PDA

View Full Version : Article 4 Discussion



Rvg72
08-20-2008, 01:34 AM
As mentioned all new articles are only available to HM customers. You will find article #4 in www.rvgsoftware.com/hm/hmupdate1.06.02.exe and it discusses facing a 3bet preflop.

Some of the main topics are

1) using your position and the position of the 3bet to adjust the 3 bettors overall 3bet % to a more realistic range

2) understanding how often the 3 bettor will fold to a 4 bet

3) using that information to determine what range of hands can be profitably 4bet for value with the intention of getting it all-in for 1 buyin.

Roy

piet51
08-20-2008, 05:50 AM
Hi
I am a customer and I want to print this article
Please tell me how to do this

Thank you for your time
Piet

Rvg72
08-20-2008, 01:02 PM
Hi
I am a customer and I want to print this article
Please tell me how to do this

Thank you for your time
Piet

No way to do that right now but you could take screen shots and print that way. I will try to add a "Print" option.

Roy

beaster
08-20-2008, 01:52 PM
Yeah I don't like how you locked this down. I can't print it, edit it, make notes, etc. I know why you're doing it, but it limits the usability for your paying customers. And as soon as you add print capability, I could print it to a file and distribute it that way if I really wanted. As you already stated I could make screenshots and pass it around that way.

Please set this up as an .rtf like the previous articles. Thanks.

Rvg72
08-20-2008, 02:08 PM
Yeah I don't like how you locked this down. I can't print it, edit it, make notes, etc. I know why you're doing it, but it limits the usability for your paying customers. And as soon as you add print capability, I could print it to a file and distribute it that way if I really wanted. As you already stated I could make screenshots and pass it around that way.

Please set this up as an .rtf like the previous articles. Thanks.

I'll try to find some kind of compromise. Most paying HM customers told me they didn't want trial users to get the articles so I needed to come up with some way to at least make it a bit more difficult. I'll work on improving it

Roy

pellshek
08-20-2008, 07:14 PM
Looking forward to looking through this Roy.

For what it's worth, I like the way the articles are locked into HEM - helps protect the copyright and make sure only registered users can use it. I would have no problem if it stayed this way.

Besides, how often do you need these articles AWAY from HEM? I mean, don't you always need HEM open beside the article to go through it? I'd say 99% of the time, yes.

piet51
08-21-2008, 07:22 AM
Ok that's your opinion
I like have a papercopy beside an open HEM

piet

Rvg72
08-21-2008, 01:12 PM
Ok that's your opinion
I like have a papercopy beside an open HEM

piet

The main goal of the new system is to encourage people to purchase the software if they want the articles but I don't want to limit paying customers so I will change the way it works. There will at a minimum be a print button.

I know it will be easy enough for someone with a paid copy to share it with other people so I'm not going to spend too much time worrying about that since it is pretty much impossible to stop. Even now they could take screen shots and send the article as a bunch of jpg's

Roy

holepunch
08-21-2008, 05:00 PM
they probably will have the documentation to distribute, but it may be an idea to stop the filters (after the first 3 'public articles') working/loading in an unregistered version of hm somehow, ill leave that to all the programmers :) or even stop the loading of the filters working all together until hm is registered, that should keep the punters wanting more!!!!, see the articles, cannot use filters to put info into articles until hm is registered

Rvg72
08-22-2008, 01:05 PM
So nobody has any comments on the article itself? Let me know if certain things aren't explained well enough or if you have any questions. I've been 4betting a lot more (in the right spots) with good results.

Roy

jake--
08-23-2008, 06:44 PM
I don´t like this at all, will stop recommending this program after seeing this. Too much info I´d say. Sucks for us who are smart enough to figure it out by ourselves.

melles
08-24-2008, 07:08 AM
How many hands do you need on a player before these stats start to converge?

morny
08-24-2008, 10:16 AM
Its a good question, id estimate that most people stats will even off after about 500 hands to give us a reasonable idea and the bigger the sample the more accurate assumptions we can make but obviously we need to consider other things like our own image, their image, are they the type of players that would adapt when their image is good or bad or are they just playing more aggressive/passive this session. These are all things we should be considering and then make our decisions based on all the info, sometimes we just get unlucky and regardless of their image and 3bet % they will sometimes pick up a hand and theres not much you can do.

How you react to the information afterwards is also important, when you 4bet and he pushed with KQ or AJ what do you think made him think you were bluffing, did you consider previous history especially the history at the table, image etc and try and look back and see what made him push, maybe a bet sizing tell, maybe a timing tell, maybe he was just tilting, do you have a tendency to 4bet early in a session with bluffs etc and although this last paragraph isnt probably releveant to the document as such it is relevant that you dont just base your decsions on just stats as Roy mentioned in the article and other factors should be taken into consideration

Travys
08-24-2008, 09:46 PM
If I understand well, the 4-bets you're talking about in the article are big pot-size-like committing 4-bets ?
All 4-bets aren't committing for 100bb. I often do a little 4-bet to keep the room to fold, or to give vilain the impression he has some fold equity if he shoves (when I hold AA...).

