Menu

Search

Dissecting Poker

MONTHLY ARCHIVES: SEPTEMBER 2010

Leveling War: What Level is He On? by Tri "Slowhabit" Nguyen

http://forum.dailyvariance.com/index.php?/blog/1/entry-13-leveling-war-what-level-is-he-on/
Some of my students often have a hard time beating mid-stakes games even though they are capable of doing so. They
said the main reason is they dont know what level their opponents are on and they end up losing. I then ask them
usually when you have one of these level wars, how often does your opponent shows you the nuts. The answer is,
usually often. So what is happening here is my student is playing the leveling war against himself. I must go out of my
way to remind them that the only hands that a nit balances in his range is the nuts, the second nuts, and the third nuts.
Thats it. Theres no more other hands when you see a huge raise on the turn or the river.
The question you should be asking isnt what level is he on. Rather, its how capable is your opponent. For example, lets
say you raise on the button and a solid player defends from the blind. It doesnt matter what the flop is. You bet. He
calls. The turn is you bet. He calls. The river he donks bet small, you raise with the 4th nuts, and he shoves. What do
you do?
The first question you would normally ask yourself in this spot is what level is he on or what level does he think you are
on? However, what you should ask yourself is, is he capable of taking this line as a bluff?
If you think he is capable of taking this line as a bluff, try to think of the last time you saw someone took this line as a
bluff. If you cant come up with any hand, then it is likely you are giving your opponent too much credit. Because trust
me, thats a bizarre line to take. If you were to see it, you would remember it, especially if its a bluff. I have probably
played over 1 million hands of poker. I cant even recall one situation where an opponent takes that line as a bluff.
Of course, if you have some kind of nasty read that its a bluff, by all means, call. But dont sit there and think you are
playing a leveling war against an opponent who play the hand bad and was lucky you have a strong hand to raise the
river.
Another question you should ask yourself is would I take that line as a bluff? If you would never take that line as a bluff,
it is unlikely hes taking it as a bluff if you think hes comparable to you in skill, which is likely since you guys are playing
at the same stakes. Of course, this isnt 100% fool proof but it does give you a place to start.
Remember, think of what he is capable of. No one messes with you as often as you think. They are too busy playing
solid or grinding their daily quota of hands. Or they are trying to avoid variance by tangling less with a regular. Or best
of all, youre playing against a moron so stop bluffing him! Because in a morons mind, you are capable of everything so
he will call and you will lose.

By Tri Slowhabit Nguyen

September 30, 2010

Leave a reply

Mathematics of NLHE Ep 4
Covered in this episode:
EV calculations
EV calculations
and more EV calculations
Expected Value (EV) is the long term expected outcome of a given hand or situation, either positive (+EV), negative (EV), or neutral (0EV).
EV Calculations 101
Basic EV calculations setup:
EV = [result of win] [result of loss]
To expand a bit:
EV = [Our Equity] * [what we win] [Villains Equity] * [what we lose]
Basic Example:
Were in the big blind withAsAc. The UTG player shoves with KhKd and folds to you. Its $900 to call to win
$1015 (stack + blinds) 5/10nl, $1000 stacks.
EV = (0.81 * 1015) (0.19 * 990)
EV = 822.15 188.1 = +$634.05
Alternative Method:
EV = [our equity] * [total pot] cost of our call
EV = (0.81 * 2005) 990 = +$634.05
Example 1 98o on 7T24 vs AA. We need to call 650 to win 700, what is our EV for calling?
EV = 0.18 * [650 + 700] 0.82 * 650
EV = 243 533 = -$290
Example 2 Villain opens from the CO to $35, we 3-bet him again OTB to $125, Villain thinks for about 2 second and
calls.
First lets put him on a range: Mostly pairs, AQ (he would 4-bet AK a lot), occasionally a SC or AXs type hands.
On the flop Kc9c8d, Vil checks, we bet $200 into $265, he check/raises all in for $875 meaning it costs us another
$675 to call. Do we call or fold?
Lets evaluate his range now that we have information: He always has 8 outs+ if drawing (OESD, FD or better), and
lets assume he 4-bets AK 100%, but he could call AA/KK planning to trap.
Based on our pre-flop and flop range, we now get a narrowed down range
of:KK+,99,88,AQcc,AJcc,ATcc,A8cc,QJcc,QTcc,JTcc,98s,87cc,JTs,67s. Against this range, how is our hand
doing?
Against the range above, our hand has about 35% equity.
EV(call) = 0.35 * (875 + 200 + 265) 0.65 * 675
EV(call) = 469 438.75 = +$30.25

WoTs TUPAC method

Following these 4 steps will help guide you to mentally calculate your equity against a hand range while at the
table:
1. TallyUp the hand combinations.
2. Pair combos to known equities.
3. Analyze unpaired combos.
4. Combine the analysis to estimate.

