Thoughts on why the solver X flop here? (2 Viewers)

[boltonguy]

I was playing Snowie in training mode and got an error when cbetting this flop. I was surprised so decided to put it in the solver and not surprisingly got the same result.

Hero RFI in CO and BB calls. Hero cbet 1/2 pot and that is incorrect.
I think the K hits my RFI range and with the FD I want to bet 1/2 pot. But Snowie likes a X 97% of the time.

GTO+ is X this flop 46% and betting 54%. With our exact hand, solver X 92% and bets 1/4 pot and 1/2 pot 3% and 5% respectively.

When I put our hand vs BB range in Equilab I see that we are at an equity disadvantage here. My gut tells me that this is because BB has more heart draws in his range but we should be ahead at the top of range as the only player with KK and equal with 77 & 55. We also have more Kx with AKs, KQs & AKo in range while we have BB raising these hands pre so not in range on the flop.

Anyone have any thoughts? I would think that if BB has more FDs than we want to charge those hands. Most of the AXs combos with the BDFD are betting here, granted most of the red color is betting AXs (hearts) but the diamond combos are betting with reasonable freq:

For example Ad9d is cbetting flop 72% "preferring" half pot but also choosing pot at 2x the frequency of 1/4 pot:

We're probably not getting better hands to fold here but I think there is a big chunk of V's range that we are ahead of that will call a cbet here (below: suited hands that are hearts plus Ax; no 7 or 5 so no pair). So do we not want to get value from these hands at AJdd? We do want to get value with A8dd. Anyone have insight into the difference?

Compared to V's pre-flop calling range:

 

[boltonguy]

This is the solver's response to a 1/2 pot cbet (Snowie folded).

Maybe with A8s I am getting better Ax to fold with 1/2 pot cbet (e.g. A9, AT, AJ and AQ all fold at some freq) but with AJs I am not getting many folds from better hands so when called I am in pretty bad shape, hence the preference for the smaller sizing or X with AJs?

 

[bergs]

Is there a snowie for drunk stuck guy who wants to plow it in bad and get there? Asking for a friend.

 

[CraigT78]

Is there a snowie for drunk stuck guy who wants to plow it in bad and get there? Asking for a friend.

+1

 

[DoubleEagle]

What language is this?

 

[boltonguy]

Something like this?

 

[bergs]

AJ? I don’t think you understand the vast expansive vista of Craig’s and my range when we’re 12 margaritas deep and it’s 2:06pm. AJ isn’t at the top of our range. AJ is like perfection, like the perfect golf swing - oft strived for but unbotainable.

Please give us 58sc and assume we think it’s suited. Can Snowie operate at that high level of thinking?

 

[CraigT78]

AJ? I don’t think you understand the vast expansive vista of Craig’s and my range when we’re 12 margaritas deep and it’s 2:06pm. AJ isn’t at the top of our range. AJ is like perfection, like the perfect golf swing - oft strived for but unbotainable.

Please give us 58sc and assume we think it’s suited. Can Snowie operate at that high level of thinking?

The real question is, what game are we playing that only has two cards? Can I draw?

 

[bergs]

The real question is, what game are we playing that only has two cards? Can I draw?

I just assumed we lost the other 3 but they’ll turn up.

 

[perfectjawnz]

Initial thoughts: The K does hit your RFI range harder, but on this flop texture, specifically when its CO/BU vs BB, I think BB actually hits this harder. While you can have KK for top set and backdoor flush draws, they are overall a lot smaller portion of your range compared to BB 2pairs, mid/bottom sets, FDs, OESD and gutshots (and just plain pairs in general). When you bet half, you're probably getting called by a pair (with potentially only one out unless you turn the BDFD).

This hand in particular is has enough equity where it doesn't mind checking, as it feels terrible to get x/r here, where as something like A8/A9s can just fold here (unless hh or maybe dd). A9/A8s also provide interesting blockers, where you're blocking some straight draws, which may be another reason why its betting + the fact you can get better AX to fold.

You mentioned that you will get called by hands that are flush draws that you are ahead of, but have you looked at the equity calcs for those hands? Even J2hh - the worst flush draw w/ no BDSD and a dominated jack - you're only a 55/45 lead here, it's very small since you don't have a pair. When you look at something like Q8hh, you're at 47/53 odds.

 

[bergs]

^ this is exactly the thought process I go through during a typical hand.

 

[perfectjawnz]

This is the solver's response to a 1/2 pot cbet (Snowie folded).

Maybe with A8s I am getting better Ax to fold with 1/2 pot cbet (e.g. A9, AT, AJ and AQ all fold at some freq) but with AJs I am not getting many folds from better hands so when called I am in pretty bad shape, hence the preference for the smaller sizing or X with AJs?

View attachment 943377

this is BB response range, correct? I feel like it's missing some hands (Q2s+, J7/6s+, suited 2 gappers, QTo+ at some frequency), although this may just be different ranges or a response to a non 2.3bb rfi which is what I study with.