Rvg72
08-25-2008, 12:02 AM
If I understand well, the 4-bets you're talking about in the article are big pot-size-like committing 4-bets ?
All 4-bets aren't committing for 100bb. I often do a little 4-bet to keep the room to fold, or to give vilain the impression he has some fold equity if he shoves (when I hold AA...).

To keep the math simple in this article it was a pot committing 4 bet with a call if the villain pushed over top to show even in this non optimal way that a lot of hands are good against frequent 3 bettors. By mixing things up, making smaller 4 bets etc you can further open up your 4bet range and increase your EV by quite a bit.

The main complication in the article if I used a smaller 4bet would be when the villain just calls - this could also happen if you make a large 4bet but at that point when there is much more in the pot than in your stack on the flop you generally aren't going to be folding.

Roy

Leonardo51
08-26-2008, 01:22 PM
So nobody has any comments on the article itself? Let me know if certain things aren't explained well enough or if you have any questions. I've been 4betting a lot more (in the right spots) with good results.

Roy

Yea, it's about time there was some discussion on the article content. My opinion is that this is gold. I've read it a couple of times and already I'm looking forward to people 3 and 4 betting me - I feel like I'll be better armed than most of them.

I hope these articles keep coming as the standard is so good in articles 1-4. What's the news on video tutorials?

I agree that the material should be secure. Though it might sound medieval, can I suggest that if anyone wants a hard copy the try writing it out, y'know, with a pencil & paper? Seriously, if you do this you really will digest the content.

JayBee
10-07-2008, 06:20 PM
I found the article very interesting... I hope to see lots more of such quality articles in the future... I play at boss media (IPN) where the tables are 5-max and not 6-max... This obviously means that I can't use the percentage modifiers since they are biased by the fact that there is a seat less to open from and thus 3bet from... I would like some ideas to what I can do to go around this? Maybe a way to alter the data? The problem has a lot of similarities with when a 6-max table goes 5-handed... But it's not exactly the same since you would probably be using the same 3betting frequencies when the table is 1 short... And these frequencies are mainly obtained from a 6-max game whereas the frequencies that I obtain in a 5-max game are obviously soley based on a maximum of 5 players...

Hope that someone have some ideas for this trouble... So far I just use the percentage modifiers from the article that come in to play in a 5-max game reduced by 0.05 each... Just to avoid making any big mistakes by 4-betting too much but still 4betting more than I usually do...

quakes
01-30-2009, 11:36 AM
How did you guys calculate what hands are profitable to get in b/c one of my calculations isn't matching up? Your article says that 4bet/calling AKo is somewhat profitable against a person with 5% 3bet but I disagree.

Assume NL100, $100 stacks.
Hero initially raises to $3 w AKo, SB 3bets to $10, BB folds, back to us. Pot is $14. We can shove or fold.

SB has a 3bet of 5%, and will get in JJ+, AKo, AKs (3% of hands), so he will fold about 40% of the time (you used 39%, so I'll use that too.)

So by shoving, 39% of the time we pick up the pot of $14.
0.39x14 = $5.46

61% of the time, we are called and have 39.8% equity. We put in $97 more dollars and get out 39.8% of the final pot, which will be $201 ($198 after rake).
So 0.61 [-97 + .398(198)] = -$11.10
So our overall EV is -$5.64

Even Rake free 0.61 [-97 + .398(201)] = -$10.37
Overall EV -$4.91

Even if you play around with the assumptions, you can't make it +EV (you need about 13 dollars more in dead money to make it breakeven).

Maybe my calculations are off, but I think this could be a mistake.

Rvg72
01-30-2009, 05:45 PM
Use this tool:

http://www.rvgsoftware.com/default.aspx

I did the calcs based on a $4 raise by you and a $14 reraise which I think is pretty typical in NL100. If you plug in the hand range assumptions I used in the article for 5%:

3bet: TT+,AQ+,76s
Call all-in: JJ+, AK

It ends up being +0.03 so basically break even but slightly on the + side.

Roy

quakes
01-30-2009, 11:49 PM
That tool is wrong.

Going all-in has a positive expectation of $0.03

Villain folds 44.90% of the time.
Your EV vs his calling range is 39.79%.

Villain is actually folding 40% of the time, not 44.9% (makes a huge difference).
TT+,AQo+,AQs+,76s is 5% of hands, 30 pair combos, 32 AK/AQ combos, 4 76s combos, so 66 total combos.

JJ+, AK is 3% of hands, or 24+16 combos (40 combos).

