Turn Decision vs Eric "The Nit" Liu

seriously though, LP needs more hand discussion threads like this

On November 16 2014 17:39 MezmerizePLZ wrote: Kinda hilarious in my mind if you honestly think you were opening 15% here I like fold vs 15% range. At what point does ATo become a call?

vs 15% range you have ~47% equity
vs 20% range you have ~48%
vs 25% you have 52.5% (equity jump is due to the addition of a lot of KTo-JTo type hands)

ATo seems reasonable starting at 25%

after PFR opening range BB's play is a very important variable here, especially how much he squeezes - pretty much every BB out there will be squeezing at least 5% of the time (AQo+, TT+) and some at 10%+, ATo cannot continue vs a squeeze so you realize 0% of your equity after putting in 2.5bb every time he 3 bets

9 outta 10 online regs these days just dont bother w/ having a SB calling range at all anymore

9 out of 10 regs also don't have to play 1500bb deep after 3 betting oop

having 52% equity vs someone OOP. i would have to think they are god awful to think thats close to enough. especially deep where a lot of my decisions are going to be somewhat handcuffed. position is huge. if I was playing against myself i would need much better equity advantage or playability. Anytime its near similar skill level a lot of your equity is never going to get realized.

On November 18 2014 16:18 Smuft wrote: Show nested quote + On November 16 2014 17:39 MezmerizePLZ wrote: Kinda hilarious in my mind if you honestly think you were opening 15% here I like fold vs 15% range. At what point does ATo become a call? vs 15% range you have ~47% equity vs 20% range you have ~48% vs 25% you have 52.5% (equity jump is due to the addition of a lot of KTo-JTo type hands) ATo seems reasonable starting at 25% after PFR opening range BB's play is a very important variable here, especially how much he squeezes - pretty much every BB out there will be squeezing at least 5% of the time (AQo+, TT+) and some at 10%+, ATo cannot continue vs a squeeze so you realize 0% of your equity after putting in 2.5bb every time he 3 bets 9 outta 10 online regs these days just dont bother w/ having a SB calling range at all anymore

really like this post

Also after rereading the hand more carefully I also like mez's play.

It might be results oriented but if you really were going to check raise all in on river and bet pot on paired boards, thats some sick 3rd level shit your playing and i gotta admire you for that, because looking at the hands i think it probably would have worked.

Not sure if peachy was raising turn for pot control check on river or if he raised to set up bluff on river after putting you on set on flop. either way there was some serious meta game in this hand.

Doomer we're calling 2.5bb in a pot of 4.5bb so we only need 36% equity which means our ATo needs to realize 70% of it's 52% equity. Will ATo realize that much of it's equity? can't be sure but it's pretty close and at least a reasonable place to start considering calling

Peachy, do you think a stack size increase from 100bb to 1500bb should make the difference between having a calling range in the SB and not having one? I can see arguments for both sides and I'm really not sure what the right answer is but I lean towards SB still having no calling range side of the argument.

I think it's just too hard to balance an SB calling range and 3 bet range while staying competitive on enough textures. You can try to balance both but except for some very perverted solutions of doing stuff like calling some combos of premiums 33% of the time, 67s 50% of the time, AQo 25%, etc. you usually just end up gutting both ranges and making them too hard to play with.

One adjustment I would make as stacks get deeper is to just 3b a lower frequency, the EV of all our hands should get lower as stacks get deeper so I'd cut out the bottom 1-3% of my 3bet range since they are no longer profitable.

On November 19 2014 08:38 Smuft wrote: Doomer we're calling 2.5bb in a pot of 4.5bb so we only need 36% equity which means our ATo needs to realize 70% of it's 52% equity. Will ATo realize that much of it's equity? can't be sure but it's pretty close and at least a reasonable place to start considering calling Peachy, do you think a stack size increase from 100bb to 1500bb should make the difference between having a calling range in the SB and not having one? I can see arguments for both sides and I'm really not sure what the right answer is but I lean towards SB still having no calling range side of the argument. I think it's just too hard to balance an SB calling range and 3 bet range while staying competitive on enough textures. You can try to balance both but except for some very perverted solutions of doing stuff like calling some combos of premiums 33% of the time, 67s 50% of the time, AQo 25%, etc. you usually just end up gutting both ranges and making them too hard to play with. One adjustment I would make as stacks get deeper is to just 3b a lower frequency, the EV of all our hands should get lower as stacks get deeper so I'd cut out the bottom 1-3% of my 3bet range since they are no longer profitable.