Cont. on Example 2 using TUPAC method

1. Tally Up the hand combinations
Lets break apart his range into the 3 main categories of hands: Those that crush us, those were flipping
with, and those were decent favorite over.
Crush us: AA, KK, 99, 88, 98s (5 hands, 13 combos)
Flipping with us: AQcc, AJcc, ATcc, A8cc, QJcc, QTcc, JTcc, 87cc, 67cc (9 hands, 9 combos)
Decent favorites against: 67s, JTs (2 hands, 6 combos)
2. Pair combos to known equities
Start matching up hands that crush us and the flips, those should even out between 25 to 35% equity
depending on how badly were crushed. A set has us drawing much thinner than overpairs.
There are 13 combos of hands that crush us and 9 combos of hands that flip. If we match those, we will
have 9 pairs with about 25 to 30% equity (not quite because of the sets) and 4 left over unpaired combos
that crush us. We can guesstimate that we have about 30% equity before the 4 unpaired combos and after
adding in the left over combos, our equity is going go down and be between 25 to 30%.
3. Analyze unpaired combos
There are 5 combos of OESDs and against those hands, we are a 2:1 favorite or 66%.
Thinking a little deeper though, we have a Q and that removes one out from the JTs hands which moves us
closer to a 3:1 favorite.
Our JTs can average out with the left over combos of 98s from the crush us category which will boost our
between 25 to 30% lets say 27% a percent or two to about 28% or so.
That leaves us with the 3 unaccounted combos of 76s where we are about a 2:1 favorite. 76s makes up
about: 3/(13 + 9 + 5) or 10.7% and we have 66% equity so 0.66 * 0.107 = 7%.
4. Combine the analysis to estimate:
Our base is about 27% after pairing the combos of crush and flips.
Pairing JTs and 98s bumps our equity up a little.
Our decent favorites add about 7%.
The total is 27 + 1 + 7 = 35%.
This is very close to the 34% equity that pokerstove gives us. This method is by no means 100% accurate
and at times, it will be incorrect but this is a good way to start calculating equities and as you get better with
pokerstove and estimating equities, this will all become easier and second nature to you.
Finally when our decision at the table is so close, where our estimated equity calculation is close but not
100% in line with our mathematical requirements, it is best to rely on the gut reads/intuition to tip the scales
on whether to call or fold, depending on how frustrated we perceive our opponent to be.

Alternate Method
1. Tally up combinations
Crush us: 13 combos w/ about 13% equity
Flipping: 9 combos w/ about 50% equity

Decent favorites: 6 combos w/ about 66% equity

2. Multiply range by equity
(13/28) * 0.13 = 0.06
(9/28) * 0.5 = 0.161
(6/28) * 0.66 = 0.141
You can fudge these numbers to make it easier.
Ex. (13/28) is close to 50% so 0.5 * 0.13 = 0.075. (9/28) is close to 30% so 0.3 * 0.5 = 0.15. (6/28) is close
to 20% so 0.2 * 0.66 = 0.132
3. Add up the equities
0.06 + 0.161 + 0.141 = 36%
Fudge: 0.075 + 0.15 + 0.132 = 36%

