The thing is we're still shoving THIS level, not next level, and it's hard to say how much the blinds should affect our range, and they should have the least affect of all when they go up on our button.
So maybe merit? But not enough to change your decision here. Definitely not something you should be worrying about yet!
all im using it for is to suggest if a certain hand is break even we can use it to tilt the scale (sorry i suggested more than that....but i brought it in this thread as an adjustment to tilt 42o from being breakevenish to positive not saying thats true)
your god range though? and keep in mind my ranges abilities should correlate to my advanced understanding of these shoving concepts...so my ranges might not be right but they should hold some decent gravity with your decision as well as my 20k games in the field...
hows your live game? I think they way you think would work very well live....see you at wsop this year? :P
no my shove game is good...i need to find someone whos good at live and mid and deepstack play to help me though
no this didn't come across right...what i mean is i really wish i knew what you and vekked knew because then i really think i would destroy this field....im really weak in those areas
(i need help with shoving too but that doesn't help my sarcasm)
So that's like those that posts whether they played a flopped Royal Flush properly and maximized their value when they should be worrying about the 99.99% of the other hands in their database? lol
almost...instead though...you be the judge...of all the factors...and come up with the real profitable range.....knowing that my range showed 42o to be break even.....
taking everything into account but saying no darb i think the ranges are this and this.....but i will average it a little with you.....
give us the god range....
Ok the big hurtle is "real profitable range" and "knowing that my range showed 42o to be break even". I know that your ranges showed that, but I don't really like the ranges you assigned. I know you've played heeeaps of these $2 and have a good idea of ranges, but assigning accurate pre-flop ranges basically IS tournament poker. Fish are fish at all levels, the fish that play the $2 aren't much different than the fish that play the $100 and might even be better than the fish that play the $5000 at fallsview. So although you have a ton more experience at this level than me, I still feel like I can spot a wonky range, so I can't give you my REAL answer while still maintaining your ranges. Obviously if your ranges/calculations are exactly correct that 42o is breakeven, then the answer is jam almost anything better than 42o, you should know this. Assigning pre-flop ranges to fish is one of the most difficult things to do because their ranges are NOT logical, therefore trying to apply too much logic can be a mistake... but we still have to construct a range somehow. This is basically how I work through it:
-First we need a PFR %. That's the only bit of real info we have to go by, even though it can mean very little for fish. If he open 50% in theory it means we should have more FE than someone opening 10%, but the 50% might call a shove with ATC and the 10% might fold AQs, but we have to make some assumptions that our fold equity is at least somewhat relative to their PFR.
-Secondly I generally start with a set of hands that are being called 99% of the time. I'd say 100% but some people are idiots and fold AK here or w/e, but I think it's more than balanced out by the people calling way too many hands. Think of a hand that if you saw them flip up that you wouldn't plan on trying to make them fold ever. As a general rule, I would just hang myself before I tried to make any random fold AQ+/99+ to a reship. It's just not going to be a winning proposition.
-So AQ+/99+ we'll assign as the tightest range we would expect to see here from anyone remotely reasonable. Now what about the loosest "reasonable" range? Sure some fish will show up with K5o and stuff but I'm cutting them out just like I cut out the guys folding TT or AK here. I'd say "reasonable" hands groupings to see here would be pairs, aces, and broadways in that order. I think A6o, QTo, and JTo are super unlikely so I wouldn't even consider them in a realistic range, only outliers would call those or worse. I think >20% will call 22, JTs, and A2s, so they're not insignificant. I'd say something like 22+,A5s+,KTs+,QJs,A8o+,KJo+ is a good "loose" range for calling a shove. Say 1/3 of the time a fish has those they call or something.
-So we have 5% as our absolute tightest fish, and 17% as our loosest fish. The average of these is about 11%, BUT I suspect the tightest fish to call those hands nearly 100% of the time, and the loosest fish to call 17% less than half of the time, so I'm going to weight it more towards the tighter fish.
