Two Plus Two Newer Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Newer Archives > General Poker Discussion > Books and Publications

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #421  
Old 08-14-2007, 05:05 PM
jeffnc jeffnc is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,631
Default Re: Professional No-Limit Hold \'em Volume 1 Review Thread

[ QUOTE ]
One other question, there are a few references that basically say that hitting your target spr and then pulling the trigger (assuming you make your hand) will get you the money in the long run because the math guarentees it...can ou elaborate a little on the math? Where I keep getting stuck is understanding what math defines an spr of 6 being better then an spr of 7 for top pair hands...am I too literal? I understand pragmatically why 6 is better then 7 (because the lower the number the weaker villain's hand can be to make the call down) but is there really math that proves it?

[/ QUOTE ]

The way I think of that is how much money goes in the pot with the best hand, relative to how much goes in when you're no longer sure. Of course you're almost never sure....

The simplest example is when you hold AA, because then you know for sure preflop. The more money that goes in when you have the best hand, the better (this is generally true in poker). Once you pass a certain threshold, then you can be confident that even though you are no longer sure you have the best hand (after the flop), you can afford to pay off because of the amount that went in when you did have the best hand. If enough goes in early, then it can reach a point where even if you promise to stack off every time your opponent wants you to, you still come out ahead.

In practice, it's much more complicated. You might still have the best hand, some opponents are tighter or trickier than others, and require more or less money going in early if you're going to pay them off. But that's the general concept as I see it.

An example of the basic principle of getting in money early when you're ahead but not late: you flop a set in position, and your donkish opponent flops a flush or straight draw against you. He checks, you bet the pot, he calls. He misses the turn, he checks, you bet the pot, he calls. The river completes his draw, he cheekishly checks, and you check. You played the hand perfectly because a ton of money went in early when you were ahead, and none went in when you were behind. But even if you paid off on the river, this can still be a very profitable situation. It's a game you'd enthusiastically play even if you grudgingly paid off your opponent when he shows you his cards before you call the river - as long as the payoff amount was less than your overall profit.

You usually can't have that much control, but the math of SPR goes somewhere along those lines.
Reply With Quote
  #422  
Old 08-14-2007, 07:59 PM
bemydemon bemydemon is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 24
Default Re: Professional No-Limit Hold \'em Volume 1 Review Thread

Alright, so who's already written the code for the online automatic SPR calculator? [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]
Reply With Quote
  #423  
Old 08-14-2007, 10:01 PM
MadMat MadMat is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 1,015
Default Re: Professional No-Limit Hold \'em Volume 1 Review Thread

And the real big question - when are we getting Volume II ?

[img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Mat
Reply With Quote
  #424  
Old 08-14-2007, 11:45 PM
Jeff76 Jeff76 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,268
Default Re: Professional No-Limit Hold \'em Volume 1 Review Thread

[ QUOTE ]
Alright, so who's already written the code for the online automatic SPR calculator? [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]HAHAHAH- I'm actually pretty sure I'm going to write a desktop utility just to play around with [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
Reply With Quote
  #425  
Old 08-15-2007, 02:03 AM
tipperdog tipperdog is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 596
Default Re: Volume 1 Review Thread, \"Fundamentals\" Question (pp. 87-88)

Just got the book. Has the "Hand 3" example on pp 87-88 been discussed anywhere (I searched but didn't find)? I think the authors made an error here. At the very least, they didn't write the example well. Specifically the authors completely lose track of the "aggressive player" with an $800 stack. IMO his presence turns a close fold into a push or call. Here's the hand.

1/2 NL
OOP "Agressive Player" [AP] with $800 stack
MP "tight & straightforward" [TS] player with unknown stack (but "has you covered.")
Hero $180 with 6d 6s

PF: AP raises to $6. TS calls. Hero calls in position.
FLOP: 7 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]5 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]4 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]. AP bets $20, TS raises to $80 (pot now $118) and action is to you with $174 behind. This flop decision is the point of the exercise.

The authors very reasonably conclude that 1) you are likely behind TS; 2) if you push, your $94 reraise will certainly be called by TS; and 3) calling isn't an attractive option. They also reasonably estimate your odds of winning are about 1.5:1 and correctly calculate your pot odds to about 1.25:1. Therefore, they say it's close, but it's a clear fold.


