Theoretical HU Question

[kurosh]

This is X-posted from poker theory because apparently no one reads it and we're having an argument about it on IRC.

You're playing HU against a very aggressive player. When you raise off the button, he will fold the bottom 10% of his hands and 3-bet the rest. When he 3-bets and you 4-bet, he will 5-bet the top 70% of his hands. His 7-betting standards are unknown, he has never done it before in several occasions of 6 bets PF. Postflop, he will continue to bet into you unless he reaches resistance. If he reaches resistance, he will raise, bet and checkraise with his good hands as well as bluff fairly often.

You have 55 on the button. You raise, he 3-bets, you 4-bet, he 5-bets, do you 6-bet?

[SoBeDude]

[ QUOTE ]
This is X-posted from poker theory because apparently no one reads it and we're having an argument about it on IRC.

You're playing HU against a very aggressive player. When you raise off the button, he will fold the bottom 10% of his hands and 3-bet the rest. When he 3-bets and you 4-bet, he will 5-bet the top 70% of his hands. His 7-betting standards are unknown, he has never done it before in several occasions of 6 bets PF. Postflop, he will continue to bet into you unless he reaches resistance. If he reaches resistance, he will raise, bet and checkraise with his good hands as well as bluff fairly often.

You have 55 on the button. You raise, he 3-bets, you 4-bet, he 5-bets, do you 6-bet?

[/ QUOTE ]

Ug, I call the 3bet.

-Scott

[Senor Choppy]

5-betting the top 70% is A LOT of hands. Considering how many of those include 2s, 3s, and 4s, I'm 6-betting.

Getting yourself totally pot committed with such a difficult hand to play seems like an added bonus.

[geormiet]

Since he is playing very loose and aggressive postflop, I would prefer to keep pots small preflop with a hand like 55 that will never be a big favorite.

By doing this in a way you are making his postflop style of play more incorrect. Unless by 4/5/6 betting you will cause him to back off or become afraid of you, I would stop at 3 bets pf, and try to exploit his over-aggressiveness postflop.

[obi---one]

Ug, I call the 3bet.

[BK_]

against a player/robot that will bet/bet/bet every street post flop, imo 6 betting and taking the lead is a mistake. you lose the opportunity to take adavantage of his -EV post flop play. flat calling his 5th bet and either c/r the turn or river, or calling down are both superior than 6 betting and either taking the lead or opening yourself up for a 7th bet.

also i think flat calling pf and c/r somewhere has positive metagame considerations. and if you happen to be incorrect in his range preflop, it will be a much larger mistake if you 6 bet than if you just call. i think there is a decent chance you are overestimating the wide-ness of nw's range here, though even if you are correct just call anyway...

[bobman0330]

6-bet.

For some reason, people seem to think you have a playing advantage postflop. They will change their mind the 60% of the time you see 3-overcard non-set flops. If he's good in addition to laggy, he's going to 3-bet a lot of the time you raise postflop, and you'll be crushed most of those times. By jamming preflop, you can call down when you don't hit a set.

This is actually a pot control question. Postflop, you have seriously difficult questions that are essentially unanswerable. Where are you on the K98 flop? Just call it down. This line becomes more correct the more you jam it preflop, and a big pot will induce him to bluff more, making your calldown even better.

Plus, you have an equity edge. Jam it, because equity is good.

[ggbman]

[ QUOTE ]
This is X-posted from poker theory because apparently no one reads it and we're having an argument about it on IRC.

You're playing HU against a very aggressive player. When you raise off the button, he will fold the bottom 10% of his hands and 3-bet the rest. When he 3-bets and you 4-bet, he will 5-bet the top 70% of his hands. His 7-betting standards are unknown, he has never done it before in several occasions of 6 bets PF. Postflop, he will continue to bet into you unless he reaches resistance. If he reaches resistance, he will raise, bet and checkraise with his good hands as well as bluff fairly often.

You have 55 on the button. You raise, he 3-bets, you 4-bet, he 5-bets, do you 6-bet?

[/ QUOTE ]

i would call the 3 bet, but do you really think anyone 4 bets the top 70% of their hands? I know it's hypothetical, but still, it seems kinda moot.

[kurosh]

When I was playing against this guy HU, he would 4-bet nearly every time I would 3-bet. He showed down garbage sometimes too. I think I'm being generous with the 70%.

[SoBeDude]

[ QUOTE ]
6-bet.

For some reason, people seem to think you have a playing advantage postflop. They will change their mind the 60% of the time you see 3-overcard non-set flops. If he's good in addition to laggy, he's going to 3-bet a lot of the time you raise postflop, and you'll be crushed most of those times. By jamming preflop, you can call down when you don't hit a set.

