|
|
#3
03-26-2007, 10:01 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: identify trash-calls?
You really need to be more specific. This question is far too broad to be answered in one single go. The range of useful PAHud stats are big, the most important ones should be an intuitive choice for you and your style. Just put up the ones you need for almost every decision.
I usually have almost anything PAHud has on offer in the popup menu for more difficult decisions. There's also no real "how them stats should be". That goes at least for the majority of stats. All they do is describe a style. Many styles can be profitable but any style can make you lose all your money, too. It's the tiny differences in flavors that can make or break your game. Let me try to explain the basics of the "continuation bet reaction stats" as I like to call them. Keep in mind that these stats only count towards raised pots. So, if the complete table limps preflop, their actions on the flop won't count towards these. Also, these stats take long to converge. So don;t get fooled by stats that aren't backed by at least 100ish hands for these stats. They may indicate a tendency, but do not rely on the numbers without second thought. Folded to continuation bet: Typically, a player will miss 2 out of 3 flops. Many players will check/fold, unless, of course, villain loves to draw, can't fold his pocket deuces, is bluff-happy, thinks he's being bluffed at constantly, or simply because this one refuses to fold for some other hidden reasons. If this stat is high enough (about 45% or more), throwing out a 2/3 pot sized cbet with air is automatically profitable if you're heads up with this buddy. On the other hand, if this guy hardly ever folds, you'll need to put in a lot more thought on how to proceed. Called continuation bets: So, you've raised preflop, good old big blind comes along. He checks, you bet, he calls. Together with this stat, his preflop blind calling range and his usual behavior, you should be able to put him fairly accurately on a range of hands. Remember that he'll only hit a piece of the flop (any piece) 1 out of 3 times, but he'll also flop several draws, or just hang onto his overcards suspecting that you've been bluffing at him. I'd expect this stat to be around 30% for typical opponents (they'll raise the stronger ones for sure). If it's far more, then you can assume that this villain is very paranoid about being bluffed at and will most likely call you down all the way to value town. "Don't bluff calling stations!" This is exactly where you should apply that. Raised continuation bets: Now, this one is very important for you if you're cbetting frequently. Since you'll do it with air often enough, you'll try to do it less against these aggro fellas who love to raise anything that looks like a cbet. Keep in mind to also think of villain's preflop calling/raising range. If he's very tight preflop, chances are that he'll raise far more frequently on the flop since his avg starting hands are much stronger than your buddylisted fella who will see a flop with any two cards. These are mere basics of how to use them. Just remember that most stats aren't worth squat in a vacuum. You need other stats to make more sense out of them. 
|
|
#4
03-26-2007, 11:04 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: identify trash-calls?
[ QUOTE ]
Folded to continuation bet: Typically, a player will miss 2 out of 3 flops. Many players will check/fold, unless, of course, villain loves to draw, can't fold his pocket deuces, is bluff-happy, thinks he's being bluffed at constantly, or simply because this one refuses to fold for some other hidden reasons. If this stat is high enough (about 45% or more), throwing out a 2/3 pot sized cbet with air is automatically profitable if you're heads up with this buddy. On the other hand, if this guy hardly ever folds, you'll need to put in a lot more thought on how to proceed. [/ QUOTE ] I've been using this stat in my display for a while (not the pop up). A 45% fold to continuation bet is pretty low. I find that typical players range from 60% to 80% - and most of the guys with FTCB<50% are stations (meaning they will often call on later streets). Of course everything depends on table image and the texture of the board, but with these guys I typically try to make a hand, value bet it hard, and reduce my c-betting frequency - and I might even tighten up my pre-flop raising range with one or more of these guys acting behind. If your playing NL with 1/2 blinds and open raise to 8 and get one caller who is not in the blinds there is approximately 18 in the pot. So lets say you lead it the pot (with air) for 12 (2/3 of the pot) - your risking 12 to win 18. To make this play profitable you need them to fold at least 40% of the time. On a lot of boards a guy with a FTCB of 45% or less is not going to fold this much. Lucky
|
|
#5
03-26-2007, 12:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: identify trash-calls?
[ QUOTE ]
I've been using this stat in my display for a while (not the pop up). A 45% fold to continuation bet is pretty low. I find that typical players range from 60% to 80% - and most of the guys with FTCB<50% are stations (meaning they will often call on later streets). Of course everything depends on table image and the texture of the board, but with these guys I typically try to make a hand, value bet it hard, and reduce my c-betting frequency - and I might even tighten up my pre-flop raising range with one or more of these guys acting behind. If your playing NL with 1/2 blinds and open raise to 8 and get one caller who is not in the blinds there is approximately 18 in the pot. So lets say you lead it the pot (with air) for 12 (2/3 of the pot) - your risking 12 to win 18. To make this play profitable you need them to fold at least 40% of the time. On a lot of boards a guy with a FTCB of 45% or less is not going to fold this much. Lucky [/ QUOTE ] You're right on all accounts. I just wanted to point out that, in theory, a fold to cbet of 45% is low enough to be profitable. Whether to cbet or not always depends on the texture and villain's tendencies, but in a vacuum, those 45% are enough for us to bet profitably. In practice, I'd often bet a tad less (just below 2/3, only very few villains will notice the difference), as long as I don't suspect villain to realize that I've bet less and therefore correctly reads weakness. Add to that, that our hand may well improve to the best hand on the turn, and we should be in the clear (one of the reasons I cbet a lot more frequently with overcards and/or backdoor draws than without any of those).
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
