PLO 200z, SBvBU 3bet w/ AKK9ds. Flop play, B or X?
Posted by Ryan Wu
Posted by
Ryan Wu
posted in
Mid Stakes
PLO 200z, SBvBU 3bet w/ AKK9ds. Flop play, B or X?
SB: $223.02 (Hero)
BB: $236.61
UTG: $105.29
MP: $149.30
CO: $200.13
This is a very common spot and I always have a hard time to find a best play in this kind of spot. I feel both betting and checking are make sense, I guess its depends on how we construct our whole range with other hands. But without software like CREV, its very hard to analyze hands on range vs range perspective. So Im gonna get some numbers with PokerJuice first and start by hand vs. range analysis, and see how things going.
I'm curious to know things like
a) Whats the immediate FE by betting on the flop? (I guess its pretty low)
b) Whats our EQ vs. his calling range?
c) Whats our EQ vs. his stack off range? Can I stack off profitable here? How about with diff stack size?
d) Whats villain's range distribution on the flop?
e) How many good/bad turn cards for our hand?
According to this assumption, we can start to do some EV calculation.
pot size = 16.2bb
eff stack = 90.9bb (SPR=5.6)
cbet size = 11bb
EV(bet) = %villain folds * payoff1 + %villain calls * payoff2 + %villain raises * payoff3
1) Assume villain always/only potting with his top range
2) I don't know whats the right way to estimate "payoff2", I made a sheet and use R factor to estimate it but I think its not a very good way.
By adjusting those parameters back and forth(assume villain's freq keep the same), I found
1) EV(bet-fold) is usually greater than EV(bet-call) with SPR=5.6. Except that if we just pot it, then BC is greater than BF due to the odds, but the EV of smaller cbet size is greater than with big size.
2) If we have a shallower stack, let SPR<4.4, then bet-call is always better than bet-fold.
3) with SPR=5.6 and cbet size=11bb, we need R>0.31 to make a profitable bet.
And then I wanna compare the EV between betting and checking, but its even harder to estimate the EV of checking cuz there are too many decision point on later streets and I dont feel using R factor to estimate would be accurate enough. I still make a sheet to estimate the EV though.
This is the sheet to calculate EV of XC, again I adjust the parameters back and forth and found EV of betting are usually greater than EV of XCing.
Thoughts
1) I believe that the R of betting is usually greater than checking in this spot, cuz this board is dynamic and I dont expect we could have a good R vs. good betting strategy.
2) I usually check on this kind of spot before cuz I think there are too many bad turn for my hand, but I found actually there are ~50% turn card are good for my hand, and by betting we can let him fold his bottom 30% range which had 25% equity and with position.
I know I still havnt find any solid conclusion here... will update this thread after I find more interesting things. This is my first post at PLO forum. Any suggestion/thoughts is appreciate!
Thanks
Loading 2 Comments...
Nice post.
I think that by taking a xc line we are opening ourselves up to having to fold a lot of equity on a lot of turn cards. I say this because I think many opponent (at 200z) will correctly assume that we don't have many nutty hands (2p+, pair+wrap) in our xc range and therefore will barrel the turn a bunch using the logic "spr around 2, I have around 40% when called, and have a bit of fold equity". So instinctively I like the line of bet-folding vs straightforward opponents and bet-calling vs aggro ones in order to get them to fold their 25% equity hands and to keep nutty hands in our perceived range on the flop.
However, since we do have to fold a hand with 38% equity when we bet and get shoved on. It seems like this hand would benefit from getting to showdown cheaply. To simplify maybe we could start by comparing the cost of having to fold vs a flop jam to the cost of letting the opponent see a free card with his 25% equity hands. If we see that the cost of having to fold is higher, we could take steps to balance our xc range on the flop so opponents could not run over us on the turn (I could be wrong and opponents can't run over us even if we only xc with marginal hands, but it "feels" like they can).
Wow this is some of the best written analysis I've seen in a long time. (I suppose this is a result of frequenting 2+2). Good work.
This analysis is useful, but its not comprehensive. I think a good portion of our strategy selection has to do with what our villains tendencies / strategies are. Some players have a really high raise cbet in 3b pot, esp when they are on the btn.. while others like to flat the top of their range in this exact spot. I think players at this level tend to play quite exploitative, so these factors carry even more weight.
I like the analysis as a baseline, thanks for the work! Any followup data/info/analysis would be awesome.
Be the first to add a comment