This is actually a pot control question. Postflop, you have seriously difficult questions that are essentially unanswerable. Where are you on the K98 flop? Just call it down. This line becomes more correct the more you jam it preflop, and a big pot will induce him to bluff more, making your calldown even better.

Plus, you have an equity edge. Jam it, because equity is good.

[/ QUOTE ]

wait, lemme check...

Yup. I just threw up in my mouth.

-Scott

[geormiet]

So what you are saying is: let's build a big pot before the flop in order to make calling down correct on nearly any board?

Someone playing this aggressive postflop, imo, is exploitable. If you build a gigantic pot preflop, you take away your advantage, which is, basically, being able to fold on maybe the worst 25% of boards or so.

[BK_]

[ QUOTE ]


Someone playing this aggressive postflop, imo, is exploitable. If you build a gigantic pot preflop, you take away your advantage, which is, basically, being able to fold on maybe the worst 25% of boards or so.

[/ QUOTE ]

very good point

[SoBeDude]

[ QUOTE ]
So what you are saying is: let's build a big pot before the flop in order to make calling down correct on nearly any board?

Someone playing this aggressive postflop, imo, is exploitable. If you build a gigantic pot preflop, you take away your advantage, which is, basically, being able to fold on maybe the worst 25% of boards or so.

[/ QUOTE ]

What he is really encouraging is that you should make a huge mistake preflop, out of position, with a vulnerable hand, so that your mistakes postflop are smaller mistakes.

This is HORRIBLE thinking.

-Scott

[bobman0330]

[ QUOTE ]
So what you are saying is: let's build a big pot before the flop in order to make calling down correct on nearly any board?

Someone playing this aggressive postflop, imo, is exploitable. If you build a gigantic pot preflop, you take away your advantage, which is, basically, being able to fold on maybe the worst 25% of boards or so.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh, right... let's set ourselves up to make big laydowns HU in massive pots. Which boards are you thinking of where you're a 3-1 dog against the top 70% of his hands? certainly not ONE QUARTER of them.

If you disagree with me, go ahead and disagree, but there's certainly no call to be simultaneously condescending AND wrong... please, pick one or the other.

My answer could be a bit off because i haven't worked out what the top 70% of hands are and checked the equities on pokerstove. The important thing, though, is that you won't be folding until showdown if he's aggro enough to bet nearly all the time. If you're going to do that, you should have just called the 3-bet.

The most important thing you need when you make a laydown is... INFORMATION. you don't have information here, you have a lot of bets. You certainly don't beat lags by folding big pots to them for small amounts of money.

Now, I think it's fairly clear that a fold would be god-awful. Since you can't fold, you will frequently be making mistakes postflop. such as whenever he pairs and you don't have a set. Your goal should be minimizing these mistakes. You do that by making the pot big when it's slightly EV-positive to do so. (I think this analysis is correct even if it's mildly EV-negative, but I'm not sure. If someone could show me pokerstove numbers instead of talking about folding an 11SB pot on the flop a quarter of the time. [Or maybe we're planning to wait until the river, and fold getting 9-1. Clarification?]). In HE4AP, they note that merely betting at every opportunity is not very far away from being the correct strategy. If you're folding TWENTY-FIVE PERCENT of the time in a massive pot, it probably is the correct strategy. This postflop playing edge you're imagining is non-existent. You just call the whole way, putting in raises if you hit a set. It's analogous to a massively overanted game. If your opponent is playing a wide range of cards, you just can't fold, because you're never that far behind his range of hands.

[bobman0330]

[ QUOTE ]

wait, lemme check...

Yup. I just threw up in my mouth.

-Scott

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, i think you just threw up on the mid/high-stakes forum. And tritely too.

[nate1729]

Call the 3-bet? Can we call up Sports Illustrated and get them to print another mockery of you?

[nate1729]

How is raising with the better hand in position preflop a "horrible mistake"?

[bobman0330]

Oh, and if you're looking for actual poker analysis rather than an ineptly delivered cliche:

Using pokercalculator, I found the following as the top70% range (vs. 66). Every pair, every two cards 6 or bigger, every Skalnsky group hand, every A, every K, 85o and better, and a bunch of suited crap. 66 is about a 58% favorite. Given that you have such a big edge, not 6-betting is just horrible. I mean, christ.

(Cut out every hand containing something worse than a 6 (including pairs) and you're still a 52% favorite. Cut out every hand containing a 6 and you're dead even. That's 40% of his hands.)

Against the worst imaginable flop: JT9s, you're a 2-1 dog. With the suited 8 "turn of death," you're 4-1, and on an A river, you're a 10-1 dog. You can finally fold! (change it to AJT98 4-suited and it's a call though).

Just to make it clear: just calling and folding ever is terrible weak-tightness. Just calling and folding and being a jerk about recommending it is being a weak-tight dick.