So villain is folding 2%/5% (40%) or 26/66 (39.4%) of the time. Your article also agrees with this, saying 39% fold. The tool is wrong.

Rvg72
01-31-2009, 04:03 PM
You have AK so the number of AA, KK, AK and AQ combo's are much lower. You can see how small changes, even with the size of the bet and raise change the EV from positive to negative here. AKo vs a 5% 3 bettor is right around break even and depending how you tweak the numbers it can be ahead or behind.

I personally would not have an issue getting it all-in for 1 buyin with AKo in this spot vs a 5% 3 bettor but vs a 4% with a big sample size and I have to play it much differently. On marginal / break evenish spots I'd tend to try and get it all-in frequently since I feel it makes my other big hands more valuable and also I prefer making tables play bigger / deeper and big pots like this go a long way towards that. I'm not saying I would take obviously -ev situations and make plays like this just for meta factors but anything close I tend to go the more aggressive route.

Roy

quakes
02-01-2009, 07:58 PM
You have AK so the number of AA, KK, AK and AQ combo's are much lower. You can see how small changes, even with the size of the bet and raise change the EV from positive to negative here. AKo vs a 5% 3 bettor is right around break even and depending how you tweak the numbers it can be ahead or behind.

I personally would not have an issue getting it all-in for 1 buyin with AKo in this spot vs a 5% 3 bettor but vs a 4% with a big sample size and I have to play it much differently. On marginal / break evenish spots I'd tend to try and get it all-in frequently since I feel it makes my other big hands more valuable and also I prefer making tables play bigger / deeper and big pots like this go a long way towards that. I'm not saying I would take obviously -ev situations and make plays like this just for meta factors but anything close I tend to go the more aggressive route.

Roy
Thanks for the reply, didn't think of the card removal effects.

quakes
02-07-2009, 08:38 PM
Ok, I was playing around with the tool to try and figure out play vs short stacks and I think I found some sort of discrepancy.

I included what I was doing in the attachment. I wanted to model a play where I raised to $6 with ATs, the short stack shoves for $40, there's $12 in dead money, and I can call or fold. The program says fold, but I think it should be a call. You are calling $34 to win $92 (12+40+40), so you need around 37% equity and ATs has 38.25% equity against that range. In other words, you put in 34 more and get out (.3825x92) $35.19 at showdown, for a +$1.19 play.

purplecard
03-14-2009, 02:51 PM
When i play I 3bet around 8 procent but i dont adjust my 3bet as high as the article says in a specific position. I am around 8 in any position. (Maybe this is a leak?) But if the villains follow the article they dont have a good read on me because of this.

My 4bet is depending on the article though. I 4bet with AKo when villains 3bet are 5 for example. But I dont adjust their 3bet depending on position. (Maybe because me myself dont 3bet more in a specific position)

I wonder if anybody adjust villains 3bet as much as the article says?

For example: I am UTG with JJ and raise to 8 on a nolimit 200table. A villain on SB raise to 26 and he has a 3bet as high as 10 on 5k hands. According to the article I should multiple 10 with 0,55 which give the villain 5,5 in adjusted 3bet. Am i really going to fold this hand now? His number is under 6,5 which is the suggested value to 4bet for an allin. I 4bet in this example everytime but maybe this is wrong?

Exampe 2: I am on the button with 88 and raise to 8 and the BB raise to 26. His 3bet is also 10 and according to the article I should multiple this with 1,4 which gives him 14 in adjusted 3bet. Am i really going to 4bet for an allin here in this spot? I always fold here.

How do you generally act with these situations. I know that there could be special situations but when you grind with the autopilot on it would be interesting how you play.

Rvg72
03-15-2009, 01:43 AM
The article uses fold or shove as the two option because mathematically it simplifies things but calling or raising smaller is always on option.

You really should get in the habit of adjusting ranges though based on position since it will make a big difference and once you get used to it it will become easier and easier.

In the first example getting it all-in is usually a mistake with those #'s although probably not a big one. A better plan might be to call since you are in position

In the second example his 3bet range is most likely so wide that 4betting big with 88 should be profitable. It is even better if you have not been 4betting him much since that will make him fold more and fold equity is a big part of this edge. Later in the session when you pick up a bigger hand and make the same play he is more likely to get it in with weaker hands

Roy

purplecard
03-15-2009, 04:02 AM
Okey. Thanks for your answer. But in my second example if I 4bet to 68 on a NL200table I really should call if he go allin right? Or should I 4bet up to 52 for example and fold if he go allin?

What do you think about my habit to almost always 4bet so that is one third of my maximum buyin? An option is to 4bet one third of buyin when you have a hand to call an allin with and one quarter when you fold an allin but if the villains see this I´m screwed. Maybe I can mix it up. But I dont want to let the villains to se a cheap flop with AK when I have JJ or QQ.