kknives

i'm italian and i understand you even better than others, maybe because my pronunciation is similar :D

anyway i really like this video and the concepts you explain in it. Only one question on the KQ hand: do you think the c/shove river for value is too thin?(too much flushes in oppo's range even if we block some of them?)

i'm sorry that my question wasn't clear. I was only asking how to estimate how often the oppo's range could beat our hand after turn and river. I thought a bit and i realize that the answer is easy, just look on how much equity we have vs each part of oppo's range, specially it's folding range.

Now it could be interesting to understand which are the limits of equity where it's +ev to bet to deny oppo's equity instead of check behind.
For example, raised pot btn vs bb, K72 rainbow, how do you play a hand like K5?
A hand like QJs has 7% equity vs us and probably it's folding vs a bet on flop, so maybe vs this part of oppo's range it's better to check behind on flop; on the other hand, A8 for example has about 16% equity and it seems to start to be quite a lot for me (?maybe it's not?), so vs this part of range maybe it's better to play bet flop and turn to take a fold on turn.
I'm a bit confused on how to understand which way to play it's the +ev :/

4/47 + 4/46= 17%..so why As8s has only 11.82% equity vs Ks5s on Kh 7d 2c?

hi daniel,
i really like this method to analize hands, but i'm a bit uncertain about some numbers. For example, why do you think that we win 15% pot when oppo's holding is underset/tp and so on?
My guess is the following: 95% of time we don't hit a set and we c/f, so we win 0bb; 5% of time we hit a set and i think we can stack off oppo. The max we can win are 18 (pot) + 92 of oppo's stack, and so 110bb, of course sometimes 3of flush, 4of straight or something like that come on board (or he gets quads) and so we overall win a bit less, lets say 90bb. So, 0x0.95+90x0.05= 4,5bb that on 18 is about the 25% of the pot. Vs TP hands we win a lot less because we won't stack oppo on a lot of river card, so let's say we win 18 + 40 of oppo's stack, is overall 3bb on 18, so 17%. Vs air we win a lot less, vs overset we lose a lot more and so on. Do you think my calcs make any sense?
Also, i'm a bit doubtful on your method of splitting oppo's range when the ranges are much wider (for example btn vs bb) or when the flop is much more wet/dynamic (and so figure out how much % of pot we win is more difficult). Do you ever make this analysis in this kind of spots?Is it possible to see one of it in one of your next video in future?
Lastly, i'm unsure of how estimate the ev of the check to compare it to bet. How did you find the 65% of equity realizing? I'm incapable of reasoning on equity realization. However, my guess is that maybe we can find out something from hm, i've tried to set a filter on this situation (my raised hu pot, oop, not cbet, flop raimbow without straight, hand value second or third pair) and it comes that i win -130bb/100, so I THINK that the calcs are that i should lose -300 if i openfold on flop (because i raise 3x pre), so i win 1.7bb on the pot of 8bb, and so i have 1.7/8= 21% of pot when i check and so i can put this value on the checkdown to see the ev of check (i don't know really if this calc make any sense). However, the problem here is that of course the sample size is really low (about 300 hands on this year), the flop filter isn't very accurate (we have KQ on AK5, 55 on KQ7 and TT on KJ8, which are not of course very similar situation) and of course the value of -130 could be affected by my own bad play.
I'm sorry for the lenght of this comment, thanks for any reply :)

as the BB we get to the river with a range such that the opener can
valuebet us super light and on top of that we are "overfolding" we
likely got to the river with too wide of a range. So it's not so much
what we do on the river, but more what we should have done on the
turn.

i think it's one of my biggest leak. In general, i fold a lot on the river and a lot less on the turn (e.g. fold to cbet in raised pot like 30-35 on turn and 55 on river). At the same time, i callmuck on the river quite a lot (let's say 70% of time). I have this strategy because i think that in my field (.it) there are very few regs who are capable of bluffing for 3 streets, the most of them stop on the turn, but it's clear that, even if the idea could be correct, i apply my strategy in a suboptimal way.
I think i have a lot of work to do on that, but i'm a bit scared of "wasting time" because i don't know exactly what to do and how to start off.
Anyway, thanks a lot for your response, i look forward to see your next vid :)

hi @santaur, i don't understand the last part. You say that with some adjustments this model works well also for dynamic boards; but you also say that it is a model based on polarized ranges. I think that it's a contradiction as long as on wet board it's difficult to have a polarized ranges in most common spots, it isn't? (i'm only asking, not sure on what i'm saying..) Could you explain better what do you think about that, please?

