Party Regs Thread

[SpecT]

hmm. if we assume he calls with JJ+/AQ (ya he called with QJo but obv that was a brain explosion). I think we only need him to fold like 25% of the time, unless i suck at maths - if anyone wants to go through it with me then be my guest

im actually liking my shove more and more

[Xanta]

SpecT he's getting 2:1 on his money, and because people are people they'll probably call with a little worse than that. Personally against a 200NL aggrodonk I'm fine getting it in with AQ here, so I'd say that your 5bet shoving range is pretty close to AQ+, JJ+. A more conservative range is AK+, QQ+, but I really don't think that's all you're 5bet shoving with.

I did some pokerstoving.

Against your first range, it's +EV for him to call your shove with any pair and AQo+. Weaker aces are around 3% below the cutoff equity.
Against your second range, it's +EV for him to call with 44+, and AK.

Against his first calling range, your 96s has 34% equity.
Against his second calling range, your 96s has 31% equity.

Given the fact that he can profitably call with a whole lot of his 4betting range, and you're a big dog against his calling range, I think your play is a big spew.

[SpecT]

well this basically comes down to:

'do you think he's 4bet/folding with less than 25% of his range there?'

if yes than it's spew. I strongly think it's more than that, especially with the table dynamics going on (assuming he had a brain explosion with QJ in this case)

edit - btw if we disagree on this point then we're just going to have to agree to disagree on the whole hand me thinks [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[Melchiades]

Lol. How interesting that his call is bad against JJ+/AQ+, and your shove is good vs JJ+/AQ. Oh wait, those ranges are completely off considering you shoved 96s and he called with QJo.

I mean those ranges might actually mean something if you were UTG and CO or something.

[Xanta]

I'm gonna indulge in a little more math here because this hand seems really counterintuitive. This is an imperfect analysis that makes a lot of assumptions, but it gives you a good idea of how crazy wide he has to be 4betting to be 4bet/folding enough for your shove to be +EV. For simplicity let's say villain calls with 22+, AQ+, which you have 34% equity against.

Every time he calls, you lose 37 bucks. I'll spare you the EV calcs.
Every time he folds, you win 93 bucks.

He has to be 4bet/folding 28.5% of the time for this play to be breakeven. We need to add 40% more hand combos to get a range that is folding 28.5% of the time (trust me, the 40% comes from somewhere). This means we need to get from 8.3% of all hands to 11.6% of all hands (Pokerstove gave me those numbers).

The range: 22+, A7s+, ATo+ is 11.6% of all hand combos.
He has to 4bet ALL of those hands, and then fold A7s-AJs, ATo-AJo for your shove to be breakeven. This range is insane to be 4betting. Even worse, anyone nuts enough to be 4betting this range is probably gonna be calling with a lot of hands that are -EV against your 'represented range' of JJ+, AQ+ simply because he's insane.

[SpecT]

but his range is polarised right?

ie. i doubt he is doing this with 22-TT/ATs etc

[Melchiades]

He usually doesn't. Agreed. But the same dynamic that made you think he 4-bet light and could be 5 bet bluffed is why he called. So usually he 4-bets monsters, and calls tight. This time he 4-bet bluffed and called light. You act like the bluff/leveling dynamic which made you make the play is not there for villain as well.

Also to the math dude. It's not nearly as simple. He is much more likely to have QQ+/AK or a bluff here than any of the medium strength hands. All hands are not equally likely. His range is heavily weighted to monsters and bruffs. Treating all his hands as one range is not really ver relevant. It's a question of how often he is bluffing.

[SpecT]

well, I mean that he's either doing this with a hand he's definitely calling an allin with (AQ+/JJ+) or a hand he's definitely folding (junky hands that don't play well allin)

[Melchiades]

That is usually the case. Obviously the dynamic between the two of you at this time changed that though.

[SpecT]

god i just wanna know why the [censored] he called with QJo