BUT WTF HAPPENED TO AP? He's still in the hand!

His presence could make the correct play a push. For example, AP could easily have a big overpair (he's played this hand just like AA or KK, hasn't he?) and if he calls, you'd be getting better than 2:1, and your odds of winning the pot would not be significantly diminished.

It's less likely, but also possible, that AP has a hand like AKc and (if TS has a similarly large stack) AP could reraise big as a semibluff, forcing TS to lay down his overpair--a sequence of events that gives you a huge overlay.

I think the presence of AP means you shouldn't fold. Surely, there has to be some reasonable chance he'll play, which will change your pot odds dramatically.

At the very least, I note the irony that just a few pages after the authors write "always consider your opponents and stack sizes before making committment decisions" they completely lose track of one opponent with a monster stack.

I'm confused [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] Did I miss something in this hand example?
Reply With Quote
  #426  
Old 08-15-2007, 03:38 AM
Sunny Mehta Sunny Mehta is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: coaching poker and writing \"Professional No-Limit Hold\'em\" for Two Plus Two Publishing with Matt Flynn and Ed Miller
Posts: 1,124
Default Re: Volume 1 Review Thread, \"Fundamentals\" Question (pp. 87-88)

Hi tipperdog,

Note that we simplified the "odds of winning" in this example to 1.5-to-1, partly because the example is there to review the Fundamentals (one of which is counting outs), and partly because we haven't gotten into the more complicated REM Process at that point in the book yet.

I don't think there's anything wrong with you wanting to delve into the hand more and treat it like it's a "full analysis" hand, but the thing is, if we do that, I'd actually draw the exact opposite conclusion as you.

If we actually assign these players ranges, hero probably has even less equity than we give credit for in the example!

First off, AP's range is way wider than AA/KK/AcKc. He's aggressive, and most of the time his flop bet is just a c-bet. I think it's far too optimistic to think that he's gonna stick his chips in with anything but a very strong hand after he bets the flop, gets raised by a tight player, and then sees an all-in from hero after that. What do you estimate is the probability that AP has a hand he's willing to commit to? It's pretty low.

Secondly, tight player's range alone is scary. If he has any pocket pair from jacks down to fours, hero is actually about a 2-to-1 dog against that range. Then even if you add in the fact that hero will get 2-to-1 on his money when (and that "when" is rare) AP comes along, the problem is that by adding AP's [strong] range into the equation hero's equity actually ends up being more like 25 percent (3-to-1).

Hero's draw is a weak non-nut straight draw on a flush draw board, his SPR is in the double digits, there's a bet and a raise in front of him, and he has zero f-equity. This is a fold.

Thanks a lot for the detailed post though.

-Sunny
Reply With Quote
  #427  
Old 08-15-2007, 08:46 AM
jeffnc jeffnc is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,631
Default Re: Professional No-Limit Hold \'em Volume 1 Review Thread

[ QUOTE ]
has the book had any impact on the games yet?
a lot of people raising to different amounts preflop and betting 2/3 pot the rest of the way?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, if something radical like that ever happened, it would be glaringly obvious they are reading this book under the table [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
Reply With Quote
  #428  
Old 08-15-2007, 05:59 PM
HustlerLA HustlerLA is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 307
Default Re: Professional No-Limit Hold \'em Volume 1 Review Thread

Last night in a live 2/5 game I was applying the SPR concepts and found them really beneficial. For example, one hand I coudn't reach a target SPR with JJ UTG+1 so I limped and then had a really good 3 bet situation that turned out great. In the past I would have played a multiway pot with JJ with a bad SPR OOP, not fun. There were standard examples where I used it to to get low SPR with TPTK type hands also.

I am having trouble with one hand in particular, deciding if I made a bad fold based off SPR or perhaps this was a situation that SPR doesnt apply. I say this because in the book and previous posts it was highlighted that in order for SPR concepts to apply, our hand must be ahead of villian's range. I doubted my hand to be but position and a dead $5 post influenced me to call preflop. I would really appreciate feedback.

