Options
Math Help!!! min raise folding
I've been trying to find somewhere that could explain to me the theory of min-raise/folding. I think I finally made headway into figuring it out and understanding the concept. But some of the math trips me up. This will be a scratch pad for it because I know there are a bunch here who can clear this up or check it. I'm also pretty sure a lot of mtt grinders here wanna see this math.
This certainly needs checking because I haven't worked it all out yet...
I was told by V that min raising is a separate event from calling a shove...so......
PART1
Ex: blinds are 100/200/25 antes 9 handed........
So if we min raise we raise we risk 400 to win 525 (blinds + antes)
which gives us 1.3125 to 1 on our bet (525/400)
which is 100 * (1 + 1.3125)^-1 = 43.24%
So if our min raise gets through 43.24% or more of the time, its profitable with any two cards.
PART2
So assuming 43.24% is correct if we are in the sb and action is folded to us, we can profitably min raise ATC as long as the bb doesn't reshove more than 1-43.24% = 56.76% of hands
PART3
If there is more than one opponent behind us the formula for the amount of times we get through is the percent each of our opponents folds multiplied together.
so if we min raise from the CU
Bu reshoves 20%
Sb reshove 10%
Bb reshoves 15%
we get through .8 * .9 * .85 = .612 = 60%
but we only we only to get through 43.24%
Part 4
From each position we can take the nth root of 43.24 where n is the players left to act and see what the average reshove range needs to be for us to min raise to show a profit (so assuming each villain shoves the same, whats their max shove range that we can still min raise ATC):
Attachment not found.
Part 5
There seems to be an relation between the sum of the reshove %'s and their product. So if one player shoves 5% too much we are ok if another player folds 5% to much. I don't think its exactly linear but I don't want to dig so far into it until I know the rest is correct.
Also it may be too complex to figure out the adjusting with so many variables but I think if we treat it linear the amount of error is small?
This certainly needs checking because I haven't worked it all out yet...
I was told by V that min raising is a separate event from calling a shove...so......
PART1
Ex: blinds are 100/200/25 antes 9 handed........
So if we min raise we raise we risk 400 to win 525 (blinds + antes)
which gives us 1.3125 to 1 on our bet (525/400)
which is 100 * (1 + 1.3125)^-1 = 43.24%
So if our min raise gets through 43.24% or more of the time, its profitable with any two cards.
PART2
So assuming 43.24% is correct if we are in the sb and action is folded to us, we can profitably min raise ATC as long as the bb doesn't reshove more than 1-43.24% = 56.76% of hands
PART3
If there is more than one opponent behind us the formula for the amount of times we get through is the percent each of our opponents folds multiplied together.
so if we min raise from the CU
Bu reshoves 20%
Sb reshove 10%
Bb reshoves 15%
we get through .8 * .9 * .85 = .612 = 60%
but we only we only to get through 43.24%
Part 4
From each position we can take the nth root of 43.24 where n is the players left to act and see what the average reshove range needs to be for us to min raise to show a profit (so assuming each villain shoves the same, whats their max shove range that we can still min raise ATC):
Attachment not found.
Part 5
There seems to be an relation between the sum of the reshove %'s and their product. So if one player shoves 5% too much we are ok if another player folds 5% to much. I don't think its exactly linear but I don't want to dig so far into it until I know the rest is correct.
Also it may be too complex to figure out the adjusting with so many variables but I think if we treat it linear the amount of error is small?
Comments
And in this case, flatting = jamming as it just means our raise didn't get through (you prob got that though).
I'm curious if we can confirm all this cause there is a lot i can do with it!
edit: also there's many times we get flatted and villain check folds a large % of the time and we can add to our overall ev?
edit2: also i haven't made any conclusions, just working out the math. If its right I can see how raising ATC from any position could be +ev but thats obviously a horrible strategy. But when everyone is playing closer to shove or fold this kinda knowledge gets more useful.
...but as for calling a shove after our min raise:
Villain shoves his stack, there is blinds/antes + hero's min raise in the pot. Hero is getting better price than 1 to 1 on his money.
Example1:
blinds are 100/200/25 antes 9 handed........
