Playing huge draw on the flop

Scouser in Dub

SnG yesterday though HH not on this PC

Villain has raised my blind a number of times from the button without me playing back at him. Have seen him throw out pot size CB's when checked to him on the flop and also seen him fold to a half pot lead into him

Effective stacks 3000 and BB100 Level 3

folded into the button he raises 300 SB folds I look down at J9h and call Pot 800

flop gives me a monster draw 8h10s3h I have OESD and Flush draw

I don't want him to fold if I lead into him and expecting him to bet if I check I check looking to CRAI

Standard?

BigCityBanker

Why do you want him to come along for the ride?

Push now and take down the pot, if he calls ur in good shape!

Scouser in Dub

I still think he can fold if I raise, if he bets light on the flop he can lay it down if he doesn't I reckon on being a favourite with 15 outs on two streets I want to get the money in on the flop as my chance of hitting reduces drastically if the turn is a brick.

ntlbell

how is there 800 in the pot?

Pot is 650 correct?

BCB pushing 2.7k into this pot is madness.

gocall01

I'm in with BCB on this.
Yes, you have a shed load of outs.
Push now, take pot, if called, huge percentage to hit one of the outs.

In this situation if you have a made hand and you expect the raise from the button if checked to, then crai.

This is my line 80% of time but I "crazy Ivan" sometimes just to change it up.
I might use your line here for that purpose from time to time.

There is more to pushing than just getting the pot.
Sending the meesage that you are not the one to be picked on is as important in this instance IMHO.

BigCityBanker

NTL - I see I have read it wrong. I thought preflop was raised to 800.

Scouser in Dub

sorry he raised 300 to 400 there is 850 in the pot with the SB we effective stacks here are then 2600

cardshark202

Easy fold preflop. The call there was a huge mistake. As played crai is best.

5starpool

Scouser in Dub wrote:

sorry he raised 300 to 400 there is 850 in the pot with the SB we effective stacks here are then 2600

For consistency it would be best if you specify the total amount of the bet. This would clarify whether it was raised to 300 or by 300. In this case it appears to be by 300 to 400.

Cardsharks line is probably how most people would play this, myself usually included.

Scouser in Dub

yeah it was raised by

I usually would put this down pre but he had been at my blind on three orbits since he had been the button to my BB and I had seen him lay down to a C-Bet on the flop

I kinda got shouted down for CRAI on a draw but I thought it made sense

Gholimoli

OP,
You said that you don’t want villain to fold his hand, why not?
Your hand is J high here!

For those who say shoving is not good but CRAI is good, this is crazy talk.
When you CRAI he will have to call with a lot of hands that are currently ahead of you which he would have dropped had you just shoved.
Also CRAI depends on the element of villain betting if you check which is not always the case and should he check behind then your equity decreases hugely on the turn, which is very bad.
The object here should be to get as much money in to the pot as possible on the flop while your equity is possibly 50%+ .a shove here increases your EV (not pot equity) as he will fold a lot of the time allowing you to take the pot.

ntlbell

Gholimoli wrote:

OP,
You said that you don’t want villain to fold his hand, why not?
Your hand is J high here!

For those who say shoving is not good but CRAI is good, this is crazy talk.
When you CRAI he will have to call with a lot of hands that are currently ahead of you which he would have dropped had you just shoved.
Also CRAI depends on the element of villain betting if you check which is not always the case and should he check behind then your equity decreases hugely on the turn, which is very bad.
The object here should be to get as much money in to the pot as possible on the flop while your equity is possibly 50%+ .a shove here increases your EV (not pot equity) as he will fold a lot of the time allowing you to take the pot.

He's back!

When the pot was what I originally thoguht 650 do you shove?

What the pot was 400 do you still shove?

Gholimoli

ntlbell wrote:

He's back!

When the pot was what I originally thoguht 650 do you shove?

What the pot was 400 do you still shove?

as long as the pot is above 0,then when you have 50%+ pot equity means a shove is profitable .
this is purely your pot equity .add to that the times wher he folds and your over all EV of a shove increases.

Shadowless

Maybe i'm just a little slow today but isn't it a good thing if villan calls our CRAI? Hero is the favourite in this spot no?

cardshark202

Gholimoli wrote:

OP,
You said that you don’t want villain to fold his hand, why not?
Your hand is J high here!

