10/20 AQs preflop

[sweetjazz]

[ QUOTE ]
btw sweetjazz. I don't put the go to showdown % on my HUD, looks like this is probably a mistake. It's actually something I've not considered in a spot like this, and I love the thought here.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it's a mistake you should definitely fix, but not so much because of preflop spots like this. The go to showdown % is GREAT for deciding when to make thin value bets or not on the later streets.

[QTip]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
btw sweetjazz. I don't put the go to showdown % on my HUD, looks like this is probably a mistake. It's actually something I've not considered in a spot like this, and I love the thought here.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it's a mistake you should definitely fix, but not so much because of preflop spots like this. The go to showdown % is GREAT for deciding when to make thin value bets or not on the later streets.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nice. This is exciting. I made a post about this stat probably 5 months ago trying to see how others used it, and I didn't get anything. This makes perfect sense now. I'm always a little slow picking things up in this game.

Since I've not messed with this stat, would you be kind enough to give me a quick example in a river situation where you examine this stat on a player? I'm assuming if the stat is high (I don't know what that # would be), value bets are easier.

Also, after how many hands does this stat start to become semi-reliable and what do you consider high or low? Does it get affected by other stats like AF does with VPIP?

Thanks.

Edit: I just pulled this out of CMI's work he did with winning SS players.

Went to SD %:

Mean: 31.73
Standard Deviation: 3.11
Min: 26.74
Max: 37.99
A one-half standard deviation range about the mean: 30.18-33.29

So, I'm assuming if I see a stat with low 20s or something of that nature, value betting marginals is not as good. Then if I see this stat in the upper 30s, low 40s or something, value betting marginals is a much easier decision. Do I have it right then?

[W. Deranged]

Jason,

I personally think cold-calling here is really sexy.

-Will

[gh9801]

Given the other players who will most likely make this a multiway pot I think you can't fold this. Just calling is probably best, and play well postflop

[sweetjazz]

I use the stat once I have about 100 hands on a person, a little less if they have a high VPIP (because they have had the same number of chances to see a showdown). You can tell what it should be based on looking at your own stats. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] Definitely over 30% and under 40%. Where in that range often depends on the limit that is being played and whether the game is short or not. Also, it should theoretically go down a tad if your VPIP is higher (because the extra worse hands you see hit the board strong enough to see a showdown less often). I really go after people who see 45% of showdowns or more. That usually means they call down almost all PPs and any pair no matter how much action there is.

I can't think of any specific examples where I have used the stat (though I know I have done it many times). Maybe this is a decent example, though I am not sure.

A guy limps in and I isoraise him with AK. Flop comes K93 rainbow. He checks, I bet, he calls. Turn is 7 completing the rainbow. He checks, I bet, he raises. Let's say that he's aggressive enough that his raise indicates a set, two pair, or a K with a broadway kicker. Without doing the math, assuming he'll play any K9, 97s, K7s, but no other two pair combinations, I think 3-betting has value here. Against a player who could get away from KT or KJ here, the 3-bet goes down in value. But if the player sees 40% of showdowns, I know he isn't folding to the 3-bet. If the player is tricky and capable of folding here, I would probably just call.

Another common situation is when someone donks a river with what appears to be a weak hand (the action is inconsistent with him having a strong hand). If he sees a lot of showdowns, then I suspect his line is more likely to be bet/call rather than bet/fold, compared to someone who sees less showdowns. So I can raise more marginal hands against this opponent.

It's been about a month since I played any limit hold 'em (outside of a few live 3/6 hands), so I have to apologize for being a bit hazy on good examples. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[QTip]

That's great, thanks.

Holy cow! I've recently lost my db, so I only have 60k hands here in which I've run quite poorly. I've had 2 of my largest downswings in this run and another one at 150bb for a total of 1.07BB/100.

In this stretch my:

wtsd% was 28.86%

W$DS% was 52.47%

fold to river bet % was 54.43%

WOW...I've not looked at this for a while. This certainly looks bad.

[sweetjazz]

Seems like you might have been folding a bit too much there. Depends on the limits you are at. When I run bad, my stats tend to be the opposite. The percentage of showdowns I see stays the same, but my winrate at showdown plummits. I am not sure which is closer to optimal. Seeing less than 30% of showdowns in a medium stakes game could lead to being run over a bit. (At the same time, I think fears about being run over are often exagerrated.) You might also have missed a lot of draws lately, which would partly explain your recent stats.

In my last 20K hands (mostly played in October), I felt like I was playing well and running okay to good. I played mostly 10/20 with a little 15/30 added in, a mix of full and 6max with slighlty more 6max. My cumulative stats were:

Went to SD: 37.63%
Won $ at SD: 53.08%
Folded to river bet: 33.69%

I post these only to give you an idea of some stats that are (hopefully) somewhere in the neighborhood of optimal play (though not necessarily that close).

And, as you no doubt know, thinking about particular hands and situations is the key, and stats will usually work themselves out. But if I had datamined your recent hands and had you seeing less than 30% of showdowns, I'd be semibluffing raising you very liberally on the turn and following through almost always on the river until I saw you showdown a marginal hand.

Good luck at the tables. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[MarkL444]

[ QUOTE ]
i don't think it really matters all that much, but I think raising may be the worst of the 3 options.

[/ QUOTE ]

it does matter. 100 hands is way too small to thinnk about his stats almost at all. he could easily be a 15-20 pfr but just had a somewhat slow 100 hands.

edit- i see now you werent responding to me, but whatev

[goofball]

I raise. Even though he's a 5 you only have 100 hands on him and the 65 is still good times. I'm pretty sure I rasie this almost all the time against almost all of the opponents.

Folding sucks, we have too much hand and hopeully gain way too much postflop to fold. Calling is ok, but not really. First, we don't have initiative, second we put ourselves in a position of having to improve to win the pot, third, we don't have initiative.

I think it's raise, call, fold in that order. Maybe 80/15/5

[BigEndian]

Call/raise depending on previous hands observed/involved with. I would usually just call.

- Jim