Big Draw On The Turn

[BaseJester 1]

He wants a new stove. The ranges presented in this thread are horribly skewed. We should expect AA/AK/AQ/KK/QQ to be 4betting a fair amount of the time preflop (ESPECIALLY AK more than any other hand in the range).

Do you think the results of another pokerstove run matter? It's going to be 2:1ish for us to hit one of 15 outs unless you think we have pair outs a lot. (And I think that's unreasonably optimistic.)

[Snamuh 0]

Do you think the results of another pokerstove run matter? It's going to be 2:1ish for us to hit one of 15 outs unless you think we have pair outs a lot. (And I think that's unreasonably optimistic.)

The stove itself doesn't matter so much. But I'd rather see a more accurate assumption of the range we are up against. Some hands need to be discounted, etc.

[David_Nicoson 1]

The stove itself doesn't matter so much. But I'd rather see a more accurate assumption of the range we are up against. Some hands need to be discounted, etc.

Fill out the C and D columns in the attached spreadsheet. The bottom right number is the chance that the villain calls on the turn. I get 73%.

AA	3	0.25	0.60	0.4500	0.0287	1.00	0.0287AK	12	0.15	0.60	1.0800	0.0688	0.99	0.0682AQ	12	0.25	0.75	2.2500	0.1434	0.98	0.1405AJ	12	0.25	0.80	2.4000	0.1530	0.95	0.1453AT	9	0.20	0.80	1.4400	0.0918	1.00	0.0918KQs	4	0.40	0.03	0.0480	0.0031	0.01	0.0000T9s	2	0.30	0.20	0.1200	0.0076	0.95	0.0073KK	6	0.15	0.50	0.4500	0.0287	0.25	0.0072QQ	6	0.50	0.40	1.2000	0.0765	0.20	0.0153JJ	3	0.60	0.40	0.7200	0.0459	0.10	0.0046TT	3	0.70	0.30	0.6300	0.0402	1.00	0.040299	3	0.75	0.65	1.4625	0.0932	1.00	0.093288	6	0.75	0.10	0.4500	0.0287	0.02	0.000677	6	0.75	0.08	0.3600	0.0229	0.02	0.000566	6	0.75	0.08	0.3600	0.0229	0.02	0.000555	6	0.70	0.08	0.3360	0.0214	0.02	0.000444	6	0.70	0.07	0.2940	0.0187	0.02	0.000433	3	0.70	0.65	1.3650	0.0870	1.00	0.087022	6	0.65	0.07	0.2730	0.0174	0.00	0.0000Totals:	114			15.6885	1.0000		0.7315

weighting.xls

[David_Nicoson 1]

I get 73%.

It tilts me that I got pretty much the same result as pulling a number out of my ass.

[simo_8ball 0]

It tilts me that I got pretty much the same result as pulling a number out of my ass.

Rephrased: My intuition is pretty accurate.

[David_Nicoson 1]

The attachment's really there now for anybody motivated to run their own numbers.

[Acid_Knight 2]

To be honest Simo, I don't spend time doing these complex calculations. I go with my intuition. And in a spot like this, if the decisions are close, I'd rather go with the more aggressive choice because even if it's slightly lower EV in the moment (which I don't believe it is), it's higher EV for overall gameplay because shoving the turn with hands like this will get you paid off with your other hands a lot easier.That's something you can't measure. If you get him to fold here, he's pretty much not going to fold a close decision next time (when you ideally have a stronger hand). It's how I get paid off in 3bet pots. Not every move needs to be +EV in the moment, but I guarantee it's more +EV for your session to shove turn here than to check/call.

I've only kind of blazed through this thread and I've read very little of the in-depth math analysis because the gist of it is that it's a close decision. When things are close, I go with aggression just like Snamuh said here. If you're not folding, there's zero reasons why you shouldn't be shoving here. It's not like we can trick him into making a bigger mistake by checking since we have J high. If we had a pair and a draw, I wouldn't mind c/cing, but just because we have the odds to draw vs him, doesn't mean we want to. I just shove my stack in there and hope he folds his pair, unless it's a pair of aces, because nobody folds those. I'm gonna read the 2nd page of this thread now.

[Acid_Knight 2]

I'd also like to throw this out there:We have J high. We beat no hands. His range however does include lots of hands that will likely fold to a turn shove. His range also includes hands better than ours, such as flush draws higher than Jx, which will bluff shove the turn. The only argument for not shoving the turn imo is that he'll have a weaker hand often enough where he checks behind and gives us a free shot at the draw, but the thing is that in those cases, he folds to the turn shove almost always anyway and we win the pot by default. With no showdown value at this point, there does not appear to be a good argument that can be made for not shoving the turn if we're never going to fold.

