you should call rather than raise (which seems more intuitive) because at this stage the pot is only 4sb and the LP limper will be getting bad odds to call regardless of what he holds.

[Xylocain]

tl;dr ...

You are probably right ...

but another important thing to keep in mind is that when you are behind its only in your interest to drive players out:

-- If they will improve to a better hand than you when you improve
or
-- They have good redraws on you relative to the pot size when you improve.

so if you are drawing to 5 outs on the flop and they are drawing to 5 outs or less on the turn when you improve, the pot has to be pretty decent for you to want to blow people out.

Remember, that when you raise with the 2nd best hand, you will often be re-raised forcing you to pay 2 bets for the privilige to draw, if you call on the other hand -- then callers behind you will pad the pot for you which compensates to some extent for failiure to protect.

It is usually more important to focus on valuebetting anyway.

[i][edit] your examples are bad, because we have ridiculously high equity in them.* with hands like FDs or stright draws that has typically ~33% equity** its usually more profitable to keep people in because they will have very few outs on you when you improve so you have really no reason to raise them out (and if they have a better flush draw, they are NEVER folding)

* With 45% equity you are raising for value not protection in a 3-handed+ pot!
** so it sucks to be HU against a better hand, but it rocks to get 6 callers .. hmm ... its even better still to get 6 callers with a cap [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img])

[vixticator]

Warning: I may be wrong. It's likely in fact, heh.

I read most of OP except the examples but this is a good move to make against a table that will not call 2 bets cold. If you have relative position against PFR'er in a multiway pot and hit some part of the board, it can be correct to donk and hope he raises even if you are behind his range to drive out the field. Or, raise their c-bet with like bottom pair and an overcard. Especially if they aren't likely to 3bet the flop. In large pots obv. Sometimes these plays are even for value. Two overcards with backdoor draws, too. You don't really want to make these moves without being able to improve, I don't do it with low pp's.

Just avoid it when the table will call 2 bets cold with whatever. In those cases you can definitely raise big draws for value, but that's different.

Alright, enough. Better players feel free to correct me. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[bellatrix]

Extrapolate this situation to the river. Remember that situation, where there's some guy that has been betting all along and you only have a marginal hand like 2nd/3rd pair and there is a player to act behind you. If the pot is large enough and there is an according chance that the bettor is bluffing, then you raise. There's an excellent example in Miller's book about the EV.

Now extrapolate that situation from the river back to the turn, simple as that, really. Your equity still is dire against that one opponent, but in relation to the pot that extra bet you put in is still within positive EV if you drive out another opponent. Plus, hey, there's still a card to come...
As you correctly pointed out, the pot size is key and all that makes us barely +EV.

Sigh, I have been working for 30 hours straight, so my thoughts might not come out very clearly.

[DavidC]

Is there a formula for this somewhere, like you can invest X% of the pot in order to gain Y% equity or something like that?

I'd like to look at this a little more closely.

[Sushiglutton]

I believe this is one of the few fun in theory, but useless in practice spots of TOP. If someone can post a hand where they used this concept I will reconsider.

[LukeSLTS]

I am inclined to agree with Sushiglutton. It is interesting to think about the math but coming up with a formula would never be useful as each poker situation is so different. The basic rule, which has already been mentioned, is raise when the pot is big.

[MattHH]

I agree. Unless you are some sort of math whiz, a precise formula doesn't do us much good. A rule of thumb would be good though.

I'll take a stab at it.

Maybe if the pot is bigger than the number of players X the current bet size you want to consider this type of move with the second best hand. Maybe this is a good starting point for making these types of decisions.

A big part of the situation is what type of second best hand do you have and how much does having additional players in the hand affect your win percentage. With nut flush draws with nothing else going for it, you are probably better off just calling (or possibly raising for value). However, if you had a nut flush draw and second pair, maybe a raise would be in order with a big pot with the intention of driving out other players.

[00Snitch]

[ QUOTE ]

I believe this is one of the few fun in theory, but useless in practice spots of TOP. If someone can post a hand where they used this concept I will reconsider


[/ QUOTE ]

This has been talked about many times before. e.g. the Ed Miller example I mentioned (but can't find a link to).