For those who say shoving is not good but CRAI is good, this is crazy talk.
When you CRAI he will have to call with a lot of hands that are currently ahead of you which he would have dropped had you just shoved.
Also CRAI depends on the element of villain betting if you check which is not always the case and should he check behind then your equity decreases hugely on the turn, which is very bad.
The object here should be to get as much money in to the pot as possible on the flop while your equity is possibly 50%+ .a shove here increases your EV (not pot equity) as he will fold a lot of the time allowing you to take the pot.

CRAI has way more EV than an openshove. When we open shove we lose a cbet which according to the OP is a cert so when we open-shove he will only call with hands that are ahead of us whereas if he cbets and we shove and he feels committed then any of those hands are probably an equity dog vs us and the rest of the hands he folds.

EDIT: Welcome back gholi

Hitman Actual

cardshark202 wrote:

CRAI has way more EV than an openshove. When we open shove we lose a cbet which according to the OP is a cert so when we open-shove he will only call with hands that are ahead of us whereas if he cbets and we shove and he feels committed then any of those hands are probably an equity dog vs us and the rest of the hands he folds.

EDIT: Welcome back gholi

I'm with cardshark on this one, CRAI is almost definately more profitable than pushing against a serial c-bettor. Haven't time to look at any maths though.

Gholimoli

cardshark202 wrote:

CRAI has way more EV than an openshove. When we open shove we lose a cbet which according to the OP is a cert so when we open-shove he will only call with hands that are ahead of us whereas if he cbets and we shove and he feels committed then any of those hands are probably an equity dog vs us and the rest of the hands he folds.

EDIT: Welcome back gholi

this is wrong.

as i said a CRAI depends totally on the actions of villain and you can never be certain what his actions are .if you think there is 80% chance of his betting if you check then the EV calculation of CRAI should take in to account the 20% where he dosent.

also when you check and villain bets,then he would almost always be prised in calling our CR.
this is good for times when we have 50%+ equity but as this is not the always the case then by doing this we lose alot of EV on our FE.
for example if we have exactly 50% equity then shoving has higher EV than CRAI as CRAI we are grtd to lose the pot 50% (becuase we are assuming he always calls) but with the same 50% equity if we shove we can with the pot certain % of the time + when we get called we win the pot 50% .
these two combined will have a higher EV.

cardshark202

Gholimoli wrote:

this is wrong.

as i said a CRAI depends totally on the actions of villain and you can never be certain what his actions are .if you think there is 80% chance of his betting if you check then the EV calculation of CRAI should take in to account the 20% where he dosent.

also when you check and villain bets,then he would almost always be prised in calling our CR.
this is good for times when we have 50%+ equity but as this is not the always the case then by doing this we lose alot of EV on our FE.
for example if we have exactly 50% equity then shoving has higher EV than CRAI as CRAI we are grtd to lose the pot 50% (becuase we are assuming he always calls) but with the same 50% equity if we shove we can with the pot certain % of the time + when we get called we win the pot 50% .
these two combined will have a higher EV.

No.

We definitely have way more than 50% equity against his range.

Hitman Actual

Gholimoli wrote:

for example if we have exactly 50% equity then shoving has higher EV than CRAI as CRAI we are grtd to lose the pot 50% (becuase we are assuming he always calls) but with the same 50% equity if we shove we can with the pot certain % of the time + when we get called we win the pot 50% .

You definately can't assume this. He c-bets a lot, so he has air a lot of the time. So you check, he bets pot, you push. I know he's getting great odds to call (~3/1), but he folds most of the time when he has nothing. Even with two overcards it's a marginal call for him. So when he folds to the CRAI, you pick up the extra 800 that he c-bets. So:

lenny_leonard wrote:

if we CRAI we can with the pot certain % of the time + when we get called we win the pot 50%

There mightn't be much between the two, but I think CRAI offers a higher EV.

Gholimoli

lenny_leonard wrote:

There mightn't be much between the two, but I think CRAI offers a higher EV.

no it dosent.

Hitman Actual

Gholimoli wrote:

no it dosent.

Categorical proof there then. :rolleyes: Gholi is definately back! Show me some maths and I'll believe you.

Scouser in Dub

only if the opponent in this hand can never lay down to a CRAI. if he is getting 2.5/1 but has none of it he can lay down he has C-bet every flop checked into him on the button 1800 is still playable at 50/100

I still thought he could lay down the worst hands that he would c-bet with

5starpool

Gholi, I really doubt that open pushing 2600 into an 850 pot is the best action here. AhTh or a set is the worst case scenario for us. Even AhKh is not the worst holding as we still have 12 outs on the turn to lead.

