Range, Equity, Maximize

[Sherman]

Hello SSMTT,

So I've been off from poker for a bit (a little over a week) while I was getting married. But before I stopped, I started playing cash games. I also read Professional No Limit Hold'em.

In one of the most important parts of that book, the authors discuss the REM process. REM stands for Range, Equity, Maximize.

It is a process for making EVERY poker decision. Anyhow, I've seen quite a few posts lately that really really really could benefit from understanding Range, Equity, Maximize. Basically, that means doing the math. Here is the process (for the real details on it you'll have to read the book):

1) Put your opponents on hand ranges. Go to Pokerstove.com and download Pokerstove.

2) Determine your equity against the hand range(s).

3) Maximize your expectation. Sometimes that means folding, sometimes that means calling, sometimes it means shoving. But the only way to figure it out is to do the math.

Now I'll be the first to admit that there are some poker problems where math doesn't apply or where the math is too difficult and inaccurate to be worth doing (well the math isn't inaccurate, but the estimates that make up the math are). But those problems are few are far between.

Anyhow, what I am saying is this. 1) Ask yourself if your post is a Math problem. If it is, do some math. If after doing some math you are still befuddled, post it here. 2) Understand REM. Seriously, understanding REM will make you so much money.

Sherman

Disclaimer: This post is not intended to offend any of the other posts or posters I replied to today, I think they are quite good posts that led to interesting discussions. I just feel that the discussions should be more focused on math rather than educated guesswork.

[BarryLyndon]

Sherman,

Congratulations.

I am currently reading the SPR portion of "Professional No Limit Hold 'Em," which by the way, is a fine book thus far. I am curious what you (and others) think about how it applies to tournaments (having said that, I haven't gotten up to the "planning for commitment" chapter yet).

Also, speaking of math, this pushbot chart issue has been coming up a bit on the forums. Any comments/criticisms/general warnings RE: the chart?

In general, I think my game falls too much on deductive reasoning and not enough on math. However, I think that a a decent percent posts here falls too much on faulty reasoning, irregardless of math. Just my two cents.

Barry

[Sherman]

[ QUOTE ]
I am curious what you (and others) think about how it applies to tournaments (having said that, I haven't gotten up to the "planning for commitment" chapter yet).


[/ QUOTE ]

The application to tournaments is there, but hard to fine IMO.

The REM part is great PF A/I decisions. I think it is also great for flop A/I decisions as well.

I feel like the SPR and "planning around committment" parts are good for tournaments, but not exactly in the way the book explains. For example, in a cash game you might have a target SPR of 7 with AA. Well, in tournaments stacks are often so shallow that any PF raise that gets one caller gets you and SPR of 7.

However, in tournaments and SPR of 7 is not equivalent to an SPR of 7 in a cash game.

In cash games bets tend to be around the size of the pot. In tournaments, bets tend to be around 1/2 the size of the pot. So it seems to me that target SPRs should be adjusted for tournaments to assume you are makign 1/2 to 3/4 the pot sized bets. Maybe 3/4 on the flop, 1/2 on the turn and 1/2-1/4 on the river.

[ QUOTE ]
Also, speaking of math, this pushbot chart issue has been coming up a bit on the forums. Any comments/criticisms/general warnings RE: the chart?

[/ QUOTE ]

I was gone for a while and may have missed it. Link?

Sherman

[MJBuddy]

Get on aim sometime. My next theory post requires a bit more input than I have on my own accord :P.

[BlueEcho]

Well when this "light bulb" finally switched on for me it ment the difference in being a break even player to being profitable. The hardest part was taking the time to learn it. By this I mean not firing up a tourney or driving to one everytime I had the chance, but studying the math (odds and EV at least) instead. I admit it sucked because obviously it's waaaaaay more fun to play then to study. The flip side is that it's waaaaaaaaaaay more fun to be profitable.

I'm not a math guy, as those that know me here will tell you, but learning it (forcing it in my case) was worth it in the long run.

Nice post Sherman..........and Congrats!!!!