-So looking at the looser fish I think a lot of the hands that they feel are "flipping" or "ace rag" or something to that effect will find the muck a lot more than other hands, so I'll take those out. (22-44, A5s-A9s, A8o, A9o), that gives us 55+,ATs+,KTs+,QJs,ATo+,KJo+ (12%). I think some of the weaker broadway hands can be taken out of an "average" fish range, like KJo/KTs, etc, but where to draw the line? I think AQ+/99+ are seen as "premium" hands by a lot of people, and if I had to draw a line a bit further for "semi-premiums", maybe AJ/KQ/88 would fit that description, so like: 88+,AJs+,KQs,AJo+,KQo (8%).
-I still think those hands are calling much more than half of the time, probably more like 75% of the time, so I think we can throw in a couple more combos. I definitely think fish are partial towards high suited cards, so ATs/KJs probably aren't unreasonable if I'm adding a couple combo's. Also fish just love getting pairs in pre, I see them stacking mid pairs pre for heaps of blinds in absurd spots all the time even at higher stakes. So probably 77-66 can go in there.
-66+,AJs+,KJs+,AJo+,KQo (9%) looks like a pretty good range to me vs. our 9BB stacks. Vs. 15BB I'd start to take out KQo/AJo/KJs/66, and take out 77, AJs, KQs as we get deeper.
So that's roughly how I'd develop a range for some fish. If you have any actual hands you've seen them shove/call a shove with, it makes a HUGE difference, which is why playing less tables/relying less on HUDs can allow us to identify spots like this. I'd say while mass multi-tabling we should consider reshipping >40% of hands roughly 0% of the time.
Like I said now it depends on how wide they raise, but since fish limp a lot I generally give them a stronger opening range than regs in a lot of spots. To be conservative I'll give him 16% (22+,A8s+,KTs+,QTs+,JTs,ATo+,KJo+,QJo). It's entirely possible he limps a lot of the weaker hands like 22-44, JTs, QJo, etc some % of the time. Assigning him 16% here means he raises 16% of hands 100% of the time. If he opens 16% and calls 9%, we can profitably shove something like 29% of hands, so:
Would be a bit safer, because if a fish deviates and calls more broadways or Ax (the most likely hands to appear randomly in their range), the equity on those suffers a lot, so 24% gives us a bit of margin for error/ICM/etc. So that's my GOD RANGE.
As a bonus, I think shoving more than 55% is probably really bad. This is the number I got vs. like one of the most exploitable scenarios I could think of.
I know you've played heeeaps of these $2 and have a good idea of ranges, but assigning accurate pre-flop ranges basically IS tournament poker. Fish are fish at all levels, the fish that play the $2 aren't much different than the fish that play the $100 and might even be better than the fish that play the $5000 at fallsview.
ima pass out before i wrap this fcuker of a thread up...but i don't do this in an mtt...mtts and 180 mans are waaaaay different in that regard....and i know you know poker all around...but im seeing completely different ranges here if its an mtt and not a 180 man
but i appreciate your response, just need to double check that you allowed my read to skew it slightly >:D
edit: ima wrap it later obv with comparing my range to what most others would shove to the 'god range'.....it works better obv if the god range was wider ;p....
ima pass out before i wrap this fcuker of a thread up...but i don't do this in an mtt...mtts and 180 mans are waaaaay different in that regard....and i know you know poker all around...but im seeing completely different ranges here if its an mtt and not a 180 man
It's probably a variety of things that contribute to varying ranges, but I'm going to guess it's stakes more than format that changes the ranges for fishies, if anything.
vekked's range for 3bet shove then was 24% i would wager that btp wetts or richard's is around 18% or less along and that anyone else's is dramatically lower
im going to suggest a 15% widest range for the field and say any wider is an anomaly (feel free to change this number but never higher than 24%)
and my theory is that if i shove the god range plus any 2 sooted cards that is about 52%....
that if you do the math....me shoving 32s soul crushes everybody in this thread....even though 32s is obv -ev
thats my theory and nobody has let me adjust any ranges yet and it still holds...and yes its a theory but the math will prove it
and also that nobody of vekked's caliber is in my field so his reshove range is an anomaly (but my range of adding any 2 sooted still beats his 24%)...