Welcome back, glad to see you have learnt some humility during your break.

ntlbell

lenny_leonard wrote:

Categorical proof there then. :rolleyes: Gholi is definately back! Show me some maths and I'll believe you.

Lenny you're usually pretty nifty with the maths any chance of showing us some of your skills here?


<I'm not taking the piss>

Gholimoli

we assume the following :
1.we have 50%+ pot equity on the flop .this is based on the fact that we have 15 outs which means we have to catch one of them to win which means if we dont we lose the hand .



2.villain bets a high % of times when checked to .we say 80% .we cant possibly say he bets 100% as there is no way we can be sure what his action is going to be.

3.the pot is a number=p and each player has a stack of =4p .

now if we shove the flop and get called x% then we win 5p x/2% and lose 4p x/2% .
also if he calls x% that means he folds (100-x)% of the time in which case we pick up 1p so the over all EV is

EV = (x/2 )x 1p + (100-x) x p

what the above suggest is that we have alot to gain by him actually folding his hand.
another an even more important point about the above equation is that its always + no matter what x is which means your EV of this move is always positive .this is very important becuase it means villain cant do anything to change that so if he calls all the time or folds all the time or calls more than he folds or folds more than he calls ,you will always have a +EV.

now consider CRAI:

you check and villain bets pot which is P .
villain does this 80% of the time and checks behind 20% of the time.
now what im going to do (cuz its easier) is see how much we lose EV on thoes 20% that he checks behind.

just to remin you we assumed that we have 50% equity on the flop but we have to catch and if we dont we will lose.

now on the turn our equity will be halfed which means 25% instead of 50%.

from here on we have significant disadvantage on any money going in .

the other 80% will have the same EV as when we shove as all the money goes in on the flop .

so basically CRAI has the same EV as shove minus the % of the time where villain checks behind.

there is however one thing.
the % of times when villain Cbets the flop but folds to a jam.
we can earn an additional p(assuming villain bets a full p with a Cbet) when this happens.
however i dont think this is that much at all considering villain will be getting 2:1 on his money (i think ) to call ,making a call very likely.

i hope this makes sense and im sure i will be corrected if my math is wrong but basically what im trying to say is:

1.we want all the money going in on the flop as we have 50% equity .
shoving would make sure this happens while CR does not.

2.we gain alot of EV by villain folding as well which makes a shove an unexploitable play (we are happy if he calls and happy if he folds) but he can exploit us by checking behind on the flop if we check and then by betting the turn.

Hitman Actual

My interpretation:

Pot = 850, stacks = 2600 each.

---

Open Push
When we open push, assume villain folds 75% of the time. Also, we're 50/50 if the money goes in. So the EV is:

EV_openpush = 0.75(850) + 0.25[0.5(3450) + 0.5(-2600)] = 743.75

---

CRAI
For CRAI, assume villain c-bets pot 80% of the time, and he calls the AI twice as often as an open-push (so he folds 37.5% of the time). So the EV of CRAI is:

EV_crai = 0.8[0.375(1700) + 0.625[0.5(3450) + 0.5(-2600)]] +0.2[???villain_checks_behind???]

= 903.125 + 0.2[???villain_checks_behind???]

The "0.2[???villain_checks???]" part is a bit tricky, but I doubt it's any worse than neutral EV. If we go into check-fold mode when we miss (3 times in 4), then this part is obviously 0. But when we hit something (the other 1 time in 4) and get the money in, we win sometimes (either uncontested or with the best hand), and lose sometimes, but I doubt it's -EV (our hand is still a very good hand!). So assume EV_crai = 903.125

---

So by my interpretation, EV_crai > EV_openpush

mdwexford

I much prefer a CRAI here, its possible the villian has complete air and unless he has a set were a fav, by pushing your not giving him an opportunity to make a continuation bet and your scaring off anything else bar an overpair, you want him to put money in the pot.

If you check you're more than likely getting another bet out of him and its possible he might feel commited after his flop bet with something like A-10 etc

cardshark202

Gholimoli wrote:

we assume the following :
1.we have 50%+ pot equity on the flop .this is based on the fact that we have 15 outs which means we have to catch one of them to win which means if we dont we lose the hand .



2.villain bets a high % of times when checked to .we say 80% .we cant possibly say he bets 100% as there is no way we can be sure what his action is going to be.

