another question cross-posted from jsh06's thread:the questions i cross-post are just ones that i think would be helpful to everyone. don't want them to get lost in personal threads.How high of a check/raise percentage would you want to see before you start 4betting hands like naked flush draws and how does this change if you're 30bb, 25bb or 20bb deep?i think you def realize you can't use your HEM c/r stat as a blanket assessment of c/r frequency on all board textures, but i'll just mention it for others. people who c/r bluff tend to c/r bluff dry boards with a ton more frequency, and can have far less total value combos to balance a high frequency with as compared to a wet board.to figure this out very specifically, you'd just have to do some ev calcs with different ranges/frequencies to get a feel for it (and at different stack sizes).if you want to do an ev calc:first stove your hand vs villain's 3bet shove calling range (try for a rough estimate)example:1300 starting eff stx bb 50, we raise 7h 3h pre to t100 and villain callsflop is Qh 6h 2c, we cbet t100 and vilain c/r to t300step 1) estimate villain's c/r frequency and range and the fold equity we have when we jam over it. lets say it's 60% for this example.step 2) estimate villains 3bet shove calling range, plug that range into stove and figure out your equity vs that range ... lets say we are 32% vs villains caling range here.the math:60% of the time we win the pot and are winning t400 from the start of the hand. 40% of the time we get called for all the chips, and have 32% equity. all the chips are 2600. 2600 * .32 = 832. that's like losing 1300 - 832 = t468. that's like losing t468 from the start of the hand.60% of the time we win 400. 40% of the time we lose. (0.6)(400) + (0.4)(-468) = 240 - 187.2 = 52.8 cEV.So, on average, we win 52.8 chips by 3bet shoving the flop. Alternatively, we lose 200 chips by folding to the c/r. So 4bet shoving is far greater than folding. Calculating for flatting is difficult without knowing villain's turn tendancies (im not even sure how to do it anyways), but we aren't passing up a +52.8 cEV flop edge ever anyways.So that's the math behind it, and you can mess with that to develop a better intuitive understanding of what fold equity and equity vs villain's range you need at different stack depths. We just want 3betting to be better than folding, so at short eff stx if we have correct fe we're obv jamming. At deeper stacks of 25-30bb, depending on the size of villain's c/r and the frequencies/equity you estimate, flatting can definitely have better expectation than jamming since we will likely have remaining stack depth in some cases to correctly flat a turn barrel.I hope that answers your question reasonably well. I'm basically saying, it depends a ton and having an intuitive understanding of this stuff is really important.
also...remember to polarize your cbetting range vs a wide-c/r as well. polarized = hands that continue vs a c/r well and hands that easily fold to a c/r. your checkback range includes hands that have showdown value and can call turn/river vs leads on certain runouts, but dont fair well enough vs c/r range.so depending on how wide villain's c/r frequency is, and how much fold equity we have when jamming over it - some hands can be easy cbet/3bet vs a v high c/r % on X board texture, while the same hands can by good to check back vs a lower (but still wide...just not wide enough) c/r % on the same board texture.you definitely need a sample size, or get to some showdowns to get a feel for villain's actual c/r range on different boards. so my default would be quick to polarize my checkback range first, instead of making dangerous assumptions about villain's c/r frequency. polarizing your cbet range with the right hands is never going to be -ev, but possibly not maxEV.
Long time I don't use the math... :( Got involved in improving my overall life and that's the result, well, time to work then.I feel somekind of dumb but whatever, I need help, sorry for the dumb questions 1300 starting eff stx bb 50, we raise 7h 3h pre to t100 and villain calls flop is Qh 6h 2c, we cbet t100 and vilain c/r to t300after the flop the pot is 200 + our cbet + villain c/r = 600 ... I thought our contribution to the pot matters... since once we put chips in the middle them aren't ours anymore... or I am missing something? 40% of the time we get called for all the chips, and have 32% equity. all the chips are 2600. 2600 * .32 = 832. that's like losing 1300 - 832 = t468. that's like losing t468 from the start of the hand.I've used a different method (much more complicated imo)... that one found in a Primo's vid (you can found my notes below)... can you explain better your equation? http://img405.imageshack.us/img405/914/hokie.png
question 1: it's the way Mers taught me to do it. i'll ask him why that is and get back to you. feel like i know the answer, but don't want to bull shit you :)question 2: you should get the same answer using either method. whichever one you are more comfortable with is fine imo.
deleted.
question 1: it's the way Mers taught me to do it. i'll ask him why that is and get back to you. feel like i know the answer, but don't want to bull shit you :)k waiting then question 2: you should get the same answer using either method. whichever one you are more comfortable with is fine imo.yep I guess I'm obtain the same number... but it seems yours is simpler... that's why I ask to elaborate a little bit:832 are our share of the pot... but what's about 1300 - 832?
this is how Mers explained it to me a couple weeks ago in an email:My question: i know this is pretty simple, but i keep forgetting to save how to do this. eff stx 1300hero raises to t60villain 3bets to t200hero has 60% fold equity when 4bet shovinghero 4bet shoves A8o - when called he has 35% equity vs X rangecan you please just remind me how to do figure out the ev of jamming A8o there? "His response:"I always think of it like this. 60% of the time we win the pot. We're winning t200 from the start of the hand. 40% of the time we get called for all the chips, and have 35% equity. All the chips are 2600. 2600*0.35 = 910. That's like losing 1300-910 = t390 from the start of the hand.60% of the time we win 200. 40% of the time we lose 390. (0.6)(200) + (0.4)(-390) = 120 - 156 = -36.So, on average, we lose 36 chips from the start of the hand by shoving. However, by folding, we lose 60 chips from the start of the hand. So shoving has a bit better EV in the hand than folding." He is calculating from the start of the hand. The fact that the email example is preflop and the article example is postflop shouldn't make a difference at all - since he didn't calculate my t60 as profit in the fold equity calc preflop.
sorry text really doesn't copy/paste well here. if you read through that slowly, it should make sense :)
Yeah... ty Hokie, btw seems strange to me... because he didn't count what we put in the pot... I'll ask in his personal thread ;)
@Server: i'm almost positive it is bc we are calculating for the cEV of jamming. then we compare that to the ev of folding or calling. he makes it pretty clear in his example we are calculating "from the start of the hand" since he says it like 5 times. using the preflop example i did with him in the emails:we're just calc'ing for the ev of a jam (not worried about calling ev)..so we either lose t60 with a foldor we win t200 with a jam 60% of the time, then 40% of the time we get caleld and have 35% equity for t2600 chips. then we compare the ev of folding and calling and choose the best option. if the t60 were "lost", then by that logic we would also lose the pot or t-260 chips. we obv don't lose 260 chips from the start of the hand by folding here.99% sure that's going to be the answer, but will verify to make sure.
yep, I think where I got lost is on the EV definition... I remember Moshman said the EV of folding is always 0 because EV count only future actions, but in your calcs, you are counting it in a correct way I think... does make a lot of sense...
The folding = 0EV thing is just a frame of reference. You can say "consider the equity from folding breakeven. Now compare that equity against other options". You can also say, as I often do in my calculations, "compare not gaining or losing any chips from the start of the hand breakeven. Now compare the equity from other actions against that". Different frames of reference work better for different situations, for example, if you're calculating how much equity you need to call a river bet, it's much better to just compare to folding directly, and call folding 0EV. If you're calculating whether a 3-bet shove is good with 98s, maybe you don't want to compare vs folding because you're never considering folding anyway.