160bb, defend ATo v UTG
Posted by dissection
Posted by
dissection
posted in
Low Stakes
160bb, defend ATo v UTG
This is not hand of mine. Villain had 13% OR from UTG. It was posted on different poker forum and one experienced (prolly winning poker player, also doing coachings) told us this is easy call preflop from BB vs. EP open. Now, I think it is not that clear defend. I tried to explain why I think this and asked him to elaborate more. He said it would be for a whole coaching session, so basically he said we should buy a lesson with him and he will told us, which is a bit "funny". Anyway, I wonder what your opinion is ? Thanks !
Loading 11 Comments...
Even if your opponent is extremely passive post flop, it seems hard to hope make better EV than -100bb/100 vs such a tight range OOP.
If someone has a "more mathematic" approach of the spot, I'm curious too :P
Pio pre flop sims for 100bb stacks:
vs a 2.5 bb open from a 16-17% range, ATo doesn't make the cut with 50NL rake (AJo does). Vs a 13% Vilain who opens for 3bb, it gets worse. As far as deeper stacks go, being OOP with an offsuit dominated hand can't make it better.
You need a serious post flop skill advantage to make money here. If coach guy makes money from such, good for him.
Well, he replied me few minutes ago and pointed me in one direction (maybe he is a nice guy afterall, lol). He told me I should watch videos from LEFORT .. actually some old videos around here on RIO. He told me LEFORT explains it in those videos and proves it mathematically.
Lefort's "6-Max Concepts" series is very good and introduces the much talked-about R factor (the % of our pre flop equity we realize when we play post flop). At the time, solvers didn't exist and nobody could say what R actually was for various hands vs various ranges IP and OOP. Now we can compute it.
What Lefort demonstrated with simple math was that we can play much more hands from BB than most are (or were) aware of. We're getting a good price, especially vs small open sizes and with the BB discount we don't need to realize all that much of our equity to have a +EV situation. For BB vs BU minraise Lefort estimated ~70% defense to be proper.
However, there's an extreme difference between BU and EP opens. R for mediocre offsuit hands is not great, especially OOP vs tight ranges. Vs a 3bb UTG open you really can't play many offsuit hands profitably.
Very cool ! You are nuts dude ! BTW: And nothing changes if we are deep as in the hand above ? Or we don't know since solvers can't solve situations for 100bb+ stacks yet ?
Solvers can use any stack size you feed them. Without going into crunching numbers we can safely say that dominated offsuit hands that rarely flop better than a bluff catcher don't benefit from sitting deep OOP vs a tight range.
Saw this post today and went looking in my yearly database because Im pretty sure I defend ATo and AJo vs EP1 to MP2 (I play FR) and found that I am losing with both these hands (500k hands played this year) at exactly -100bb/100.
With ATs and AJs same situation I am winning 196bb/100.
This is at nl200 to nl600 so obv at lower stakes it might be a bit more profitable but seems like a clear losing play to defend these hands from those RFI positions.
Good post! Got me studying allot today!
Is the -100 bb/100 for ATo/AJo a loss beyond the -1bb/hand you already put in as the big blind, or is it your overall stack decrease after defending (in which case -100 bb/100 equals the EV of folding, so that your defence was breaking even).
So I did make 2 mistakes in this spot while studying my things, the first being I did not remove the times I 3bet (im guessing when we meant defending, 3bet was excluded?) and I also forgot to factor in that I am BB and it is already -1bb per hand as ZenFish was saying (I had that written down, I guess I was really tired finishing my day out....).
So the total ive got from the 500k hands played this year and 252 spots of ATo/AJo calling from the BB vs EP1 to MP2 is at -77bb/100 (these are always put in EV and not in real cash earned or lost, real was at -91bb/100).
As a side note I would like to mention that vs some players that I know are good and will play very well postflop or others that play very tight, it is possible that I not defended so keep in mind who you are playing against when calling.
Since we are in the BB it seems to be clearly better than a breakeven spot (these stats are with BB already put in), im guessing my sample size is big enough to make that claim (Ive been coaching 2 guys this year at nl50 and nl100 so I will also look in their database to compare) and again these stats are for nl200-600.
Interesting to compare computation with empirical data. Pre flop simulations put AJo in range and ATo on the cusp vs 2.5bb with small stakes rake, playing vs a perfect player (Nash) with 16-17% open.
Lower rake, post flop skill advantage (of which we have none vs Nash), and being selective with who you flat against could very well swing ATo to a playable hand. Exploitative play on the margins is a strong approach.
If you can be bothered, what were the results for ATo specifically?
No bother, again another flaw in these stats, my student pointed out to me that in HM2 early position transitioned into full ring is EP1, EP2 and MP1 and middle position is MP2 and HJ.
So ; ATo vs early (EP1, EP2 and MP1) is at -48bb/100 and vs middle (MP2 and HJ) -56bb/100 for a total of -52bb/100 vs those 5 positions.
AJo vs early is at -226bb/100 and vs middle is +16bb/100 for a total of -102bb/100, again for the total vs 5 positions.
Obv I dont have the open sizings ranging from 2x to 3x, I cant say the RFI opening %, I do select the players I play against, I do know what I am doing postflop and there is some variance in those stats given the spot does not come up that often.
Be the first to add a comment