Table Estimations Thought Process

WoTs thought process at the table when using his TUPAC method:
As soon as I get checked raised all in, I think: ok, I doubt he ever does this as a pure bluff and right there I am
talking about his hand range. I figure him to do this with big draws, sets, pocket aces, and the two OESD, 67s and
JTs. He never has AK here because he will 4-bet it 100% pre-flop. There are about 10 or so big draws he can have
depending on how many Axcc combos and suited club broadways he is calling with pre-flop to a 3-bet. I know I
have been hammering on him so I know he may call with a lot of those combinations. So the more he is calling
with those combinations the more draw combos there will be. As for sets, its hard for him to have KK because I
have one and the board has one. He could have AA and the smaller sets. He has aces and smaller sets about as
often as he has big draws so if thats true, my equity against that part of his range is between 25-30%. he could
have the 98s for two pair and the OESD as well. I am doing bad against the two pair but I am ahead of his OESD
so that sort of balances out and gives me some equity. I am actually a 3:1 favorite against JTs since I have one of
the Qs removing an out for him, giving me more equity. Over all Id estimate that I am about 30 to 35% or about a
2:1 dog. I am getting about 2:1 on my money which makes it close. This leaves it down to reading my opponent.
The more frustrated he is, the more apt I am to call. The less frustrated he is, the more I will fold.
September 29, 2010

Leave a reply

I Play Solid by Tri "Slowhabit" Nguyen

http://forum.dailyvariance.com/index.php?/blog/1/entry-14-i-play-solid-but-i-cant-seem-to-win/
But I Cant Seem To Win.
I hear a lot of players say this and it gets funnier every time I hear it. The reason is, they dont play solid. What they
meant is they play in a robotic manner and hope to cooler someone. So when they win these big cooler pots, they play
well and run well. If they lose, they run bad. There is some truth to this because you obviously run bad if you dont win
the cooler pots.
But poker is much more than those big cooler pots. Poker is a game that is defined by better players accumulating
small edges here and there. When you sit and play a solid game, better players are taking a more active role in
maximizing their EV. One example, they play with a little more aggression. They fight extra hard for pots. They think of
opponents ranges before betting. They dictate the flow of the game and is always aware of their images.
People usually say they play a good game and they are just running bad. But whenever we have sweating sessions,
there are so many small things they miss out. Three notable examples are cbetting too much, neglecting the small
pots, and passive pre-flop play. Its hard to detect these problems because if you knew it, you would have fixed it
already. When we look over our sessions, we usually focus on the big pots that we win/lose but neglect to think about

our overall game and what we can do to improve it. A player who is active pre-flop will take a lot of uncontested pots
and thus, dont have to win those big cooler pots to have a winning session. Its amazing how Doyle was sooo ahead of
his time.
Next time when youre at the table, remember to think throughly about a situation before clicking a button. Dont be
lazy. Talk aloud. Practice. Perhaps youll realize that maybe, just maybe, you werent as solid as you assumed.
By Tri Slowhabit Nguyen
September 29, 2010

Leave a reply

DB Analysis vs. 3-bets by mpethybridge

By mpethybridge:
Using my DB as an illustration for how people ought to go about this analysis to determine their profitability in
responding to 3-bets:
1. Note your Fold to 3-bet%:
This image has been resized. Click this bar to view the full image. The original image is
sized 101871.

(Im a calling station, what can I say?)

2. Note your overall performance facing a 3-bet:
This image has been resized. Click this bar to view the full image. The original image is
sized 1019112.

3. Note your win rate when 4 betting:

This image has been resized. Click this bar to view the full image. The original image is
sized 1016114.

4. Note your win rate when calling a 3-bet:

This image has been resized. Click this bar to view the full image. The original image is
sized 1024114.

5. Note your win rate when you are NOT slow playing AA or KK by filtering them outI call this my unsubsidized 3-bet
calling win rate:
This image has been resized. Click this bar to view the full image. The original image is
sized 1019112.

The standard for whether you are leaking playing back against 3-bets is NOT making a profit on the hand. If you fold,
you lose 3 or 3.5 bb. Therefore, any strategy which yields you less of a loss than folding is a +EV strategy.
In PT this is a loss rate of -1.5 to -1.75ptBB/hand; in HEM, it is a loss rate of -300 to -350 bb/100.
Take a look through your databases in this way, as most of the micro players I have been doing DB analyses for are
definitely leaking in one or more of these areas, as knn05 says is likely the case.
September 29, 2010

Leave a reply

Full Ring Theory and Practice, Part 2

Theory:
What makes betting, raising, calling and checking profitable?
Playing a hand against a range versus playing a range against a range.