3.the pot is a number=p and each player has a stack of =4p .

now if we shove the flop and get called x% then we win 5p x/2% and lose 4p x/2% .
also if he calls x% that means he folds (100-x)% of the time in which case we pick up 1p so the over all EV is

EV = (x/2 )x 1p + (100-x) x p

what the above suggest is that we have alot to gain by him actually folding his hand.
another an even more important point about the above equation is that its always + no matter what x is which means your EV of this move is always positive .this is very important becuase it means villain cant do anything to change that so if he calls all the time or folds all the time or calls more than he folds or folds more than he calls ,you will always have a +EV.

now consider CRAI:

you check and villain bets pot which is P .
villain does this 80% of the time and checks behind 20% of the time.
now what im going to do (cuz its easier) is see how much we lose EV on thoes 20% that he checks behind.

just to remin you we assumed that we have 50% equity on the flop but we have to catch and if we dont we will lose.

now on the turn our equity will be halfed which means 25% instead of 50%.

from here on we have significant disadvantage on any money going in .

the other 80% will have the same EV as when we shove as all the money goes in on the flop .

so basically CRAI has the same EV as shove minus the % of the time where villain checks behind.

there is however one thing.
the % of times when villain Cbets the flop but folds to a jam.
we can earn an additional p(assuming villain bets a full p with a Cbet) when this happens.
however i dont think this is that much at all considering villain will be getting 2:1 on his money (i think ) to call ,making a call very likely.

i hope this makes sense and im sure i will be corrected if my math is wrong but basically what im trying to say is:

1.we want all the money going in on the flop as we have 50% equity .
shoving would make sure this happens while CR does not.

2.we gain alot of EV by villain folding as well which makes a shove an unexploitable play (we are happy if he calls and happy if he folds) but he can exploit us by checking behind on the flop if we check and then by betting the turn.

Wow this is so wrong I don't know where to start. I'm multi-tabling atm but I will have to tear this apart later. Sorry gholi but it will have to be done

RoundTower

I think this is a pretty obvious check, he has the perfect amount behind and will fold a lot, also you don't mind a free card if he checks behind.

cardshark202

Gholi,

How do you come up with the fact that the CRAI has the same EV as a shove - the times he checks behind? It seems like you just made it up. Lenny's post shows things pretty clearly and also shows how not checking in this spot is actually a huge mistake. We must also take into account that his calling range once we shove will actually be tighter than if we CRAI so our hand not only performs better vs his calling range after our CRAI, but we also win more after he folds his cbet.

Also, when you say the crai is exploitable you are quite wrong because no way does he check behind fearing a crai most of the time, not going on this read.

Ste05

Welcome back Gholi, although I think you're a bit rusty TBH.

I'd also be very much in Cardshark's corner here too. I have a feeling this thread will get quite long and interesting but without doing any of the maths myself yet, I'd certainly think that Lenny's calculations are much closer to the reality of the situation.

It's not very often (if ever) correct to Open push 3x the Pot.

Hectorjelly

checking is much better here. A free card is fine because if that happens we can commit ourselves on the turn if we miss. If he pushes over a bet on the turn then he has to have a hand which he was slowplaying on the flop, so would of called our push anyway. (Unless he turns something)

jimbling

interesting thread.... and welcome back Gholi.
I much prefer the CRAI here. Especially with the read on the villain.

phantom_lord

I much prefer a crai too, lets gang up on the noob!

jimbling

phantom_lord wrote:

I much prefer a crai too, lets gang up on the noob!

Gholimoli

HJ,
I disagree with what your saying here.
“free card is not bad as we can commit our self on the turn if we miss”.
I don’t see how this can be right at all.
Your equity has halved from flop to turn, also another card has fallen that could have improved villains hand and now you are saying its good to commit our self’s here as oppose to the flop where we have double the equity????
We can be severely punished by a bet from villain on the turn (depending on how good villain is).
Just to make this simple suppose on the flop we have exactly 50% pot equity against a villain who has an over pair.
On the turn we assume no one improves.
Then our equity has been reduced to just 25%.
What this is means is that we can no longer get our remaining stack in on the turn profitably as if we do we win 4P 25% and lose 3P 75%.

So if the hand goes check, check on the flop:
If we bet out on the turn and he shoves then we are getting the bad side of it.
If we check on the turn and he bets and we shove and he calls, we are getting bad side of it.