Do you ever study your opponent on your hm database away from the tables or you just take notes in game?In the first case, can you explain which is your method (do you use some particular filters like btn vs bb raised spots, btn vs bb call 3bet etc or whatelse.) or is it possible to do some videos in this way? thanks a lot :)

at 37:45, after putting all 8x suited hands in bb range and that he calls all Ax hands, he is folding 51%..you say "BB is unbalanced in his calling strategy, he should calling a little bit more".
Why do you say that? I know that when utg is risking 594 on 795 the bb should call about 58% to not be exploitable to a bet with any two cards. However, i also know that this principle isn't 100% correct, because the utg risks money even before the river, and i think it's impossible for bb to be perfectly balanced in his calling strategy in this spot. (There are a lot of spots like this where is impossible to be balanced, for example when you bet flop, bet turn and check river in your 3bet pot, you can't defende enough of your checks and so you are c/f "too much").
So, my question for you is what do you think about that (there is any method or some more precise calc to do to find which is the "real correct" defending frequency?or at least which factors taking into consideration?) and what do you think about the BB's river calling range in this spot should be (in other words, how much do you think the BB could fold on river in this spot, vs these turn and river sizes, to be as close as possible to a balanced strategy.)
Thanks a lot, i like your videos very much

yes,a lot.
Thank you for the reply.

hi daniel,

i think i don't understand one thing. At about 22.34 you change the btn call river frequency to 20%, to make a 0 ev bluff for bb, and that makes sense because of bb's bet sizing. However, while the ev of the bluff incrases from -6 to 0, the overall bb bet ev doesn't change (is still 2.11). Where this ev goes?is it because the ev of bb's value bet goes down in a "proportional way" or what else and what does it mean?

hi daniel,
i don't understand exactly why, when you change the btn river call frequency at 22:34 to an optimal one (20%), the ev of the BB bluff become 0 but doesn't change the overall ev of the bb (is still 2.11). Is it because the ev of the bet with Ax goes down in a proportional way, or what else? (sorry for the bad english, i hope the question is clear.

don't worry, i'm not convinced on what i'm saying too, so i'm pleased we continue to talk about this. it's very likely that i'm writing a lot of bullshits. 

while i'm replying on this, i'm making some calculation with my real values on hm and i understand that there is something wrong with my idea, but i'm not sure about the reason and a bit confused, when i'll clarify with my own brain i'll try to explain better :D Btw, thanks a lot for your help

yes i agree, it's another kind of definition. Let's take this last example and then i'll really give up :D

Suited trash from BB vs btn. Btn open 2x, we have to put 1bb and the pot on the flop is 4.5bb. The hand won % with them is 37%, so you have to get back 4.5x37%=1.66bb. You have put 2bb preflop (1+1), so on your HM your BB/100 should be 1.66-2=-0.33 bb--->-33bb/100. If you have worse than -33bb/100 (for example -50bb/100) there's something wrong with your game. Do you think this could make any sense?

(in reality, on won hand you can have +400bb/100 and on lost hand you can have -350bb/100, so the overall ev that you get back isn't 1.66bb but it is better and so also the -33 isn't correct but it's pessimistic, the value you shouldn't have to cross is something like -26bb/100 (?))

yes it's right, i understand what you say. Btw, i still don't understand what is wrong on saying "R=how often do you win the pot/how often do you should have to win --->how often you win/equity--->30%/40%" but i don't want to bore you further, so i give up :D thanks a lot

first of all, thanks a lot for your help. I understand what you write, but i'm still a bit uncertain.

why do you say that this 30%(how often do you win the hand) couldn't be an approximation of your "real equity"?