Hero min raises from cut-off with 5000 chips (25bbs)
Button reshoves all in 4000 chips (20bbs)
Action on Hero, 18bbs to call 18bbs, with 1325 extra chips in the pot?
This is the same as (I skipped showing some math here):
blinds are 276/552/55 antes 9 handed........(276 + 552 + (55*9))= 1223 ~ 1325
Button shoves 3600 chips (6.5bbs)
Action on hero in bb to call (6.5bbs)
So if min raising is profitable with any two cards from the cutoff, we can min/call the button's 20bbs shove with the same hands we would call if we were in the bb with 6.5bbs vs villain range. We can min raise fold the rest.
We don't need any special charts, we just take the blinds * 2.75 and divide that number by the villains stack (minus our initial min-raise). Then call him as if we are in the bb.
Example 2
blinds are 300/600/60 9 handed
UTG Hero 18000 (30bbs)
CU Villain 15000 (25bbs)
Hero min raises
CU pushes 99+,ATs+,AJo+
everyone folds to Hero:
Here thinks:
600 * 2.75 = 1650
13800/1650 =8.36 ~ 8.5bbs
Hero imagines hes in the BB vs 8.5bbs Cu shoving 99+,ATs+,AJo+ and calls accordingly.
If the bb and the button each have 10bb before posting can the bb bust the button?
Or after posting does the bb only have 9 effective bbs and the button will have 1bb left over if he loses the race?
seriously?
anyway, still havn't found time to look into this topic
lmao are you serious?? jaja
just got home from work, id love to go over this with you and throw numbers back and forth once i eat supper and can think straight
quick glance it makes my brain hurt, but have we not gone over this construct/theory on min raise/calling before?
neither of you answered.:mad:
EDIT: my 2nd large post here is slightly off because of the answer to this, I will modify it later, but it doesn't change the concept just the constant 2.75 to something else (still not sure if its a constant).
i.e 10 k stacks... say btn wins hand, btns stack will be 20K, bb will be 0
comeonman.jpg
if all the chips are going in, all the chips are coming out.
your assumption is correct. if BB and button have 10BB before posting then they could bust each other out perfectly.
SCENARIO 1
Yes, if you are outside the blinds, then if your min-raise will win the pot right there 43.24% of the time or more, then min-raising is a +EV play.
SCENARIO 2
You forgot about the fact that you have already posted the SB, so you are in fact betting 300 to win 525. So, if your min-raise will take it down right away 36.4% (or more) of the time, then min-raising is +EV from the SB.
But, looking at it from the BBs position, folding to the min-raise is a pretty big mistake no matter what their hand. They need to invest 200 to try and win 825 - so they only need to win 32% of the time with the added bonuses of position on the min-raiser, with the SB having no clue as to which 2 cards they hold.
As someone stated earlier, it comes down to the flatting tendencies of the BB. If they are mathematically/positionally savvy then your min-raise should not work as well as you hope - unless the blinds are so high that it now becomes a matter of they need to fold or shove.
I know what you're saying... "But I stated earlier that someone flatting is equivalent to them shoving" but it really is not, because it would adjust your percentages IRL.
Your math is correct on this part... if the BB would only call/reshove 20% of the time, the SB only calls/reshoves 10% of the time, and the BB only calls/reshoves 15% of the time then you would win right there 61.2% of the time.
But... when calling is an option to bust up your play I really think 20%/10%/15% is way too low of a percentage. A range of 30%/20%/25% would be enough to make your min-raise try unsuccessful (with the assumption that you will always lose if you are called/raised).
Yes this is about my other question, I haven't sorted it out yet but seems we get a lot better price.
most people don't take advantage of this, once they are past 'beginner' they are uncomfortable playing in either blind....not all thought, but few people flat 73s or q7o or t5o etc. Here were talking about strategy which i haven't brought up yet, im still looking at the math, but I do play turbos where most of the tournament is played shortstack. So this doesn't suggest we can min raise wherever when ever, but when stack behind are short we can have an idea how wide our opponent has to flat or shove to make a raise -ev.
Still curious about the rest of the math, but I have more applications when I know its correct.
THX!!!!!