[simo_8ball 0]

Care to give some %s?That's all I want. I just want someone to give their concept of %s that show shoving is better.

[psujohn 0]

I don't get all the discussion on this hand. Seems pretty obvious to me.If we get it all in we have neutral EV.We have (considerable) fold equity.Shove.Profit = FE * Pot size.What's left to discuss?

[Deftones150 0]

[David_Nicoson 1]

I don't get all the discussion on this hand. Seems pretty obvious to me.If we get it all in we have neutral EV.

The decision to call an all-in has neutral EV. That is, calling and folding are about equal. That's not the same as saying going all-in and checking are equivalent. The more money that goes in the pot on the turn the worse for us, since we are a 2:1 dog and getting 1:1 bet odds.

We have (considerable) fold equity.Shove.Profit = FE * Pot size.What's left to discuss?

There are other scenarios that we can figure profit for and one of those might be a larger profit than the shove case.If it just checks through on the turn and the villain folds the river, then we preserve our 1/3 equity in the pot, which is worth $9.If it checks through or the villain bets small, whatever the villain is willing to call on the river after we hit is 100% profit. So that path may also be worth more than betting, depending on what assumption we make about the frequency of each action.

[Acid_Knight 2]

Care to give some %s?That's all I want. I just want someone to give their concept of %s that show shoving is better.

I don't get all the discussion on this hand. Seems pretty obvious to me.If we get it all in we have neutral EV.We have (considerable) fold equity.Shove.Profit = FE * Pot size.What's left to discuss?

I agree with John here. I think you're too focused on the breakdown of things, Simo. His exact range doesn't matter a ton. We know that he has a hand that beats us and it's still a hand that sometimes folds if we shove. Since check/calling is neutral EV, you just shove and hope that some of your FE comes through and that the EV bumps up slightly.

[BaseJester 1]

The attachment's really there now for anybody motivated to run their own numbers.

I think a villain with AK flat-calls the reraise preflop more than 15% of the time. It's fun to flat the preflop and call the continuation bet, because you can show down the hand they're not expecting. "Ha, ha, bitch. I do have AK." I bumped it up a bit (and also for AQ). It didn't change the final result much, though. 78%.

[thebestintheworld 0]

Ok, this was posted in the Challenge thread, and obviously it's hard to get an 'on track' discussion there so I've reposted it here.I really want to get into this discussion (and I think I can come up with an equation to get some real numbers on this), but I won't have time until tomorrow afternoon/evening.Against a hand that won't fold, check calling is obviously better (because sometimes we draw for free). It is at worst break even if he shoves every time.Against a hand that will fold, shoving is obviously better.It's a case of work out how often he needs to fold compared to how often he needs to check behind, or at least not shove. I personally don't think we have too much fold equity, and villain's range is centred around AT or better.I just think it will work out to be pretty close overall (plus it balances the times I would check AK/AA/etc here).Discuss...

overall bad play by the one on the button fullstop

[simo_8ball 0]

Snamuh said repeatedly that it wasn't close. I say it is. I just want to show that it is actually a close decision in most cases.

I agree with John here. I think you're too focused on the breakdown of things, Simo. His exact range doesn't matter a ton. We know that he has a hand that beats us and it's still a hand that sometimes folds if we shove. Since check/calling is neutral EV, you just shove and hope that some of your FE comes through and that the EV bumps up slightly.

Check/calling isn't neutral EV. Check/calling a shove is exactly the same as shoving and getting called. The +EV from shoving is the fold equity. The +EV from check/calling is drawing more cheaply.Look, the equations are there. All I want are numbers. If you can just give me some percentages I'll be happy.

[simo_8ball 0]

overall bad play by the one on the button fullstop

Erm...why?

[psujohn 0]

If it just checks through on the turn and the villain folds the river, then we preserve our 1/3 equity in the pot, which is worth $9.

And if villain open farrels we get 100% of the pot but that's not likely to happen either.I think it comes down to - the turn checking through is wishful thinking. There's no way we have the best hand.We have FE over even part of the range that villain shoves. We have decent enough odds if villain calls. We have CONSIDERABLE fold equity.There are plenty of what ifs that make this a more interesting spot - if we're in position and villain checks to us and stacks are deep it's easier to check behind - I don't think this particular situation is even close to being close.