So to summarize.....you think 32s is -ev.....i think its +ev.....but we just showed it doesn't matter....its a profitable shove either way.
We are used to thinking we get paid on ev....but thats not always true.... we know that sometimes we can make more $ by letting go of +ev spots....
we dont' get paid on ev...we get paid on optimal plays....
and here optimal (better than anyone else) is going to be between vekked's range......up to and past the god range....and into a bunch of mistakes, until youv'e made enough mistakes that you are shoving worse than the best in the field.......
that range is like 25% hands big....that you can choose to be your range....anywhere between 24% and like 55% maybe...and you will still be shoving better than everyone and making the most on the play
So to summarize.....you think 32s is -ev.....i think its +ev.....but we just showed it doesn't matter....its a profitable shove either way.
We are used to thinking we get paid on ev....but thats not always true.... we know that sometimes we can make more $ by letting go of +ev spots....
we dont' get paid on ev...we get paid on optimal plays....
and here optimal (better than anyone else) is going to be between vekked's range......up to and past the god range....and into a bunch of mistakes, until youv'e made enough mistakes that you are shoving worse than the best in the field.......
that range is like 25% hands big....that you can choose to be your range....anywhere between 24% and like 55% maybe...and you will still be shoving better than everyone and making the most on the play
With this arguement, couldnt you argue its going to be profitable to shove anytime someone opens with that range? Or why is this hand different
With this arguement, couldnt you argue its going to be profitable to shove anytime someone opens with that range? Or why is this hand different
im not sure if i understand you exactly but if i do then the answer is yes if this concept is true it applies across the board....in many spots...
this one is the example i chose because the 3bet range people choose will be drastically different than the one vekked gives us (that include all +ev and 0ev hands).
Ok in that case I would say that a lot of people use this theory already. But once you get to High stakes, even middle stakes you will find people call you a lot lighter after seeing it and it becomes -ev pretty quick. So you need to quickly adjust to tighting your range again. As I said, a jam here where you have to show your hand no matter what will change the credit people give you in the future. If there was no shorty already in, I would like the shove a lot more...
yes Im just telling you to be aware in the future haha. But 24os really isnt the best hand to be doing this with is my main point. Do it with like q5s haha
and my theory is that if i shove the god range plus any 2 sooted cards that is about 52%....
that if you do the math....me shoving 32s soul crushes everybody in this thread....even though 32s is obv -ev
thats my theory and nobody has let me adjust any ranges yet and it still holds...and yes its a theory but the math will prove it
and also that nobody of vekked's caliber is in my field so his reshove range is an anomaly (but my range of adding any 2 sooted still beats his 24%)...
What is this? Why does it matter if your range is more +EV than other people in this thread, is both ranges are far from optimal? Shoving 30% > shoving 50% > shoving 15%, yes, but why not try to shove more around 30% than just trying to prove 50% > 15%? Poker's about maximizing your EV, not about measuring your reshove penis vs. other people's reshoves penises.
and here optimal (better than anyone else) is going to be between vekked's range......up to and past the god range....and into a bunch of mistakes, until youv'e made enough mistakes that you are shoving worse than the best in the field.......
that range is like 25% hands big....that you can choose to be your range....anywhere between 24% and like 55% maybe...and you will still be shoving better than everyone and making the most on the play
Why are you using my range as the bottom of the optimal range and above "the god range" (I'm really disliking that term since "god" would clearly shove way less % of hands than the ones that include 0EV) as the top of the range? I did heaps of calculations and showed you that ~29% was going to be optimal, and I personally think that shoving a bit less than that is more optimal because in practice we don't have a good enough idea of what people will call us with, and shoving too much can become a disaster. So I explained that 24-29% is about optimal, so I don't get where you're getting 24-55% is optimal? There's no way that an "optimal" range can be that huge unless you're using optimal really loosely.