 

[perfectjawnz]

^ this is exactly the thought process I go through during a typical hand.

gotta do the work off table so you don't have to do it during the hand haha

 

[bergs]

gotta do the work off table so you don't have to do it during the hand haha

I honestly don’t understand this during live play. I guess I get it for online if you’re using something real time to assess opponent range (not even sure that’s allowed).

But with live play, you’re memorizing a nearly infinite number of spots to gain a couple percentage points (assuming you can remember all the aspects of each situation including accurately assessing opponent range), and ignoring things like live tells, and probably never playing enough hands to realize your true equity anyway.

 

[perfectjawnz]

I honestly don’t understand this during live play. I guess I get it for online if you’re using something real time to assess opponent range (not even sure that’s allowed).

But with live play, you’re memorizing a nearly infinite number of spots to gain a couple percentage points (assuming you can remember all the aspects of each situation including accurately assessing opponent range), and ignoring things like live tells, and probably never playing enough hands to realize your true equity anyway.

Live tells are not very useful in my experience as it depends a lot from player to player, so unless you're getting in 1000s of hands, it won't matter.

And a couple of percentage points really start to matter at high volumes - it can be the difference between a 3bb winning player and a -1bb losing player. Plus, I'm a little bit of a nerd. I enjoy the technical/ strategy side of poker, more than I enjoy the winning money part of it.

 

[boltonguy]

I honestly don’t understand this during live play. I guess I get it for online if you’re using something real time to assess opponent range (not even sure that’s allowed).

But with live play, you’re memorizing a nearly infinite number of spots to gain a couple percentage points (assuming you can remember all the aspects of each situation including accurately assessing opponent range), and ignoring things like live tells, and probably never playing enough hands to realize your true equity anyway.

I dont think the goal of off-table work is to memorize spots but rather to distill these types of spots into principles we can use while playing to maximize EV.

For example, I just played the following hand in Snowie which is very similar. RFI in CO with KJs, BB calls.
Flop hits my range hard IMHO and I connect with MP so normally I would fire 1/2 pot here with the FD on the flop.
However having thought through the above hand I think - OK, I have a lot of equity here but if I bet and am raised/called I'm not in great shape.
In this case I decided to X and that was correct. Havent put this in the solver yet.

The goal is to recognize scenarios/configurations and have a planned approach based on off-table work.
Not that we always want to play optimally, but any exploitation is a deviation from optimal based on V's leaks so we need to know optimal to know what to deviate from.

 

[boltonguy]

Interesting that in this case solver is X 64% and betting pot 29%.
Our exact hand is a pure X.

 

[perfectjawnz]

I'd never play like solver there in a million years but it makes sense I guess. I'd probably go x or 66% pot, full pot always seems a little excessive (and hard to play/balance) to me OTF IP. I don't think I'd ever bet full pot with 33 or 54s haha

 

[boltonguy]

I find it interesting that the solver will bet pot with KJdd. Normally I would bet smaller to get a call from worse hands.
I wouldnt think that V would have a string enough hand to call a pot-sized bet often enough.
With KJdd I think we block most of V's calling range and my concern would be that we arent going to get called by worse when making a pot-sized bet.
It does seem that the solver prefers to fast-play in most scenarios "hoping" that V has a strong hand and can maximize value.

This is V's range / action when facing a pot sized bet from hero:

And this is what it looks like facing a 1/2 pot sized bet. We get calls from all the suited aces (especially non-diamonds) that fold to a larger bet.

 

[boltonguy]

Interesting Snowie mixes KJdd so similar to the solver.

 

[TheWhiteJZ]

I'm not a solver expert, but I would translate my answer to the original question as saying that as RFI in position, you want to c bet small 100% on boards that are "high and dry." This one is not dry, and the BB has nearly all the nut draw potential and will find a lot of reasons to float. Therefore, control the pot. If they would fold (not float), not many turns are going to change that.

Against a float, your best chance to win is to turn an A or J, and they will fold putting no more into the pot. More likely (when im Hero anyway), it will come below a T, and you will hate the card and it's unclear whether they picked up equity. Then what? barrel 2/3 of the bloated pot with A high? give a free card?

By checking you go into bluff catch mode when turn is below T or delay cbet when its T or above and you can be polarized.

 

[FDLmold]

I'm not a solver expert, but I would translate my answer to the original question as saying that as RFI in position, you want to c bet small 100% on boards that are "high and dry." This one is not dry, and the BB has nearly all the nut draw potential and will find a lot of reasons to float. Therefore, control the pot. If they would fold (not float), not many turns are going to change that.

Against a float, your best chance to win is to turn an A or J, and they will fold putting no more into the pot. More likely (when im Hero anyway), it will come below a T, and you will hate the card and it's unclear whether they picked up equity. Then what? barrel 2/3 of the bloated pot with A high? give a free card?

By checking you go into bluff catch mode when turn is below T or delay cbet when its T or above and you can be polarized.

I understood all of this. Today is going to be a good day!