[RonFezBuddy]

Does the book (or any other resource for that matter) provide instruction on how to assign good ranges?

For example, for a certain set of conditions (ie buyin, blind level, 9-handed, etc), an UTG 3x raise is usually a range of (AQ+, TT+).

I guess taking what HOH tells you that should play as actual villain ranges can help in that regard but are we assuming that everyone has read HOH and actually plays that way?

Or is the answer simply experience and observation?

Don't get me wrong, I know a book can't be that precise but any sort of general rules would be a good place to start.

[Sherman]

Ron,

I always always start with VPIP and PFR.

For example, if I know a guy has a PFR of 5 (even over a small sample) and he raises PF from MP, I'll give him credit for the top 5%. If he raises from UTG, I might make that 2.5%. From the button, maybe like 10%.

So this guy is obv. really tight. Then I adjust to what makes sense. For example, with 2.5% Pokerstove shows TT+,AKs. Well, he is probably raising AKo also. I might also throw in AQs as well. With 10%, pokerstove shows 88+,A9s+,KTs+,QTs+,AJo+,KQo+. So I might adjust that to be something like 55+,A9s+,KTs+,QJs+,ATo+,KJo+, which seems more like a typical raising range from the button.

Anyhow, that's where I start.

Sherman

[RonFezBuddy]

Sherman,

Thanks, that was helpful. I never really made use of the % slider at the bottom of the hands screen of Pokerstove, but that is an extremely useful tip and definitely something I can use as a base for range estimates.

I also agree with you and think this post should be amplified in this forum. It's amazing how clear some moves become when you do the math.

I was discussing a hand with a friend this morning where he had 6400 with 400/800 blinds. He had 88 on the button and it was folded to him. He wasn't sure what he should do there because he was afraid that he was going to be called by shortstacked BB and SB (roughly 4k - 5k each) and lose if he pushed. So he bet 2400. Once I showed him the math it was clear that he needed to just shove. I think the math worked out that his opponent's calling range was 14% of hands. Both sb + bb combined was like 28% and when called he was 58% against the range. So 72% of the time he takes a pot uncontested and then about 16% of the time he wins a huge pot. 12% of the time he loses. It opened his eyes.

He simply could not see that without doing the numbers.

Talking about hands without doing the math is basically just giving opinions which may or may not be valid.

[cheburashka]

[ QUOTE ]
Sherman,

Thanks, that was helpful. I never really made use of the % slider at the bottom of the hands screen of Pokerstove, but that is an extremely useful tip and definitely something I can use as a base for range estimates.

I also agree with you and think this post should be amplified in this forum. It's amazing how clear some moves become when you do the math.

I was discussing a hand with a friend this morning where he had 6400 with 400/800 blinds. He had 88 on the button and it was folded to him. He wasn't sure what he should do there because he was afraid that he was going to be called by shortstacked BB and SB (roughly 4k - 5k each) and lose if he pushed. So he bet 2400. Once I showed him the math it was clear that he needed to just shove. I think the math worked out that his opponent's calling range was 14% of hands. Both sb + bb combined was like 28% and when called he was 58% against the range. So 72% of the time he takes a pot uncontested and then about 16% of the time he wins a huge pot. 12% of the time he loses. It opened his eyes.

He simply could not see that without doing the numbers.

Talking about hands without doing the math is basically just giving opinions which may or may not be valid.

[/ QUOTE ]

Obviously great and useful post, Sherman. And congratulations on your nuptials (when are you going to post pics, BTW?)

One warning about using the slider, which may seem obvious, but which is a trap I find myself falling into and which may apply to others based on posts I have read.

That is, you must apply your hand against villain's entire range, not just the lower part of that range. For example, in the heat of a tourney, it's easy to look at a guy with PFR of 20% and say, "Well, according to pokerstove, he's willing to raise K8s or KTo, so my KJo must be good," only to be surprised and stacked by AK (for the record, KQs has 50% equity against a top-20% range).

[Nogatsira]

I read this right after I made my JJ post, sorry [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
You are indeed right, I could have easaly solved my own problem