[simo_8ball 0]

And if villain open farrels we get 100% of the pot but that's not likely to happen either.I think it comes down to - the turn checking through is wishful thinking. There's no way we have the best hand.We have FE over even part of the range that villain shoves. We have decent enough odds if villain calls. We have CONSIDERABLE fold equity.There are plenty of what ifs that make this a more interesting spot - if we're in position and villain checks to us and stacks are deep it's easier to check behind - I don't think this particular situation is even close to being close.

Please will you give me some %s? Pretty please? Pretty please with bells on?

[David_Nicoson 1]

The way to figure out these percentages is to imagine playing the hand as the villain. For instance, how do you play the hand with AJs?

[Acid_Knight 2]

Snamuh said repeatedly that it wasn't close. I say it is. I just want to show that it is actually a close decision in most cases.Check/calling isn't neutral EV. Check/calling a shove is exactly the same as shoving and getting called. The +EV from shoving is the fold equity. The +EV from check/calling is drawing more cheaply.Look, the equations are there. All I want are numbers. If you can just give me some percentages I'll be happy.

Yes, we draw more cheaply sometimes if we check and he checks behind. Are we shoving the river then? How often do you think we're going to win the hand after checking the turn, even if he checks it back? If check/calling a shove on the turn is neutral EV, then shoving must be +EV since we have FE over a number of the hands that he reaches the turn with. What you are trying to say is that we can check the turn and win the pot unimproved on the river often enough to make up for the EV that we have by shoving the turn, but the thing is that our range looks so horribly weak by playing that way, we lose FE over all of the hands that we could get him to fold on the turn since he decides that we'd never play a good Ax hand by 3betting and then bet/check/shove post flop, so he calls us with QQ or JJ or whatever because our line makes no sense where as he would not be calling with those hands on the turn.

[simo_8ball 0]

Yes, we draw more cheaply sometimes if we check and he checks behind. Are we shoving the river then? How often do you think we're going to win the hand after checking the turn, even if he checks it back? If check/calling a shove on the turn is neutral EV, then shoving must be +EV since we have FE over a number of the hands that he reaches the turn with. What you are trying to say is that we can check the turn and win the pot unimproved on the river often enough to make up for the EV that we have by shoving the turn, but the thing is that our range looks so horribly weak by playing that way, we lose FE over all of the hands that we could get him to fold on the turn since he decides that we'd never play a good Ax hand by 3betting and then bet/check/shove post flop, so he calls us with QQ or JJ or whatever because our line makes no sense where as he would not be calling with those hands on the turn.

Swing and a miss.

[Acid_Knight 2]

Swing and a miss.

Dude, I really don't know what you're doing in this thread tbh. It's a close decision since C/Cing AI is about neutral EV.. You show that mathemtically, nobody is arguing. People spend more time in poker arguing about close decisions than anything else when these are the decisions that matter the least. It's hard for us to make a mistake here. Shove? Ok. Check/call his shove? Ok. It doesn't really matter that much and probably has a larger metagame implication than anything.I shove because I want to be able to shove other hands here for value and as bluffs. I want him to make a decision for his stack. I don't want to check and let him think he can semi bluff me off of my hand or whatever. There really isn't anything else to talk about. It seems that you're so dead set on proving something here when there isn't anything to prove imo. Pretty much everyone's saying shove since we have FE and it's a neutral EV situation if we do get called anyway and we have J high and no showdown value. There's no flaw in that. It's just common sense here. Aggression is best overall, so just shove and move onto the next decision. This isn't a complicated math problem with an exacting solution, no matter how much of a consensus you could get on the %s that you keep asking for. It's a hand of poker. It's a close decision. Everyone who plays a lot is saying "shove because we don't care if he calls and he has a lot of hands in his range that will fold" and you keep saying "give me %s." Just because you are not gonna be able to convincingly prove mathematically that shoving is better, doesn't mean that it isn't the best choice.

[psujohn 0]

Please will you give me some %s? Pretty please? Pretty please with bells on?

A good villain shoves 100% of his range because he should figure he has FE is we 3-bet/c-bet/check. Sure most of our villains are not good but so what.

Pretty much everyone's saying shove since we have FE and it's a neutral EV situation if we do get called anyway and we have J high and no showdown value. There's no flaw in that.

QFMFT

[David_Nicoson 1]

A good villain shoves 100% of his range because he should figure he has FE is we 3-bet/c-bet/check. Sure most of our villains are not good but so what.QFMFT

I'd check back with AJs. Would you?