Betting/Raising
There are three reasons to bet or raise:
For value
As a bluff
To pick up dead money against hands with non-trivial equity
Whenever we are debating the merits of a bet or raise, we must consider our opponents continuance range
relative to his entire range. We can often manipulate our opponents continuance range through bet sizing.
We want to use the information available to us at any given time to make the most profitable decision possible
not bet in order to obtain additional information.

Calling
There are four main reasons to call a bet:
Our hand is ahead of our opponents range. You could refer to this as a value call
Our hand has sufficient implied odds to extract enough value on later streets should we improve.

Our hand is behind our opponents range, but good enough of the time for a call to show a profit given the
pot odds we are being offered. Especially applicable on the river.
To float: calling a bet because we believe we will be able to bluff a later street profitably enough of the
time.
The expected value of our calls must always be weighed against that of us raising. Just because a call is
profitable does not mean a raise will not be more so, and vice versa.
If we are unable to call or raise profitably when facing a bet, that is what the fold button is for!

Checking
When we check and are not closing the action, it is because we are intending to:
Check/Raise for any of the reasons that raising is profitable.
Check/Call for any of the reasons that make calling profitable.
Check/Fold if we cannot do either of the above profitably, we should check/fold.
The expectations of check/raising and check/calling should be weighed against each other, and also
compared with that of betting. Fairly frequently all three will be profitable, but one will have a significantly
higher return.
When we are closing the action, the expectation of checking behind should be compared with that of
betting. Even if betting is profitable, checking behind may have a higher expectation in some situations.

Good Float
Our opponent, running 14/10 with a flop c-bet of 80% opens in MP1. We call from the CO with AhQs.
The flop comes 3h5hTs, and our opponent c-bets 2/3 pot.
Factors that make this a good spot to float:
Our opponents range has a reasonable amount of air and his c-bet stat suggests he frequently c-bets his
air.
Having the Ah acts as a blocker to our opponent having many combinations of flush draws which he is likely
to be continuing with on the turn should we float the flop, while also giving us additional equity.
Having two overcards, we will often have three to six outs should our opponent c/c our turn bet on a blank.
Bad Float
Our opponent, running a positionally aware 13/9 with a flop c-bet of 50% opens UTG. A weaker player calls from
middle position and we call from the BTN with 6d6s,
The flop comes JhTh8d, and our opponent c-bets 90% of the pot. The weaker player folds.
Factors that make this a bad spot to float:
Our opponent has a strong UTG range.
Based on his c-bet stat, it is unlikely our opponent will be betting his air multi-way on an extremely wet
board. His bet sizing supports this.
Our hand has very little chance to improve if we are checked to on the turn and our bluff is called.

Hand vs Range or Range vs Range?

When playing against an opponent who is not thinking about our range or that we expect to never develop any
history with, we need only play our hand against his range.
When playing against an opponent who is thinking about our range, we should be attempting to play our range
optimally against his range. Otherwise, we will inevitably develop tendencies which are trivially exploitable to a
thinking player that is paying attention.
By playing a range against a range well, we may sometimes sacrifice expected value with some parts of our range
in order to gain a larger amount with others.

My Thoughts:
Definitely a video I would re-watch as the information is presented in a very clear and precise manner. The first 15
minutes of the video touches on basic theories but the explanations are top notch. Beginning and intermediate players
could benefit from watching and re-watching that part to refresh their memory, especially when running or playing bad.
The rest of the video is made up of HH review, live play, and a quick HEM stats review.
I very much like RonFar3s style of play and wish to emulate it. He puts a lot of thought into his decisions and goes
through/compare all his options to choose the one that is MOST +EV. As a result, his style of play lends itself to more
checking and less c-betting compared to other winning players.
I feel that most people, myself included, overuse the c-bet as a standard strategy but fail to consider all their options. I
need to seriously take a serious look at my game and see if I can improve in that aspect.

Leave a reply

September 29, 2010

Older posts

Archives
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010

SEPTEMBER 2010

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

Oct

Aug

2p2 3-bet 4-bet 6max 50NL aggressive Andrew Seidman BalugaWhale blog building reads
classroom Coaching Kristy CR
Arnett

DC domination forum hand planning HH review Kristy

live play math note taking post-flop

video review

Blog Stats

posts redline

statistics theory

thread video

5,510 hits

View Full Site

Blog at WordPress.com.