Secret HQ Poker Forums

FYI, I get the fact that we need less equity in the 50bb pot, just don't know the math. Anyone?

I am crap at math, but here is my take at the problem.

1) If we shove villain has to call 40.5 in a pot of 101, so we should autoshoving here when we have at least 40% of equity against his range of hands.

2) If we shove villain has to call 90.5 in a pot of 201, so we should be autoshoving here when we have at least 45% of equity against his range of hands

3) If we shove villain has to call 190.5 in a pot of 401, so we should be autoshoving here when we have at least 47.5% of equity against his range of hands

Sorry for invading the topic, I will purchase the book soon.

SO I did the math and came up with answers I am pretty sure are wrong, so I will default to DJ above.

Back to my other original question though Improva, are we counting outs to an overpair, or just to NUT type hands like str and flush?

like JT on a 892r board?

I am crap at math, but here is my take at the problem.

1) If we shove villain has to call 40.5 in a pot of 101, so we should autoshoving here when we have at least 40% of equity against his range of hands.

2) If we shove villain has to call 90.5 in a pot of 201, so we should be autoshoving here when we have at least 45% of equity against his range of hands

3) If we shove villain has to call 190.5 in a pot of 401, so we should be autoshoving here when we have at least 47.5% of equity against his range of hands

Sorry for invading the topic, I will purchase the book soon.

Hey DJ.. no worries you are more than welcome here.. Let the others know how you solved the problem.

SO I did the math and came up with answers I am pretty sure are wrong, so I will default to DJ above.

Back to my other original question though Improva, are we counting outs to an overpair, or just to NUT type hands like str and flush?

like JT on a 892r board?

Well the number of outs depends on the hand that villains has. So your question is not easy to answer. What you should do is write down the range of hands that you expect to get action from and do the PokerStove dance. That will give you an idea of the equity we have. I think a good estimate is to add one out in the specific hand - giving you 9 outs.

Maybe I should write something about draws?

Maybe I should create questions for some of the videos here on DC? Not just math problems but poker problems? Add a little value to the vids?

Maybe I should create questions for some of the videos here on DC? Not just math problems but poker problems? Add a little value to the vids?

this would be uber-sick

If we play 100bb poker and the action is: Villain open to 3.5bb, we call from the SB and BB folds. Pot is 8bb and villain fires a 6bb c-bet.

How much equity do we need on the flop in order to go broke if the effective stack is:
a) 50bb

One one side we have to calculate how much there is in the pot when all the money goes in which is equal to -> 50bb (villain stack) + 50 bb (our stack) + 1 bb (bb big blind) = 101 bb.
Now we have to look at how many bb villain has left after he makes his flop cbet -> 50bb (initial stack) - 3.5bb (raise size) - 6 bb (cbet size) = 40.5 bb.
To calculate the price he is getting to call our shove you simply divide the two figures: 40.5/101 = approx 40%
Obviously the procedure to follow doesn't change when we talk about a different stack size.

If we assume that the EFS at the beginning of the hand is 50bb. Then...

Ev(X) = 0 becomes

Ev(X) = (8+6+40.5)*X - 46.5(1-X), where ...

- (8+6+40.5) is the potential win (40.5 is what villain has left).
- X is our equity.
- 46.5 is our risk.
- (1-X) is villains equity

DJ... it seems that you might have calculated the EQ needed for villain to call our shove.

Yep, that's right.

So if I didn't miscalculated, with 50bb we need around 46%, I expected a slightly lower figure.

Alright, so thanks to improva's extreme flexibility/generosity, I'm in!

I'm a bit behind but I did skim the previous posts to make sure what I have said has not been answered already. My first Q on the bottom of PG 26 talks about what the TEC's can tell us about playing against a calling station.

I agree with 1-5, but 6 is a problem for me:
"Tec6 tells us that we should be looking for scare cards if we want to bluff on the turn or the river."

I see that the "if" is italicized...
If we have already established that the player is a calling station, do we really want to be bluffing...even on scare cards? Not to mention, what ARE the scare cards if a huge part of his range are draws or mid-pair hands that he calls with anyways?

Just a point of preference, but this is a little awkwardly phrased:
"On these boards I would consider not c-betting 100% of my range a big adjustment." - bottom pg 29

Alternative: On these boards, I am c-betting 100% of my range. The only exception is if I am adjusting for various reasons...etc

Its just a stylistic preference, but for any non-native english speakers this might be confusing.

Just a point of preference, but this is a little awkwardly phrased:
"On these boards I would consider not c-betting 100% of my range a big adjustment." - bottom pg 29

Alternative: On these boards, I am c-betting 100% of my range. The only exception is if I am adjusting for various reasons...etc

Its just a stylistic preference, but for any non-native english speakers this might be confusing.

Please use: https://thepokerpuzzle.lighthouseapp.com/ for feedback...

Alright, so thanks to improva's extreme flexibility/generosity, I'm in!

I'm a bit behind but I did skim the previous posts to make sure what I have said has not been answered already. My first Q on the bottom of PG 26 talks about what the TEC's can tell us about playing against a calling station.

I agree with 1-5, but 6 is a problem for me:
"Tec6 tells us that we should be looking for scare cards if we want to bluff on the turn or the river."

I see that the "if" is italicized...
If we have already established that the player is a calling station, do we really want to be bluffing...even on scare cards? Not to mention, what ARE the scare cards if a huge part of his range are draws or mid-pair hands that he calls with anyways?

Scare cards are cards that could give us a very strong hand. The if means that we should almost only try to bluff if we get help from a scare card. Calling stations do fold sometimes.

"Question 15: Try to justify the big value bet on the river using the elasticity conjecture."

tec4: The more inelastic the range is, the bigger we can bet for value when we have the best hand.

At this point, his range is inelastic, meaning his hands are polarized into ones which will call just about any bet or no bet at all. Most people won't top pair obv.

My Q: This example was a dry flop, meaning there are very few draws. On a bit more connected board, when a larger range of his hands are these draws, does it make sense to check and induce a bet rather than bomb the river and hope he's got the TP?

"Question 15: Try to justify the big value bet on the river using the elasticity conjecture."

At this point, his range is inelastic, meaning his hands are polarized into ones which will call just about any bet or no bet at all. Most people won't top pair obv.

tec4: The more inelastic the range is, the bigger we can bet for value when we have the best hand.

pot and smile... pot and smile.