I mean, the aim isn't to calculate the R factor basing on how much we win, but is to understand if we can or not do a call basing (is this word exist? :D) on the R factor (that we don't know, i thought that it could be how often do you win the pot/how often do you should have to win --->how often you win/equity--->30%/40%)

your calculation say: i have X equity-->i have X pot odds-->let's go to see how much we win in this situation-->we calculate R

instead, my tp is: i have X equity-->i have X pot odds-->i have this R factor (or i can estimate it in some way)-->i should to make X money--->i check that in the real life i make much less money-->there something wrong in my game that i have to fix.

maybe my goal it's impossible to reach because we have 2 variable (ev and R factor) and it's impossible to calculate one if we don't know the other and we can't estimate one of them, but i'm not sure

i know that the last part it's wrong, infact i specified that "this is correct only if we suppose that the lost money when we loose the 49hands are equal to the won money when we win the 51hands."

maybe i don't understand something, but my point is the following:

i have a type of hand that has, let's say, 40% equity vs villain range and i have 35% pot odds. Now, the only thing that i can verify for sure, it's how many time i win a pot with this type of hand in this particular spot (with the "won hand true" stat). Let's say in the database there are 30% won hands.

This 30% is your "real equity", so, considering the 35% pot odds, i should have to fold. (the R factor it's simply 30%/40%-->0.75 or 75% of equity realization, i have 40% equity but i win only 30 pots, so i realize 75% of it, right?). However, i think that this fold could be wrong, because you don't considered that the average size of the pot is different depending on if it's won of lost ones.

If the 30% of times you win, the winrate is 400bb/100, and the 70 times you lose is -250bb/100, i think it's clear that you can do this call even if you have 35% pot odds but your "real equity" is just 30% (it's like a kind of definition of implied odds).

I don't know how to put this data in a formula to prove mathematically that it's correct what i'm saying and how much ev i win with the call in this example. i'm asking exactly this formula (i think it's the general ev formula, but i don't know how to use it with these number or how to convert them)

i'm saiyn that when i 3bet in the SB vs BTN and BTN call, with the filter "hand won true" the BB/100 of 77 or A3s or 76s are similar, whereas with the filter "won hand false" the negative bb/100 of the pp are much less.

In my opinion, this is because when i 3bet and i don't hit a set, i just c/f flop or turn, whereas with other kinds of hand i try to take the pot as bluff, or i c/c for showdown value etc. I don't know if this is because i play bad with some of these hands, or it's just because of the nature of the hand that has less or more reverse implied, or both.

i also don't know if the ev of 3betting pp is > of the ev of calling them in blinds vs btn open, but it's clearly that the +ev hands to 3bet in this spot in general are the PP

yes, i already know it, but i would try anyway to understand more deeply this topic.

For example, now i'm seeing the results that i have in different spots (bb vs btn raised, call 3bet ip, call 3bet oop etc) with different grouping of hands (SC and S1gap, broadway off, broadway suited etc) and i'm finding some interesting things.

For example, when i 3bet in small blind vs btn open, i find that with 88- i have the less reverse implied, compared to other kinds of hand, whereas the BB/100 of the won hands are similar. So i'm start to think that maybe the best strategy is to 3bet all the PP from the blinds, despite their little bluff equity (of course i'm not sure, it is possible that there's something wrong with my game or with the sample size)

i think it's true only for a river call..on the other situations, there are implied and reverse odds that are much more important

i try to make another example with real data on my hm

it's opened from BTN, we are BB and we call with a range of only suited cards, no AXs, no broadway suited, no SC (so K9s-, Q9s-, J9s-, T8s- etc). My result it's -110 bb/100, so there's something wrong in my game.

with this range vs 40 to 60 btn open range i have around 40% equity. Let's say the btn open 2 to 2.5bb, so our pot odds are from 22% to 27%, around 24%.

In my hm, when i put Won hand true, there are 318 hands on 790 total, with 568 bb 100. Instead, with Won hand false, there are 472 hands with -565 bb 100. So, the avg pot are very very similar, but i realize 318/790 = 40% equity instead of 24%/40% =60% that i have to and make a BE call (and so loosing -100 bb 100 i think?)

Now, is there a way to understand if the problem it's the similar average pot (so i lose too much/win too little when i call) or it's the too low equity realization?(or maybe both of them).

And also, is there a way to convert this overall -110bb/100 into an ev number?(suppose the pot on flop is around 4.5-5bb)

yes, i know, but i could take some deduction by myself, based on my hm dates, if i understand how to convert them.

For example, if i see that with an hand i have -240 bb 100, i could verify that the problem is that i lose too much big pots (and so i have too much reverse pot odds) or that i realize too little equity (so i lose a lot of small pots)

It will be enough if i understand how to convert this -240bb/100 into an ev number