Good posts. I want to add that we have to factor in how much equity we will realize in 3handed pot as well. ATo does well in hot&cold equity in both situation but there's risk of being blown out of our hand pre and post being first to act.

Regarding SB play, I think there's pros of having a calling range at this stack depth. I agree with your sentiment that it sucks because of vulnerability in our coverage, and that's exactly why I disagreed in Mez's flop raise since constructing a raising range in this texture makes our strategy problematic in future streets. However, it goes the same when you play 3bet or fold. A lot of the hands that was profitable in 100bb lose in value and our fold equity becomes considerably lower so we have to strengthen our range by folding hands that may beat the blinds when we call. We also have more risk of being blown out of our equity not just from BB but BU's 4bet as well.

just looks spewy the second x/f isn't clicked on flop, esp vs capable regs.

Ye thats a good point smuft. I didn't really account for the price we are getting i guess. It does become closer for sure.

On November 16 2014 17:39 MezmerizePLZ wrote: Kinda hilarious in my mind if you honestly think you were opening 15% here I like fold vs 15% range. At what point does ATo become a call?

15% if ur on ur phone, 10% if ur shuffling chips and gazing into my eyes.

On November 20 2014 22:28 Ryan Neilly wrote: just looks spewy the second x/f isn't clicked on flop, esp vs capable regs.

lol, with 2 overcards and the ace of club, check/folding shouldn't be an option

On November 19 2014 08:38 Smuft wrote: Doomer we're calling 2.5bb in a pot of 4.5bb so we only need 36% equity which means our ATo needs to realize 70% of it's 52% equity. Will ATo realize that much of it's equity? can't be sure but it's pretty close and at least a reasonable place to start considering calling Peachy, do you think a stack size increase from 100bb to 1500bb should make the difference between having a calling range in the SB and not having one? I can see arguments for both sides and I'm really not sure what the right answer is but I lean towards SB still having no calling range side of the argument. I think it's just too hard to balance an SB calling range and 3 bet range while staying competitive on enough textures. You can try to balance both but except for some very perverted solutions of doing stuff like calling some combos of premiums 33% of the time, 67s 50% of the time, AQo 25%, etc. you usually just end up gutting both ranges and making them too hard to play with. One adjustment I would make as stacks get deeper is to just 3b a lower frequency, the EV of all our hands should get lower as stacks get deeper so I'd cut out the bottom 1-3% of my 3bet range since they are no longer profitable.

My intuition is that 3 betting 100% of the hands you decide to play from the sb this deep is suicide. When you're 100bbs and you have TT and get 4bet you are just like lol allin, but when you're this deep even QQ is not exactly an exciting 5 bet, aswell as having to worry about defending your "call 4bet" range with some AA and KK combos? it just seems insanely difficult to give a strong player the option of putting in a 4th bet or calling with a very playable range this deep while ur out of position.. I'm definitely in the camp of wanting to have a 3 betting range and a calling range, I have some other thoughts regarding this but not exactly sure how much of my strategy I want to divulge to p3achy or other onlookers.

re: calling preflop as it depends on the bb's play, your live-read advantage over the bb can be an important factor here. if the bb is a tellbox and peachy's not a sick/fearless live-reader (or he's just not paying a lot of attention today), then you can not only diminish your positional disadvantage vs the bb, but you can also leverage your read on the bb to make your life easier vs peachy. for example, if the bb is someone whose live tells will allow you to correctly pick spots to lead-bluff flops and/or turns, then you get to basically make that bluff with impunity vs the bb and also benefit from looking stronger than usual in peachy's eyes, because you're bluffing OOP to two people.

when the bb is pretty tellboxy, you get to seize these little bluff opportunities in 5-10% of pots in my estimation, and if peachy's not keen to your game, that's a big difference. plus there are all the occasional other ways you get to use your read on the bb against peachy, such as being able to check/call correctly when the bb is telegraphing that he's also going to call behind you, etc. imo even if the bb doesn't have preflop tells because he waits for his turn to look at his cards, then even if he's squeezing 5%, you can make up for that risk if he's somewhat easy to read postflop.

one step further, if peachy is also a good live-reader and is attentive enough to know that you're aware of the bb's tells, then you're in for a world of hurt.

