Confusion re: Pot Odds vs Minimum Defense Freq
Posted by Yaphet-Kotto
Posted by
Yaphet-Kotto
posted in
Low Stakes
Confusion re: Pot Odds vs Minimum Defense Freq
Say we're on the river facing a pot-sized bet.
According to pot odds, we're getting 2:1 and should call if we expect to win >33% against Villain's range.
Minimum Defense Freq (MDF) tells a different story. It says that since our opponent is risking 1pbs to win 1psb, we need to call 50% of the time or he's auto-profiting with his bluffs.
Confusing, right?
If we base our decision on pot-odds, we're only calling 33% -- not enough to keep villain indifferent to bluffing with ATC. If we use MDF instead, now we're calling 50% when (against a balanced range) we're only good 33%.
So my question is: are pot-odds and MDF supposed to be used in tandem? That is, if you think a villain is trying to exploit you with his bluffs, are you just supposed say "MDF it I call" 50% of the time, and do so with a range that wins >33% of the times you call?
Somebody please enlighten me.
Loading 1 Comments...
Minimum Defense Freq is how often we need to continue vs a bet or raise so that our opponent can't auto profit from us folding. In the example you gave, yes you should be defending with 50% of your range, and that range should have at least 33% equity against villain's range (the bottom portion of your range should be breakeven or slightly +ev). If it isn't, it's likely that you are getting to that spot with too wide of a range (but not always). Conversely, if your equity is way above 33% it's likely your range is too tight, and villain is making money off of you on earlier streets because you are folding too much.
Be the first to add a comment