Ste:
There is nothing wrong with shoving 3x pot when you have 50% equity and the pot is not empty.
Basically if you get called you will get more than your investment 50% of time by just claiming your equity and you will win the pot when you don’t get called so in terms of profitably its profitable.
Now whether or not there is an alternative, more profitable strategy than shoving, well that depends on other aspects.

Basically what im trying to say is with this kind of equity my priority is to
Get it all in on the flop.
Every one pretty much seems to agree with this and the disagreement seems to be the method, which best accomplishes this.
I think both have advantages an disadvantages:
With CRAI you will gain an extra bet the times where he will cbet and fold to a shove.
But there is also the chance of him checking behind and betting on the turn.
With shoving you gain the pot by him folding but you lose out on the times where you could have picked a Cbet.

gocall01

This is the type of discussion/arguement I read boards for.
This is very informative for both the experienced and inexperinced player.
It shows the thought processes which are required (whether you agree with them or not) to improve as a player.

I said it earlier, I would follow Gholi's line here, not because I understand all the maths in working out the +EV or -EV but because it is what I would be most comfortable with.

If all players played the exact same way it would just be predicatble.
Obviuosly if you can guarentee a certain set of circumstances the EV can be calculated exactly but due to the nature of the game that is impossible.
No matter how good the read you can never to 100% sure of another player's next move, you can try to infleunce it but (as NickOD would say) "that is all".

Anyway on with the discussion and maths lessons...

Hitman Actual

Gholi, using an overpair as a simple example doesn't hold here. As you often say yourself, you have to consider his range of holdings, and I think we can assume that the villains range is relatively wide here (cos if he's agressive enough to c-bet a lot, he probably raises with a wide range preflop too). Most of the time he misses the flop (or at least flops something that can't call a push), but will c-bet anyway.

Also, if he HAS an overpair, the pot plays out differently, in that he always calls your push, nearly always bets this board when checked to, and nearly always calls your CRAI. So the money goes in anyway. But it doesn't matter; it's his range that you have to consider.

Also, what you're arguing is for the times when this villain doesn't c-bet, which isn't too often. The dominant factor in the EV calculation comes from the (large) % of the time when he does c-bet.

I reckon if you picked any holding that villain might have, and compare push and CRAI, CRAI will show a higher EV.

Hectorjelly

Gholi, say he has AA and isnt folding. If the flop goes check check and then we get all in on the turn if we miss, there is no difference between getting all in on the flop. He wasnt folding either way, and we still get to see both cards. Sometimes we get it in as a dog, sometimes weve hit one of our outs and he gets it in as a dog, it doesnt matter much.

If he checks the flop then we lead out for the whole pot on the turn (or push if you like) and he can only call with hand which he slowplayed on the flop. I wouldnt be very worried with the the turn giving him a card that will make him commit, there are a lot of cards that him both of us but give us the strong hand.

Gholimoli

Hectorjelly wrote:

Gholi, say he has AA and isnt folding. If the flop goes check check and then we get all in on the turn if we miss, there is no difference between getting all in on the flop. He wasnt folding either way, and we still get to see both cards. Sometimes we get it in as a dog, sometimes weve hit one of our outs and he gets it in as a dog, it doesnt matter much.

i really dont get this HJ.
in mind there is a huge difference between the two example you have said here and its not even close.
i take your example :
he has AA and make it simple we say we have 50% equity against his AA on the flop.

now we check,and he checks behind and now we are playing the turn.
we have not improved on the turn and nor has he.
how can you say getting it all in here is now the same as getting it all on the flop.
we have much less equity here so the more we get in the more we lose.
you say "we get to see both cards" but getting to see both cards on its own is worhtless,its the chances we have to improve our hand that counts not the act of seeing the card.
im sure you know this but i actually cant understand why you would make this comment at all?how can you say
you say sometimes we get it in as dog as sometimes we hit our card.
i really dont understand your logic.
the times that we dont hit are of great importance it the overall EV .
can you please explian what makes you think that getting it on the flop is the same as getting in on the turn when we miss,using the AA example and 50% equity on the flop??