On November 29 2014 08:46 [vital]Myth wrote: and if peachy's not keen to your game,

On November 29 2014 08:46 [vital]Myth wrote: re: calling preflop as it depends on the bb's play, your live-read advantage over the bb can be an important factor here. if the bb is a tellbox and peachy's not a sick/fearless live-reader (or he's just not paying a lot of attention today), then you can not only diminish your positional disadvantage vs the bb, but you can also leverage your read on the bb to make your life easier vs peachy. for example, if the bb is someone whose live tells will allow you to correctly pick spots to lead-bluff flops and/or turns, then you get to basically make that bluff with impunity vs the bb and also benefit from looking stronger than usual in peachy's eyes, because you're bluffing OOP to two people. when the bb is pretty tellboxy, you get to seize these little bluff opportunities in 5-10% of pots in my estimation, and if peachy's not keen to your game, that's a big difference. plus there are all the occasional other ways you get to use your read on the bb against peachy, such as being able to check/call correctly when the bb is telegraphing that he's also going to call behind you, etc. imo even if the bb doesn't have preflop tells because he waits for his turn to look at his cards, then even if he's squeezing 5%, you can make up for that risk if he's somewhat easy to read postflop. one step further, if peachy is also a good live-reader and is attentive enough to know that you're aware of the bb's tells, then you're in for a world of hurt.

over-analysation of things that are not very important or factor into the hand enough to be worthy of discussion imo

live tells are super overrated. not that some players don't clearly give them away but i'd assume peachy & clay are pretty aware and locked in to who is giving away what and generally are always paying attention when they are in a hand

i find it very interesting peachy raises anything at all on the turn and what his reasons are for doing it vs clay (which i'm sure he won't divulge)

Live tells are the opposite of overrated. This is an exaggeration and a different format, but how AWFUL is phil hellmuth at fundamental poker, and how good is he at still crushing via live tells? That's literally the only strategy to his game...get into hand with someone that he's picked something up on. If he doesn't pick anything up...he busts or nits it up. Negreneau same shit until he became friends with all the online pros, now he can do both. Obv tourneys aren't live cash blah blah, but I think all of the stuff corwin said is extremely important, and certainly not overrated.

On December 11 2014 00:28 thewh00sel wrote: Live tells are the opposite of overrated. This is an exaggeration and a different format, but how AWFUL is phil hellmuth at fundamental poker, and how good is he at still crushing via live tells? That's literally the only strategy to his game...get into hand with someone that he's picked something up on. If he doesn't pick anything up...he busts or nits it up. Negreneau same shit until he became friends with all the online pros, now he can do both. Obv tourneys aren't live cash blah blah, but I think all of the stuff corwin said is extremely important, and certainly not overrated.

I guess I ment in this particular situation for the most part

Ofc when you're playing with a bunch of fish they're important ala Negreanu/Hellmuth

Everyone gives off some tells some of the time, especially in a smaller game like this. I'm not shy in saying I'm sure both whoosel and clay have picked up tells on me in certain spots that have led to me losing money. With that said these tells are usually only come into play when all your other analyses have broken even--don't overvalue things you see, as they may be nothing at all!

I know a mix game reg who plays technically poor game but do very well because he's able to make more correct decisions based off body language. Some people are naturally gifted at making better guesses based of body language. I think NL game are a lot different tho since players become completely immersed to the opponent when they're in a hand compared to other games. I feel that it's too dangerous to make decision based off gut feeling for huge amount of bets when your opponent is very attentive. Best way is to beat them technically. Not by gut feeling.