Fwiw I think in 2012 it's possible to evaluate the profit of 1 range vs. another. I just did some maths myself to do it but I have to double check with some wizards before I put up my results because I might've went wrong.
in my field tho its different even top regs don't adjust because the best are playing 50 tables.
Really? really? The best regs? Depends on your interpretation of "best". At 50 tables you are not playing your best poker, only maximizing rakeback. Probably not making profit without it.
I have one more good question: why is it that we give villain enough credit for understanding minraising is better than 2,5xing but not that raisefolding to 9 BB's is one of the biggest leaks you can have in the game?
Edit: I know for a fact after playing a few that far from everyone goes 2x
Really? really? The best regs? Depends on your interpretation of "best". At 50 tables you are not playing your best poker, only maximizing rakeback. Probably not making profit without it.
yes best regs...wondering if you think im joking, lying, or stupid?
rakeback? 50 tables chats with friends on skype while playing hu (on 50 tables)
I stand by my claim... and so he made 52K from 32k games? $1.80 per game? And quit uni when he was well on the way... not saying you are stupid but he is at least foolish..
I have one more good question: why is it that we give villain enough credit for understanding minraising is better than 2,5xing but not that raisefolding to 9 BB's is one of the biggest leaks you can have in the game?
Edit: I know for a fact after playing a few that far from everyone goes 2x
fish isn't think 'hey...3x was std then it was 2.5 now its min raise....'
hes thinking:
'wow i have a monster i'm gonna min raise'
or
'man i have a shitty hand but look at that shorty beside me....im going to min raise A5s and see what happens.....'
i don't think hes thinking
'man i have a5s, thats not a strong hand i should fold'
or
i have a5s i should jam because its correct to jam marginal hands in turbos
or
i have a5s i should limp and see what happens...(most likely one i discounted though)
I stand by my claim... and so he made 52K from 32k games? $1.80 per game? And quit uni when he was well on the way... not saying you are stupid but he is at least foolish..
Comments
your god range though? and keep in mind my ranges abilities should correlate to my advanced understanding of these shoving concepts...so my ranges might not be right but they should hold some decent gravity with your decision as well as my 20k games in the field...
no this didn't come across right...what i mean is i really wish i knew what you and vekked knew because then i really think i would destroy this field....im really weak in those areas
(i need help with shoving too but that doesn't help my sarcasm)
Yes.
Ok the big hurtle is "real profitable range" and "knowing that my range showed 42o to be break even". I know that your ranges showed that, but I don't really like the ranges you assigned. I know you've played heeeaps of these $2 and have a good idea of ranges, but assigning accurate pre-flop ranges basically IS tournament poker. Fish are fish at all levels, the fish that play the $2 aren't much different than the fish that play the $100 and might even be better than the fish that play the $5000 at fallsview. So although you have a ton more experience at this level than me, I still feel like I can spot a wonky range, so I can't give you my REAL answer while still maintaining your ranges. Obviously if your ranges/calculations are exactly correct that 42o is breakeven, then the answer is jam almost anything better than 42o, you should know this. Assigning pre-flop ranges to fish is one of the most difficult things to do because their ranges are NOT logical, therefore trying to apply too much logic can be a mistake... but we still have to construct a range somehow. This is basically how I work through it:
-First we need a PFR %. That's the only bit of real info we have to go by, even though it can mean very little for fish. If he open 50% in theory it means we should have more FE than someone opening 10%, but the 50% might call a shove with ATC and the 10% might fold AQs, but we have to make some assumptions that our fold equity is at least somewhat relative to their PFR.