This is the hand:
I missed my blind (bathroom) and posted 5 on the cutoff to get back in. EP raiser makes it 20, I have KJo, and decided with the discount and position I would call, but I dont think I had +EV against his range without adding stealing/position. SB and BB call. Pot 80. I cover all players. Flop is Jc3d4d. SB and BB check and dont look interested (no c/r likely) and villian leads for 90 and only has another 80 behind. Well, stealing is not an option now, and he seems comfortable and confident and I beleive from history that if he was c-betting a missed flop he would have led for 1/2 to 2/3 pot. I beleived that he wasnt bluffing and thought I would see AJ or QQ+ too often here. My SPR was only approx 2. And I still made a very tight fold to a flop bet. I felt I had a strong read that he wasnt bluffing. That being said, am I forced to call mathwise? Or does the SPR not matter becasue I was never ahead of his range? is this just a fold that I cannot make profitably even with a good read? He said he had 99 which I believe because I suspect after SB and BB checked he thought his 99 was good with only me left to act. This is a situation where I read strength (he's not bluffing), but assign to much strength to the opponents hand.
Reply With Quote
  #429  
Old 08-15-2007, 09:04 PM
threads13 threads13 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: thread13.com
Posts: 2,681
Default Re: Professional No-Limit Hold \'em Volume 1 Review Thread

[ QUOTE ]
Last night in a live 2/5 game I was applying the SPR concepts and found them really beneficial. For example, one hand I coudn't reach a target SPR with JJ UTG+1 so I limped and then had a really good 3 bet situation that turned out great. In the past I would have played a multiway pot with JJ with a bad SPR OOP, not fun. There were standard examples where I used it to to get low SPR with TPTK type hands also.

I am having trouble with one hand in particular, deciding if I made a bad fold based off SPR or perhaps this was a situation that SPR doesnt apply. I say this because in the book and previous posts it was highlighted that in order for SPR concepts to apply, our hand must be ahead of villian's range. I doubted my hand to be but position and a dead $5 post influenced me to call preflop. I would really appreciate feedback.

This is the hand:
I missed my blind (bathroom) and posted 5 on the cutoff to get back in. EP raiser makes it 20, I have KJo, and decided with the discount and position I would call, but I dont think I had +EV against his range without adding stealing/position. SB and BB call. Pot 80. I cover all players. Flop is Jc3d4d. SB and BB check and dont look interested (no c/r likely) and villian leads for 90 and only has another 80 behind. Well, stealing is not an option now, and he seems comfortable and confident and I beleive from history that if he was c-betting a missed flop he would have led for 1/2 to 2/3 pot. I beleived that he wasnt bluffing and thought I would see AJ or QQ+ too often here. My SPR was only approx 2. And I still made a very tight fold to a flop bet. I felt I had a strong read that he wasnt bluffing. That being said, am I forced to call mathwise? Or does the SPR not matter becasue I was never ahead of his range? is this just a fold that I cannot make profitably even with a good read? He said he had 99 which I believe because I suspect after SB and BB checked he thought his 99 was good with only me left to act. This is a situation where I read strength (he's not bluffing), but assign to much strength to the opponents hand.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think if you are going to call the flop raise this is the exact flop that you should have been hoping for.

It sounds like you didn't think about what your SPR would be with your raise. I think you were going to end up with a low SPR on the flop and wouldn't have been in a profitable steal opportunity. Had the blinds folded your SPR would have been around 4 which wouldn't have been much better. So, given that you called the flop raise I think you can just raise the flop to put him AI. However, I think the best play would have been to fold preflop.
Reply With Quote
  #430  
Old 08-16-2007, 02:48 AM
Peleus Peleus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 317
Default Re: Professional No-Limit Hold \'em Volume 1 Review Thread

Firstly, let me say thanks for bringing a great book into the market. Definitely will benefit from it, well done. I usually play around 100bb deep, micro stakes although I think the question holds true throughout the range. SPR question.

Unless it is a massively loose table, how realistic is it getting the SPR level's down to say sub 4-5 on hands where you want to try and get people pot committed. I understand you can lower the number (generally) by getting more callers to act as a multiplier for the bet, or raising more in the first place, but even if we get say one caller we're still having to do an unrealistic raise to achieve it.

Do that further imply its better to play short stacked against them or try and get a higher SPR (away from 13). Seems a strange play with AA for instance?

Forgive me if I sound like an idiot and the question has been answered, or if I'm considering the concept in the wrong way. Feel free to correct me.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:12 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.