'ello

ez game

this looks pretty bad

at first i thought are u on crack then i thought for a second and hes repping like 3 combos lol nh

On June 10 2015 23:19 Ryan Neilly wrote: at first i thought are u on crack then i thought for a second and hes repping like 3 combos lol nh

at first i thought u were on crack then i thought for a second and realised u were indeed on crack

math, not even once

he s repping at least 50 combos best case scenario 40 of which have us with either 0 outs or 3 at best

would bet much smaller on this flop, something like $1.3. theres really no reason to bet more than that, because of how many hands have close to zero equity versus top pair

Why is this so bad? Against specific opponents that aren't that tricky preflop, his range is indeed narrow after the flop raise. After a 3 bet and then a bet on the flop by Lemon, the guy raises an 88K board. What is his range here if he is a non-tricky aggressive player? He probably doesn't raise any kings here like KJ or KQ even, why would he do that? The only hand he raises here is a hand with an 8, which can at times be very unlikely if you have specific dynamics going on against a player.

The combos he can indeed have are probably limited to bluffs or 8's, simple as that. Adjust for game flow frequencies and proceed.

On June 11 2015 04:37 fira wrote: would bet much smaller on this flop, something like $1.3. theres really no reason to bet more than that, because of how many hands have close to zero equity versus top pair

Don't we lose the option to threaten his stack with our turn sizing then tho?
That's why I know I need to be betting small in 4b and squeeze spots - make the hand a 3 street thing with his stacks going in on the river

On June 10 2015 23:38 dogmeat wrote: Show nested quote + On June 10 2015 23:19 Ryan Neilly wrote: at first i thought are u on crack then i thought for a second and hes repping like 3 combos lol nh at first i thought u were on crack then i thought for a second and realised u were indeed on crack math, not even once

On June 11 2015 08:07 LemOn[5thF] wrote: Show nested quote + On June 11 2015 04:37 fira wrote: would bet much smaller on this flop, something like $1.3. theres really no reason to bet more than that, because of how many hands have close to zero equity versus top pair Don't we lose the option to threaten his stack with our turn sizing then tho? That's why I know I need to be betting small in 4b and squeeze spots - make the hand a 3 street thing with his stacks going in on the river

the boards gonna change by the turn unless it doesnt but basically i think we should reserve the larger sizings for when there are semibluffs on the board, otherwise balance is an issue seeing as we are sort of forced to put in a lot of money with near zero equity hands to try and balance our Kx+ range. even if the board doesnt change we can make really large sizings later on with our range advantage or whatever.

also is it a big deal that we might not be getting it allin by river? these type of boards neither player should have much so the player who puts in a lot of money first is sort of screwing himself imo

On June 11 2015 09:31 fira wrote: Show nested quote + On June 11 2015 08:07 LemOn[5thF] wrote:   On June 11 2015 04:37 fira wrote: would bet much smaller on this flop, something like $1.3. theres really no reason to bet more than that, because of how many hands have close to zero equity versus top pair Don't we lose the option to threaten his stack with our turn sizing then tho? That's why I know I need to be betting small in 4b and squeeze spots - make the hand a 3 street thing with his stacks going in on the river the boards gonna change by the turn unless it doesnt but basically i think we should reserve the larger sizings for when there are semibluffs on the board, otherwise balance is an issue seeing as we are sort of forced to put in a lot of money with near zero equity hands to try and balance our Kx+ range

imo only reason for 1/3pot bet ev being higher is that our range is so strong here we cant add any additional bluff combos to justify bigger betsizing and
results might be different on Qhi boards

well its not just about the strength of our range, but how it's distributed. on a board like this we're gonna have a huge amount of "air" hands (no pair), a small number of decent hands (pair+), and a very tiny amount of hands that are basically immortal and cannot be drawn out on (AK+). this is gonna be the same for opponent's range, although ours is a bit stronger since we have more KK/AA/AK, but both players should have 8x. so if we're gonna be betting against a range that is distributed like this, why would we bet large? the board makes ranges polarized, and it doesnt make sense to bet large against a polarized range imo

btw what program is that? looks neat but i dont really understand it, like what do the nash EV numbers mean?