-Secondly I generally start with a set of hands that are being called 99% of the time. I'd say 100% but some people are idiots and fold AK here or w/e, but I think it's more than balanced out by the people calling way too many hands. Think of a hand that if you saw them flip up that you wouldn't plan on trying to make them fold ever. As a general rule, I would just hang myself before I tried to make any random fold AQ+/99+ to a reship. It's just not going to be a winning proposition.
-So AQ+/99+ we'll assign as the tightest range we would expect to see here from anyone remotely reasonable. Now what about the loosest "reasonable" range? Sure some fish will show up with K5o and stuff but I'm cutting them out just like I cut out the guys folding TT or AK here. I'd say "reasonable" hands groupings to see here would be pairs, aces, and broadways in that order. I think A6o, QTo, and JTo are super unlikely so I wouldn't even consider them in a realistic range, only outliers would call those or worse. I think >20% will call 22, JTs, and A2s, so they're not insignificant. I'd say something like 22+,A5s+,KTs+,QJs,A8o+,KJo+ is a good "loose" range for calling a shove. Say 1/3 of the time a fish has those they call or something.
-So we have 5% as our absolute tightest fish, and 17% as our loosest fish. The average of these is about 11%, BUT I suspect the tightest fish to call those hands nearly 100% of the time, and the loosest fish to call 17% less than half of the time, so I'm going to weight it more towards the tighter fish.
-So looking at the looser fish I think a lot of the hands that they feel are "flipping" or "ace rag" or something to that effect will find the muck a lot more than other hands, so I'll take those out. (22-44, A5s-A9s, A8o, A9o), that gives us 55+,ATs+,KTs+,QJs,ATo+,KJo+ (12%). I think some of the weaker broadway hands can be taken out of an "average" fish range, like KJo/KTs, etc, but where to draw the line? I think AQ+/99+ are seen as "premium" hands by a lot of people, and if I had to draw a line a bit further for "semi-premiums", maybe AJ/KQ/88 would fit that description, so like: 88+,AJs+,KQs,AJo+,KQo (8%).
-I still think those hands are calling much more than half of the time, probably more like 75% of the time, so I think we can throw in a couple more combos. I definitely think fish are partial towards high suited cards, so ATs/KJs probably aren't unreasonable if I'm adding a couple combo's. Also fish just love getting pairs in pre, I see them stacking mid pairs pre for heaps of blinds in absurd spots all the time even at higher stakes. So probably 77-66 can go in there.
-66+,AJs+,KJs+,AJo+,KQo (9%) looks like a pretty good range to me vs. our 9BB stacks. Vs. 15BB I'd start to take out KQo/AJo/KJs/66, and take out 77, AJs, KQs as we get deeper.
So that's roughly how I'd develop a range for some fish. If you have any actual hands you've seen them shove/call a shove with, it makes a HUGE difference, which is why playing less tables/relying less on HUDs can allow us to identify spots like this. I'd say while mass multi-tabling we should consider reshipping >40% of hands roughly 0% of the time.
Like I said now it depends on how wide they raise, but since fish limp a lot I generally give them a stronger opening range than regs in a lot of spots. To be conservative I'll give him 16% (22+,A8s+,KTs+,QTs+,JTs,ATo+,KJo+,QJo). It's entirely possible he limps a lot of the weaker hands like 22-44, JTs, QJo, etc some % of the time. Assigning him 16% here means he raises 16% of hands 100% of the time. If he opens 16% and calls 9%, we can profitably shove something like 29% of hands, so:
22+,A2s+,K9s+,Q9s+,JTs,T8s+,97s+,87s,A3o+,KTo+,QTo+
I think 24%, or:
22+,A2s+,K9s+,Q9s+,JTs,T9s,A7o+,A5o-A4o,KTo+,QJo
Would be a bit safer, because if a fish deviates and calls more broadways or Ax (the most likely hands to appear randomly in their range), the equity on those suffers a lot, so 24% gives us a bit of margin for error/ICM/etc. So that's my GOD RANGE.