Hitman Actual

Because the money was going to go in on the flop anyway. So when we get a "free" card, and the money goes in on the turn, we still get from flop to river seeing both cards, and putting in the same amount of money. If you don't intend for the money to go in, then it's a different scenario.

opr

Gholimoli wrote:

i really dont get this HJ.
in mind there is a huge difference between the two example you have said here and its not even close.
i take your example :
he has AA and make it simple we say we have 50% equity against his AA on the flop.

now we check,and he checks behind and now we are playing the turn.
we have not improved on the turn and nor has he.
how can you say getting it all in here is now the same as getting it all on the flop.
we have much less equity here so the more we get in the more we lose.
you say "we get to see both cards" but getting to see both cards on its own is worhtless,its the chances we have to improve our hand that counts not the act of seeing the card.
im sure you know this but i actually cant understand why you would make this comment at all?how can you say
you say sometimes we get it in as dog as sometimes we hit our card.
i really dont understand your logic.
the times that we dont hit are of great importance it the overall EV .
can you please explian what makes you think that getting it on the flop is the same as getting in on the turn when we miss,using the AA example and 50% equity on the flop??

This is very robotic thinking but ......

Two things happen if it goes check check

1. On the turn we hit our card about 34% of the time and get it all in with AA and win 100% of the time.

2. On the turn we miss 66% of the time but get it all in with AA and still hit 34% of the time meaning we win about 22% of the time.

Overall our EV is about 55% so it does not change as long as the action does not change. As HJ said for him to call on the turn he was more than likely going to call on the flop so it makes no difference. Even if he is calling cause he improved on the turn chances are we also improved and are ahead so it ok.

One thing ........ Do we not think he calls on the turn much more often than he would on the flop when its a blank ? Our bet does look very odd and he may call with much more weak holdings than he would have on the flop.

Opr

Gholimoli

lenny_leonard wrote:

Because the money was going to go in on the flop anyway. So when we get a "free" card, and the money goes in on the turn, we still get from flop to river seeing both cards, and putting in the same amount of money. If you don't intend for the money to go in, then it's a different scenario.

Lenny this doesn’t make sense.
The reason why you want the money go in on the flop is because it’s the flop.
The reason for this is that you have 50% equity.
The reason for this is because you have x number of outs with TWO cards to come.
If you have x equity with two cards to come then you will have x/2 with one card to come.

Now what your saying is because we intended the money to go in on the flop, it’s the same thing going in on the turn as we get to see both cards.
When money goes in on the flop we cant possibly lose.
Basically for a pot size of 0 <=P then our EV is always 0 <= EV.
Basically for what your saying to hold true the pot has grow from P to 2P(our equity in the pot is divided by two so the pot has grow times two to have the same equation).
Does this make sense?

Hectorjelly

Gholi, sometimes the turn will improve our hand (like we hit a pair) and our equity will increase to 50% against an OP. Sometimes we will make a flush or a straight on the turn and get all in with an equity of 100%. All of this has to be balanced with the times that you get all in with only a 30% equity. It all balances out in the end if both players are determined to get it all in at some stage, if you cant see this then I dont think there is any further discusion to be had. If the money is destined to go in anyway, it makes no difference at what stage it goes in at as your chance of winning the pot is the same at each juncture. The cards arent affected by what happens in the pot.


Also villain checking behind an op on such a dangerous board isnt going to happen much anyway.



OPR I think an open push signals a draw more than any other line we can take

Hitman Actual

Here's the science bit:

Assume villain has AcAs, and we both get all the money in at the same time, either flop or turn. Our hand is J9h, board is Ts8h3h, Pot = 850, stacks = 2600.

If the money goes in on the flop, we're a 56.3% favourite.

EV_ai_flop = 0.563(3450) + 0.447(-2600) = 780.15

---

If the money goes in on the turn:

We have 15 clean outs, so we improve 33.3% of the time. When this happens villain is drawing dead. The other 66% of the time we're 66:34 dog (ignore the times when villain can improve to a house for simplicity).

EV_ai_turn = 0.333(3450) + 0.666[(0.34*3450) + (0.66*-2600)] = 787.3

---

So the EV is the same (the small error is due to rounding up/down of figures, pokerstove inaccuracies, etc. Edit: also, ignoring the house possibilities has an effect).

opr

Gholimoli wrote:

Basically for what your saying to hold true the pot has grow from P to 2P(our equity in the pot is divided by two so the pot has grow times two to have the same equation).
Does this make sense?

The second pot never exsisted if the first one does and vice versa. So p never has to grow to 2P

Opr

Ste05

Gholi, as has been said above by HJ, OPR and Lenny, I think the part that you seem to be ignoring are the times when it goes check check, and we hit an out.

