"stress testing" our assumptions - split ranges
Posted by Lewis Harkes
Posted by Lewis Harkes posted in Low Stakes
"stress testing" our assumptions - split ranges
Hi guys,
I`m not quite sure how to pose this question/theme, so please bear with me through some general imprecision.
I've read a number of books and a lot of posts where the analysis of a villain's hand turn range is based on starting assumptions and narrowing the range through a logical path by removing hands from street to street based on reasonableness. However, it seems to me that by playing "improperly" in an early spot can lead to some bigger mistakes later down the road. I want to consider how we can exploit this tendency and protect ourselves from getting tricked. The first two parts of this analysis assumes solid reg. vs. solid reg. with some history, third part assumes we know opponent is reg. I decided to put in separate posts to avoid the dreaded wall of text.
Split ranges: For example, if we look at a bb defence vs button of 15% or 20%, there are not going to be many 2s, 3s, or 4s in either of these ranges (pairs, Axs). So if the flop pairs, has 2 of these cards or a wheel (using an A) a thinking player should strongly discount these from our range. Given flop/turn runouts, this seems like an opportunity to collect large implied odds since we "should never have 2pr or wheels, and rarely have sets". For example, on a flop of Ah2s2d, we should have 1 Ah2h and 22 in our range that crushes AK. It might be tough for AK to get off this hand.
Loading 7 Comments...
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.
This thread has been locked. No further comments can be added.