been bored lately so I started playing some poker. I'm 7 years out of shape and have no clue what I'm doing lul

Perfect gto

don't you get squeezed a ton?

valid legit full opt

Pre flop is a fold. Flop I think should be checked a lot. Id be careful with river bluff. Many regs dont cold call with worse than ATs pre. So you should only bluff with one combo here. And there are four AT with ace diamonds

On November 27 2017 21:06 Stroggoz wrote: Pre flop is a fold. Flop I think should be checked a lot. Id be careful with river bluff. Many regs dont cold call with worse than ATs pre. So you should only bluff with one combo here. And there are four AT with ace diamonds

Thanks stroggoz. What do you think about a preflop 3bet instead?

It's questionable whether to have a cold call range here, you could have one or you could 3bet a linear range IP. but if ATo is too weak, imo.

+1 to everything that Stroggoz said

Most players coldcall between 3-10% on the button with 10-13% being very high. Average is probably 5-6% but a strategy with virtually no coldcalling pre (like Oborra) is valid. A10o is always a fold here; the frequency with which the blinds squeeze you make it heavily -ev.

Everything Stroggoz said is correct. He gets 2:1 on a call so if your value range is only AJdd/A10dd you can have literally one bluff combo.

I'd definitely overbluff the river here at these stakes, doing it with all Ad can't be bad

If I somehow get there like this, I'm sure shovelling all of them is good if you consider his range

Need someone to explain to me why folding is better then calling

I included the tightest range for CO (18%) and removed all weaker Ax hands and Tx hands and all the suited hands that I open with and its 52% for the CO. Its obviously lower when you include the skill factor, that his equity realization is going to be harder to realize then the button and the lower Tx and Ax hands I removed from calculation. Excluding the blinds and the squeeze consideration.. can this really be a fold after you dominate your opponents Tx range, and a decent portion of the Ax range?

You can't exclude the blinds and squeeze consideration though; that is the main factor here. You may be able to make a small profit in a hypothetical scenario with no blinds vs Co alone but the 12+ % of the time you are 3bet you always lose 2.5bb which outweighs any potential profits from those times you get to see a flop. You want to have hands where calling a squeeze (or sometimes 4betting) is significantly better than coldcall/fold in this spot.

You could use ATo as a 4 bet hand but the guy in the sb is a fish and the guy in the bb is a reg who should complete light. squeezing light which I was implying (considering Ax is a huge consideration of a squeezing range) should be really low here.

but I am not convinced yet that even against competent squeezers who could squeeze as a bluff that folding is > calling

edit. got players messed up a little here but should not be too different

Well ATo plays shit vs squeeze and shit multiway also against solid people
But when you got a 75bb probable donk in the BB it can't be bad if you got skill advantage, you just over realize as he'll let you do whatever the fuck you want
And the CO is in a rough spot on the flop when one of the blind calls especially if BB midstacker is a donk
So hard to argue with your line of thought

I just automuck ATo so much i wouldn't bother looking even personally, it's a fold for moi with occasional 3bet when someone opens CO too wide and/or overfolds to 3bets
but there can be situations like probably this one when you can mix it in
especially when people do stupid shit like this when the mofo has fuckall flushes in his range when we got the Ad

And I mean you know he's a donk now
but we didn't before the hand or am I missing some shit
All I see is probable softer site and a non-autorebuy bro in the BB and deeper eff stacks vs the other mofos XD

casinocasino said he got the roles reversed, sb (villain) is actually a reg and bb is the fish (75bb).

The discussion here has been incredibly helpful and enlightening, it's really cool to see how much the game has changed. Thanks everyone

On November 28 2017 07:36 Stroggoz wrote: It's questionable whether to have a cold call range here, you could have one or you could 3bet a linear range IP. but if ATo is too weak, imo.

Whats the advantage of having a linear 3 betting range IP opposed to a polarized one vs a unknown reg?

On November 30 2017 04:19 casinocasino wrote: Show nested quote + On November 28 2017 07:36 Stroggoz wrote: It's questionable whether to have a cold call range here, you could have one or you could 3bet a linear range IP. but if ATo is too weak, imo. Whats the advantage of having a linear 3 betting range IP opposed to a polarized one vs a unknown reg?

It just to do with the fact that you can't 3bet early/middle position too much since their ranges are narrow. So if someone didn't cold call, then they would 3bet all of their strongest hands

On November 30 2017 04:19 casinocasino wrote: Show nested quote + On November 28 2017 07:36 Stroggoz wrote: It's questionable whether to have a cold call range here, you could have one or you could 3bet a linear range IP. but if ATo is too weak, imo. Whats the advantage of having a linear 3 betting range IP opposed to a polarized one vs a unknown reg?