As in, when you say, let our equity on the flop = x, (with 2 cards to come), it is NOT x/2 on the turn because we have one less card. You need to include the 27% of the time we have increased our equity to 100%. HJ and opr have already covered this point well so I'll leave it there,

These are for the times when, the hand is "Destined" to be All-In either on the turn or Flop and so it doesn't really matter what we do, i.e. AA, KK, QQ, etc. (i.e. the higher end of his range) These hands play themselves and don't need to be worried about too much.

Where the EV is higher with a check as opposed to an Open Push is the times when we check, he continuation bets (with the lower end of his range, which is the much larger proportion of his range) we push and he folds. In those cases we make mucho mucho more money than open pushing. And these times make the EV of a CRAI miles higher than the EV of an Open Push. It's just the gap concept.

If we look at his range, as has been said above it doesn't matter what we do against the higher end of his range. We win 50% of the time and lose 50% of the time, the only thing that changes is when the money goes in, (a) on the flop, (with an open push or a CRAI) or (b) on the turn. the % of times we win are the same.

Then we have to look at the rest of his range, the lower part of this range, will Fold to an open push always, but, some of the time (more than 0%) will make a continuation bet and fold to a CRAI. Every % point above 0 is good for us here.

Then we look at the hands that will fold to an open push, but yet will make a continuation bet and feel priced in and so call our CRAI. In these hands we win at least 50% of the time so the Variance is slightly higher but the EV is basically neutral as we don't mind getting in as a marginal favourite.

The final category is the times it goes check check, against the lower of the Villains range, I'd have to go on for another age to go through this point but basically it's not desirable but the Free card helps us ~27% if the time so we only need to worry about the other ~73% of the time. And basically I don't think it changes much in EV terms.

opr

Ste05 wrote:

Gholi, as has been said above by HJ, OPR and Lenny, I think the part that you seem to be ignoring are the times when it goes check check, and we hit an out.

As in, when you say, let our equity on the flop = x, (with 2 cards to come), it is NOT x/2 on the turn because we have one less card. You need to include the 27% of the time we have increased our equity to 100%. HJ and opr have already covered this point well so I'll leave it there,

These are for the times when, the hand is "Destined" to be All-In either on the turn or Flop and so it doesn't really matter what we do, i.e. AA, KK, QQ, etc. (i.e. the higher end of his range) These hands play themselves and don't need to be worried about too much.

Where the EV is higher with a check as opposed to an Open Push is the times when we check, he continuation bets (with the lower end of his range, which is the much larger proportion of his range) we push and he folds. In those cases we make mucho mucho more money than open pushing. And these times make the EV of a CRAI miles higher than the EV of an Open Push. It's just the gap concept.

If we look at his range, as has been said above it doesn't matter what we do against the higher end of his range. We win 50% of the time and lose 50% of the time, the only thing that changes is when the money goes in, (a) on the flop, (with an open push or a CRAI) or (b) on the turn. the % of times we win are the same.

Then we have to look at the rest of his range, the lower part of this range, will Fold to an open push always, but, some of the time (more than 0%) will make a continuation bet and fold to a CRAI. Every % point above 0 is good for us here.

Then we look at the hands that will fold to an open push, but yet will make a continuation bet and feel priced in and so call our CRAI. In these hands we win at least 50% of the time so the Variance is slightly higher but the EV is basically neutral as we don't mind getting in as a marginal favourite.

The final category is the times it goes check check, against the lower of the Villains range, I'd have to go on for another age to go through this point but basically it's not desirable but the Free card helps us ~27% if the time so we only need to worry about the other ~73% of the time. And basically I don't think it changes much in EV terms.

Very good post.

Opr

Scouser in Dub

Thanks to all who contributed to this. I haven't posted the results as I don't think they are important. This thread has pretty much confirmed what I thought. My own plan pretty much hinged on him betting the flop which was shortsighted I wasn't sure what my line would have been had he checked behind as I wasn't expecting him to.

So in conclusion fold preflop CRAI on the flop if he checks behind shove turn.

cardshark202

Scouser in Dub wrote:

Thanks to all who contributed to this. I haven't posted the results as I don't think they are important. This thread has pretty much confirmed what I thought. My own plan pretty much hinged on him betting the flop which was shortsighted I wasn't sure what my line would have been had he checked behind as I wasn't expecting him to.

So in conclusion fold preflop CRAI on the flop if he checks behind bet turn.

.