CrackMyBack

I dont know what my x/raising range looks like. But I do know that I would be folding vs it a ton if I was playing against my self, haha.

The reason why I started the thread was just to hear what people would be expecting:
1. His calling range to be
2. His jamming range vs a check to be
Because with these numbers I then could just calculate the EVs my self.

Now I would like to get the thread more in the direction of how we should construct our turn betting ranges, turn check calling ranges, and turn calling ranges given our range constructions. That is, how do we construct are whole range play (is that the word?) so that the strategy EV is the highest for our full range?

To do this, we'll probably be needing to make a ton of adjustments and re-adjustments: If we do this, how can he exploit us? If he exploits us by doing that, how can we exploit that? Oh well, now that he does that, we can do this, but then he can do that :((( etc

I'm of to bed. Nearly falling a sleep. Just wanted to post something. Haven't been by the computer much lately and saw that there was some interesting discussions going on. I'll be back ;)

Hey,

I don't think protecting our range is as important on a super-dynamic board like this. And I don't think I bring much protection to my range by flatting a hand like this. I'll still have about exactly as many A9 and A:ass if in my check call range if I check raise a hand like this, that is, a hand that occurs with such a low frequency (the nine is of spades as, making it even less combos with A9:ass)

It is important to protect our range, but on a super dynamic board, each scenario occurs with a lower frequency, and thus we won't be exploited for as much as if the board was completely static. And we will still have these hands. And our opponent won't be able to make it 10x pot in PLO.

I do hear the argument of chasing away weaker hands that draw slim, but we´re OOP and are pushing quiet a lot of EQ against his continiung range.

The fact that we dont have the Ts/Js/Qs/Ks in our hand makes it more favorable check raising (since he should be continuing against our x/r more often), I think.

I think people often make huge mistakes when "protecting their range". I can just draw a parallell from when I played NL, and thought that I was "protecting my range" by slowplaying three combos of sets in BB vs BU vs a CB. Slowplaying a set brings three combos of protection, of lets say 365 combos in my total flop x/c range (roughly, not to important anyways):

1326*0,5*0,55=365 (Total hands pre)*(Flatting range pre)*(Flatting range flop)=365

We both loose a lot of direct value with our hand, and we let our opponent gain a lot of value with his range against ours, when we let our opponent CB without getting check raised.

EDIT: fwiw my thoughts about FI when we played the hand was that he was overly aggressive. Former HS-reg that did some battling, but has just been a spewtard for a while. Seems as my reads were wrong and that he's been spending some "time in the lab" though.

The build up of the text above makes me nauseous. Some things didn't come out as I intended to; bold letters, the disposition etc.

Well, the differences in EV are pretty massive depending on how he reacts to our action.

SOEQ: 38%
Final PS: 232bb

Say that he calls our jam 43% of the time (, and that we have 32% against this range, then our EV is 25bbs:

S/O range:(88,99,tt):(T,ss,hh),t7+,a:(QK,KT):hh, our EQ = 32%
.43(-.06*232)+.57(56)=26

Say that he calls our jam 60% of the time (our EQ will be around 30%), our EV is 11:

S/O range: AJT,T7+,88, our EQ = 30%
.6(.06*232)+.4(56)=11

Say that he calls our jam 47% of the time, and that we have 29% EQ, our EV is 20:

S/O range:AJT,T7+,88+:(t), our EQ = 29%
.47(-.09*232)+.53(56)=19.8664

Lets have a look at the EV of a check:

If he jams 88+,(8t,9t,jt):(ss,hh) (60%), we'll actually have to fold.
This will have him checking back 40% of the time.
We'll have the nuts on 34% of the rivers
If we have him calling it off 33% of the time OTR when we hit, this accumulates to 30-ish bbs:

.34(.33(.66*232)+.66(56))=.34(50,5296+36,96)=29.746464

He'll only check back the turn 40% of the time (given above assumptions), so the EV accumulates to 11.9:
29.746464*0.4=11.9

To beat the EV of 20bbs, we then need to win 8bbs more. It's 66% of the rivers left, and he'll only check back 40% OTT, thus we'll need to win 30bbs on theese rivers:
8/0.4/0.66=30

30bbs is about 50% of the pot OTR, and we won't win close to that on these 66% "non nut rivers"

Jam>>>>>>>Check

Please give me your thoughts on my assumptions and the math done above. Anything wrong with the numbers?

I'm still interested of your guys answers to the questions in TS:
1.Which hands would you expect CO to jam vs a check?
2.Which hands would you expect CO to call it off vs a turn jam?