The thing is I find it I prefer if my default game preflop is very hard to play against and hard to exploit from the get go that I don't have to adjust too much.
And these days even random regs call and 4bet much better vs 3bets even oop and 4betting, squeezing even cold 4bets are a common place as low as NL10 these days
And at NL100-200 random reg will do that as default pretty well

So basically in my game I'd try to have solid preflop ranges that I don't have to adjust too much as I find it harder and harder to get a preflop edge and it makes my postflop easier when I map out my own range without changing it drastically looking for every preflop tiny edge all the time. And then own people postflop where everyone still sucks.

And the range I found works best is is basically 3betting the hands that are strong, 3betting hands that benefit from it the most and increase my board coverage like A2s-A5s, small suited connectors.

And play mixed strategy with the rest as default, with skewing it towards 3bet or call with table conditions.
And then ATo comes in
When you 3bet and mix in a bunch of other hands and you add even the full blast of ATo combos to that range, you 3bet way too much and people can just shit on you
And when you flat ATo in a range that already is missing a bunch of strong hands again your call range is too weak and again people can shit on you both postflop and preflop again.

In Grandfather Panorama's age you didn't have to give a fuck - everyone was way too passive as default pre, folding too much and you could print money and get away with stuff like this.

These days I feel like it's only the case like in this hand if you read it right and other unique situations where you can get out of line
You know like when you have a short fish in the BB ATo plays great again who's likely to be passive and will sandwich the reg into a bad spot postflop forcing him into playing honest on the flop when it's 3way

I am a little puzzled by the answers.

What about having to fold some of our equity vs 4 bets or cold 4 bets from the blinds. I am not talking about ATo specifically but what about hands like
AQs AJs ATs KQs TJs QJs AQo AJo? (hands that typically go in a linear 3 bet ranges but play worse then just a preflop flat call)

I would rather prefer to 3 bet less often but with more polarized hands, meaning when I am faced with a 4 bet or when my opponent calls my decisions are easy.

There is no theory in poker that says you gain ev from making your decisions easy. You'll have to explain how this is beneficial to me.

I don't really understand how it makes it easier to have a polarized range either. Do you mean it's easier because you fold to 4bets? Well, it's usually very close in terms of ev whether to call or fold to a 4bet with suited connector type hands. linear range is prob close too, but slightly more +ev to call with suited broadways.

You expand your preflop tree too dramatically by adding all your suited broad ways in your 3 betting range, then you need to further branch out your preflop tree to decide if you want to call, fold or maybe even shove vs a 4 bet because the equities begin to run so close. Also what kind of hands are you putting in your flat calling range if you are 3 betting only linear? 22-99 and suited connectors up until the broadways? doesn't that make your flatting range really unbalanced?

I didnt say anything about gaining EV by making your decisions easy. I just said its easier for me as a player to adjust to a 4 betting strategy by having polarized ranges.


edit: I did some basic equity calculations preflop and the equities run much better when you include less combinations of suited connectors and I also think that a lot of opponents have a very bluff catching type strategy in the CO vs Button that I think having such a wide range would put myself in some really bad spots where I am not sure if I really want to barrel off light or not without much information.

try not 5betting so much IP, solvers almost never 5bets in BB vs SB for example vs an open raise strategy. here's a sim i just did of a preflop solution for BB vs SB 150bb deep. It virtually never 5bets and you'd expect it to 5bet more the deeper it gets.

https://gyazo.com/cb44d73b89798888ae3f5b4d1fe3885d

The pic has it 5betting ATo, K4s a lot but thats out of like 10% of the combinations that make it to that node in the decision tree.

i already said that you can have no cold call range and just 3bet linear (again, might not be a gto strategy but it's simple and the ev difference is small), so some of what you wrote misread my assumptions.

the4bet size is way too small you'll get skewed results like this

It's to 500 not 700 right

200 to 500, 2.5x 4bet size, it's the most commonly used 4bet sizing. do you go from 200 to 700?

150bb deep you got to go bigger yeah
700 sound ... okay? better than 2.5X for sure
when I worked with Snowie it just usually pot 4bets 100bb deep
Otherwise you see a stupid wide range like this calling you IP

You can still use 2.5X oop in practice because people are shit playing vs 4bets but it's not the right size

I mean just think about it looking at the solver range when he calls this wide vs 2.5X
you're just blowing the pot up OOP with 25% fold equity when you 4bet small when someone plays optimal

I put 500 in because that's how population plays, which is what i model for. But solvers like going bigger than 2.5x, and hard to disagree with them, and probably better vs most humans too. So yes i agree with you.