(Follow the syllogism...)

You, gentlemen, are weak-tight dicks.

[Marnixvdb]

bobman,

You may have misread some posts, because I don't see anyone advocating folding to 25% of the boards after putting 5 or more bets in PF.

Marnix

[piggity]

[ QUOTE ]
Using pokercalculator, I found the following as the top70% range (vs. 66). Every pair, every two cards 6 or bigger, every Skalnsky group hand, every A, every K, 85o and better, and a bunch of suited crap. 66 is about a 58% favorite.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please see my reply in the Poker Theory forum.

First of all, the hand is question is 55, not 66. Secondly, 55 is actually a 75%-77% favorite (pending clarification of the original question). So yeah, 6-bet.

(Note that 66 would be a 84%-86% favorite.)

[bobman0330]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Using pokercalculator, I found the following as the top70% range (vs. 66). Every pair, every two cards 6 or bigger, every Skalnsky group hand, every A, every K, 85o and better, and a bunch of suited crap. 66 is about a 58% favorite.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please see my reply in the Poker Theory forum.

First of all, the hand is question is 55, not 66. Secondly, 55 is actually a 75%-77% favorite (pending clarification of the original question). So yeah, 6-bet.

(Note that 66 would be a 84%-86% favorite.)

[/ QUOTE ]

What range of hands did you use? I skewed my hand selection to make our Hero as disfavored as possible.

[bobman0330]

[ QUOTE ]
bobman,

You may have misread some posts, because I don't see anyone advocating folding to 25% of the boards after putting 5 or more bets in PF.

Marnix

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Someone playing this aggressive postflop, imo, is exploitable. If you build a gigantic pot preflop, you take away your advantage, which is, basically, being able to fold on maybe the worst 25% of boards or so.


[/ QUOTE ]

As I calculated above, you can't be worse than a 2-1 dog on the worst of flops. If he bets every street, you're paying 2.5 BBs, which means the pot has to be smaller than 5 SBs for you to *ever* fold on the flop. Which means you have to LIMP IN FROM LATE POSITION WITH A POCKET PAIR. The 25% figure is too ridiculous to even be addressed. Turns can be as bad as 4-1, so it's possible that you might fold (2 BBs to call, getting 3-1). And you can lay down almost all 4-straight, 4-flush, 5 overcard rivers. That's gotta be at least 25% right?

Anyways, I know I was guilty of exaggerating his argument a bit, but that's only because it was so hilariously wrong. I still laugh every time I think of him saying you can fold postflop A QUARTER OF THE TIME. And I put it all in caps like that. High comedy.

A related funny notion is that he thinks that your advantage against a LAG is folding frequently postflop, and not punishing him when you have an equity edge. A further funny notion is that he thinks you have a big playing advantage when the only way you can tell whether you're way ahead, a little ahead, or drawing dead or nearly so is by guessing and looking at card frequencies.

[piggity]

[ QUOTE ]

What range of hands did you use? I skewed my hand selection to make our Hero as disfavored as possible.

[/ QUOTE ]

Per the OP's specifications, I used the best 70% starting hands in a heads-up game (i.e., top 118 hands as measured by preflop pot equity vs. random hand). If the OP meant top 70% of the top 90% for 5-betting, then of course we would have to use the best 63% instead. My range is bounded by these two cases.

[bobman0330]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

What range of hands did you use? I skewed my hand selection to make our Hero as disfavored as possible.

[/ QUOTE ]

Per the OP's specifications, I used the best 70% starting hands in a heads-up game (i.e., top 118 hands as measured by preflop pot equity vs. random hand). If the OP meant top 70% of the top 90% for 5-betting, then of course we would have to use the best 63% instead. My range is bounded by these two cases.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hmmm. Is this weighted to account for pairs/suited cards being rarer?

[piggity]

[ QUOTE ]
Is this weighted to account for pairs/suited cards being rarer?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. In fact my rankings come from a complete enumeration of all possible opponent hands and board for each possible starting hand.

[BK_]

the most recent posts are assuming this is an all-in preflop type situation. you cant ignore post flop considerations

[kurosh]

As I told you when we were discussing it on IRC, it IS nearly exactly like an all-in PF situation.

[BK_]

[ QUOTE ]
As I told you when we were discussing it on IRC, it IS nearly exactly like an all-in PF situation.

[/ QUOTE ]

this is very very wrong

[piggity]

[ QUOTE ]
you cant ignore post flop considerations

[/ QUOTE ]

This is of course a true statement. However,

[ QUOTE ]
Postflop, he will continue to bet into you unless he reaches resistance. If he reaches resistance, he will raise, bet and checkraise with his good hands as well as bluff fairly often.