As a bonus, I think shoving more than 55% is probably really bad. This is the number I got vs. like one of the most exploitable scenarios I could think of.
but i appreciate your response, just need to double check that you allowed my read to skew it slightly >:D
edit: ima wrap it later obv with comparing my range to what most others would shove to the 'god range'.....it works better obv if the god range was wider ;p....
It's probably a variety of things that contribute to varying ranges, but I'm going to guess it's stakes more than format that changes the ranges for fishies, if anything.
Vekked pm'd me the god range...that is, every hand that a 16/9 range that is Oev or better.....
Attachment not found.
vekked's range for 3bet shove then was 24% i would wager that btp wetts or richard's is around 18% or less along and that anyone else's is dramatically lower
im going to suggest a 15% widest range for the field and say any wider is an anomaly (feel free to change this number but never higher than 24%)
Attachment not found.
and my theory is that if i shove the god range plus any 2 sooted cards that is about 52%....
that if you do the math....me shoving 32s soul crushes everybody in this thread....even though 32s is obv -ev
thats my theory and nobody has let me adjust any ranges yet and it still holds...and yes its a theory but the math will prove it
and also that nobody of vekked's caliber is in my field so his reshove range is an anomaly (but my range of adding any 2 sooted still beats his 24%)...
We are used to thinking we get paid on ev....but thats not always true.... we know that sometimes we can make more $ by letting go of +ev spots....
we dont' get paid on ev...we get paid on optimal plays....
and here optimal (better than anyone else) is going to be between vekked's range......up to and past the god range....and into a bunch of mistakes, until youv'e made enough mistakes that you are shoving worse than the best in the field.......
that range is like 25% hands big....that you can choose to be your range....anywhere between 24% and like 55% maybe...and you will still be shoving better than everyone and making the most on the play
With this arguement, couldnt you argue its going to be profitable to shove anytime someone opens with that range? Or why is this hand different
this one is the example i chose because the 3bet range people choose will be drastically different than the one vekked gives us (that include all +ev and 0ev hands).
thats not entirely correct but it can stand for now.
in my field tho its different even top regs don't adjust because the best are playing 50 tables.
What is this? Why does it matter if your range is more +EV than other people in this thread, is both ranges are far from optimal? Shoving 30% > shoving 50% > shoving 15%, yes, but why not try to shove more around 30% than just trying to prove 50% > 15%? Poker's about maximizing your EV, not about measuring your reshove penis vs. other people's reshoves penises.
Why are you using my range as the bottom of the optimal range and above "the god range" (I'm really disliking that term since "god" would clearly shove way less % of hands than the ones that include 0EV) as the top of the range? I did heaps of calculations and showed you that ~29% was going to be optimal, and I personally think that shoving a bit less than that is more optimal because in practice we don't have a good enough idea of what people will call us with, and shoving too much can become a disaster. So I explained that 24-29% is about optimal, so I don't get where you're getting 24-55% is optimal? There's no way that an "optimal" range can be that huge unless you're using optimal really loosely.
I just calculated that 32s is -720 chips.
lol, POTD...
Edit: I know for a fact after playing a few that far from everyone goes 2x
but here we have as much fold equity as vekked said...because we used his math and nobody would let me use my ranges for the fold equity...
so youre arguing his given range 16/9
so i changed my hand 32o to 42o just to find an example to explain my thought.
rakeback? 50 tables chats with friends on skype while playing hu (on 50 tables)
Attachment not found.
hes thinking:
'wow i have a monster i'm gonna min raise'
or
'man i have a shitty hand but look at that shorty beside me....im going to min raise A5s and see what happens.....'
i don't think hes thinking
'man i have a5s, thats not a strong hand i should fold'
or
i have a5s i should jam because its correct to jam marginal hands in turbos
or
i have a5s i should limp and see what happens...(most likely one i discounted though)
so the example might suck....and i might be horrible at good ranges....but its an interesting concept i think