Yes, your math is correct on this one, assuming that all players have an equal chance of raising or folding (which we know not to be true - but I won't keep pounding this point).
Part 5
If there is a difference in the percentages for one player up by X% and a difference down for another player by the same X% it will not be fully linear - but it will be close.
If we assume p is the original percentage, then for 2 iterations it will be p^2.
If we add in our up/down variance of x, then (p+x)(p-x) = p^2 - x^2.
So, with a 5% up/down variance it will change the calculation to p^2 - 0.0025 (a change of .25%).
Unless the variance is very large, you could effectively ignore it for calculation purposes.
Yes the ranges change things, but I'll go over some of that, but if this all correct it gives a great back bone to adjust from. I know the 30%/20%/25% well, that is my 180 opponents reshove and flatting ranges from 0-30ishb bbs, I just never knew what to do with it.
So ya this is def geared towards shortstack play, but that is what most tourney play is (well im biased).
I forget sometimes that I'm an mttsng turbo player, that game is a little different, I have months and months of notes on most of my opponent reship ranges, once I have this math sorted out, I'll be a laser with min raising and with min/calling. I could not find this info anywhere, not saying its new or something but for me its def groundbreaking
But yes I'm not saying I proved atc is profitable so boom we will do that, certainly there will be villains that try to exploit us, or who are just naturally really loose flatters. But we will just note that and tighten our range and adjust to that. This isn't about raising atc, its about the formula that tells you when you should raise wide and when you shouldn't based on our opponents ranges because we know their ranges.
I think this will be a lot like Nash to people. So many people study nash just enough to learn that Nash Equilibrium is how perfect players would play each other, but they stop there and say, "People don't play like that in real life so I don't need to know it"
I think the info in this thread will fall victim to that for the exact same reason for some people.
But also keep in mind that one person flatting generally won't skew things far enough (in short stack poker) to make it -ev to open, and we can always check fold post in case they do flat. And if they flat oop and check fold a lot then we can prob open wider.
Here a quick example though that I wonder if people agree with....
folds to hero on the button with 16bbs and antes in play
Sb is tightish losing player with 4bbs
BB is a breakeven reg who 20 tables and isn't capable of adjusting his ranges.
This is an open with ATC imo always.
what he said is what I said but much more succinct.
If your just checking it out make sure you get to around 12 minutes because the beginning is a just a setup.
I'm sure if a few watch this there will be someone who this just resonates with in a big way.
This is what I've been lacking and now that its fixed I'm confident my results will follow
The disclaimer is I could be totally wrong
https://vimeo.com/48573123
Tis a concept for intermediate players but I tried to explain it in a way everyone could understand.
There is lots in here that I needed to know.
Good work.
okerStars Hand #85562616357: Tournament #608362640, $1.29+$0.21 USD Hold'em No Limit - Level IV (50/100) - 2012/09/01 19:07:02 ET
Table '608362640 1' 9-max Seat #7 is the button
Seat 1: mindmaster99 (2656 in chips)
Seat 2: nugget1291 (2965 in chips)
Seat 3: Mr Demantova (1440 in chips)
Seat 4: Ferum416 (4004 in chips)
Seat 6: thiagopzago (4580 in chips)
Seat 7: PHILLIIVEY1 (1908 in chips)
Seat 8: jockspi (2260 in chips) out of hand (moved from another table into small blind)
Seat 9: ciprilimon (7187 in chips)
ciprilimon: posts small blind 50
mindmaster99: posts big blind 100
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to PHILLIIVEY1 [6c 6s]
nugget1291: folds
Mr Demantova: folds
Ferum416: folds
thiagopzago: folds
PHILLIIVEY1: raises 100 to 200
ciprilimon: folds
mindmaster99: folds
Uncalled bet (100) returned to PHILLIIVEY1
PHILLIIVEY1 collected 250 from pot
PHILLIIVEY1: doesn't show hand
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 250 | Rake 0
Seat 1: mindmaster99 (big blind) folded before Flop
Seat 2: nugget1291 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 3: Mr Demantova folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 4: Ferum416 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 6: thiagopzago folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 7: PHILLIIVEY1 (button) collected (250)
Seat 9: ciprilimon (small blind) folded before Flop