[/ QUOTE ]

this description does not at all say the opponent is going to take preflop action into consideration postflop. Ergo, there is no point whatsoever in giving up preflop equity.

I am obviously taking the OP's statements literally, insofar as this was posed as a theory question.

[BK_]

[ QUOTE ]


this description does not at all say the opponent is going to take preflop action into consideration postflop. Ergo, there is no point whatsoever in giving up preflop equity.


[/ QUOTE ]

if hero 6 bets he takes the lead in the hand and therefore the villian cant go bet/bet/bet, and hero cant either c/r him or call him down. this is not good.

[phish]

[ QUOTE ]
Since he is playing very loose and aggressive postflop, I would prefer to keep pots small preflop with a hand like 55 that will never be a big favorite.

By doing this in a way you are making his postflop style of play more incorrect. Unless by 4/5/6 betting you will cause him to back off or become afraid of you, I would stop at 3 bets pf, and try to exploit his over-aggressiveness postflop.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is what I said in the other forum, except you said it so much more succinctly and clearly. I tend to ramble.

[phish]

The point against raising too much pre-flop is not that you will be folding to 25% of flops or turns, but is that on many flops and turns, the best course of action may be to call rather than raise against a tricky aggressive opponent. Not raising means you are giving him a free draw. For that to be a smaller mistake, not reraising with such a vulnerable hand pre-flop may be the best course of action.

[piggity]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


this description does not at all say the opponent is going to take preflop action into consideration postflop. Ergo, there is no point whatsoever in giving up preflop equity.


[/ QUOTE ]

if hero 6 bets he takes the lead in the hand and therefore the villian cant go bet/bet/bet, and hero cant either c/r him or call him down. this is not good.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is not true, at least according to the OP's description of the opponent.

It seems you are assuming a player who has certain characteristics similar to the one described in the OP, but plays with additional intelligence ascribed to "normal" players. I'm assuming a player who plays precisely as described in the OP.

[nate1729]

Huh? You aren't a big favorite over 44-22, A4s-A2s, etc?

It's shocking how many people are advocating just calling the 3-bet.

[bugstud]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Since he is playing very loose and aggressive postflop, I would prefer to keep pots small preflop with a hand like 55 that will never be a big favorite.

By doing this in a way you are making his postflop style of play more incorrect. Unless by 4/5/6 betting you will cause him to back off or become afraid of you, I would stop at 3 bets pf, and try to exploit his over-aggressiveness postflop.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is what I said in the other forum, except you said it so much more succinctly and clearly. I tend to ramble.

[/ QUOTE ]

problem is HU this is really, really dangerous to do. Playing all the time in counterpunch mode is very hard to do well.

[Michael Davis]

The only way this isn't an all-in type problem is if his postflop play changes drastically because the pot was 6-bet instead of 3-bet. But it doesn't, and neither should yours. If some of his postflop calls that would have been incorrect become correct, this is subsidized that you correctly got a bunch more money in preflop as a favorite. There really is no legitimate reason not to go to the felt with a pair against a guy like this unless you are afraid of losing money.

-Michael

[bobman0330]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


this description does not at all say the opponent is going to take preflop action into consideration postflop. Ergo, there is no point whatsoever in giving up preflop equity.


[/ QUOTE ]

if hero 6 bets he takes the lead in the hand and therefore the villian cant go bet/bet/bet, and hero cant either c/r him or call him down. this is not good.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is not true, at least according to the OP's description of the opponent.

It seems you are assuming a player who has certain characteristics similar to the one described in the OP, but plays with additional intelligence ascribed to "normal" players. I'm assuming a player who plays precisely as described in the OP.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good point, but it doesn't actually matter. If your opponent is going to let you take control of the hand, you can gain a ton of equity by taking free cards or value betting as appropriate. Position is good.

[piggity]

[ QUOTE ]
Good point, but it doesn't actually matter.

[/ QUOTE ]

/images/graemlins/confused.gif

[ QUOTE ]
If your opponent is going to let you take control of the hand,

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't think my point made it across. Why don't we agree to disagree.

[BK_]

[ QUOTE ]


This is not true, at least according to the OP's description of the opponent.

It seems you are assuming a player who has certain characteristics similar to the one described in the OP, but plays with additional intelligence ascribed to "normal" players. I'm assuming a player who plays precisely as described in the OP.

[/ QUOTE ]

sure its true. he mentioned that the villian will bet/bet/bet but it is clearly implied that he will not donk bet every street if hero was the one with the last raise pf. the player is neverwin, he wouldnt do stuff like that

[bobman0330]

I'm just saying that even if we're not adhering strictly to the OP description, or if we're misinterpreting it, it doesn't change the analysis, since the change in the villian's behavior we induce by raising will actually be beneficial to us.