Home / Community / Forum / Poker Education / Texas Hold'Em Cash Games /

AKs facing cold 4bet vs Unknown

Old
Default
AKs facing cold 4bet vs Unknown - Thu Jan 16, 2014, 05:06 PM
(#1)
bhoylegend's Avatar
Since: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,261
Ok, this is a super easy hand to analyse I am sure, but being fairly new to the 6 max variant I just want to make sure its as standard as I am thinking.

Button raises, I 3bet, BB cold 4bets and he is unknown to me, I make the assumption that he knows that I know that the button is stealing so often here that a 3bet is pretty profitable with a lighter range, however, I also know that he is likely to think his 4bet is profitable and that I will fold my lighter range, so, super standard stack off at 6 max?

If I had been still playing full ring, I think I would probably have been considering a fold, even though the relative positions are the same. 6 Max has got me a little more aggro.

 
Old
Default
Thu Jan 16, 2014, 07:27 PM
(#2)
spand42's Avatar
Since: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,496
Well played.

Like you say, villain could easily 4Bet lighter than normal knowing that your restealing range likely does not compose of purely value hands.

Calling a cold 4Bet with AK Out of Position isn't really going to be profitable, so shoving is the best play here.

It will certainly take a while to adjust to 6Max from FR and the preflop aggression that 6Max brings, but you played this spot well!
 
Old
Default
Fri Jan 17, 2014, 06:27 AM
(#3)
ArtySmokesPS's Avatar
Since: Oct 2011
Posts: 7,346
I don't think the BB is squeezing light very often, tbh. 4-bets from the BB are usually monsters in my experience. That said, there's so much dead money in the pot that shipping with your blockers should be profitable. Villain will have JJ+ quite often, but you could also be freerolling vs AKo.


Bracelet Winner
 
Old
Default
Fri Jan 17, 2014, 11:18 AM
(#4)
mike2198's Avatar
Since: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,485
How do you work out if we can still shove here with the dead money in the pot vs JJ+ and AK or a diff range of hands if you got reads?

I think you have to work out your equity vs that range then you x or divide them and then you have to do something with the pot odds?
 
Old
Default
Fri Jan 17, 2014, 12:42 PM
(#5)
ArtySmokesPS's Avatar
Since: Oct 2011
Posts: 7,346
Yes, it's a pot odds vs equity thing, which is quite difficult to work out at the time, it has to be said.

Assuming we shove and villain calls, our shove is for 4.95 effective total (villain's starting stack), but we've already put in 53c, so our final bet is for $4.42. The pot size if the action proceeds as expected will be 2*$4.95 plus the 17c the button chipped in, making a final pot of $10.07.
The equity we require to break even in this situation is the usual [cost of betting]/[Final pot] = 4.42/10.07 = 43.9%
Against a range of JJ+/AK, AKs has 42.8%, so this is closer than I first thought. (I'd initially expected us to only need about 40% equity, given all that dead money). What makes it more of a profitable play is that the BB might just fold to the shove (because he was squeezing light in the first place, or he suddenly hates his JJ/TT/AK when we 5-bet jam). So we make money if villain folds, and we break even if he calls. That's kind of a win/win for us.
I should perhaps point out that villain should be snapping with JJ, because he'll be getting even better pot odds because he's already put so much in the middle. It's one of those spots where the dead money means shoving is slightly +EV for hero, but it's even more +EV for the villain to call off (if he has a hand). In effect, it's just a cooler and you just let the variance Gods choose the winner.


Bracelet Winner

Last edited by ArtySmokesPS; Fri Jan 17, 2014 at 12:50 PM..
 
Old
Default
Fri Jan 17, 2014, 01:18 PM
(#6)
mike2198's Avatar
Since: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,485
So were shoving AK here with 42% when you need 43% so how tight must villain be 4betting for us to fold?
 
Old
Default
Fri Jan 17, 2014, 01:28 PM
(#7)
ArtySmokesPS's Avatar
Since: Oct 2011
Posts: 7,346
If his range is solely QQ+, we lose money, since AKs vs QQ+ is way down at 35%. However, most players that stack off QQ will also get it in with AK and you have 42% vs QQ+/AK.
The fact that we're suited in this particular spot actually counts a fair bit, even though suitednees only adds about 2% to your winning chances. With AKo, I'd strongly consider folding to the 4-bet if I'm readless.


Bracelet Winner
 
Old
Default
Fri Jan 17, 2014, 03:19 PM
(#8)
flight2night's Avatar
Since: Jun 2013
Posts: 59
great explanation arty clear and concise thx F2N thx for the hand bhoy

Last edited by flight2night; Fri Jan 17, 2014 at 03:20 PM.. Reason: spelling error
 
Old
Default
Fri Jan 17, 2014, 04:49 PM
(#9)
bhoylegend's Avatar
Since: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,261
Thanks for all the replies, thankfully, he folded. And I took down a very nice pot pre-flop.
 
Old
Default
Fri Jan 17, 2014, 06:20 PM
(#10)
Marc Rae's Avatar
Since: Aug 2013
Posts: 505
Sorry for the long post.. but I am trying to drill down these scenarios myself the last month or so... so this a good example for me to write this all up.

This is mostly an EV question for me. I think with good regs that have a balanced 4b bluff range or a villain you have a hyper agg dynamic with.. it's interesting to see if, with not only your top 1% hands are +EV, but also holdings like 22.. may also be +EV against a villain's balanced 4bet range, with 100BB+ effective stacks. I think this is quite different to tight regs (who play strictly abc).

The line here is to 3bet, with the PLAN to 5bet shove ONLY... against that specific villain hyper agg dynamic, or good balanced reg, where you are being 4bet.


Without any 4bet range, 5 bet fold info..

Let's say 4bet range in villain's position is 12%, and he calls off with 3% of his range, ie. (TT+, AK) 25% he calls and folds the rest of the 75% of holdings he is 4betting with.

If we fold obv, it is 0EV.
When we shove, we risk 3.32 to win 2.38.
If villain folds our EV is +2.38.
If villain calls we lose -3.32 x% of the time.
If villain calls we win 2.38+4.47 = 6.85, y% of the time.

When villain calls, we have 43.37% equity vs. TT+, AK.

.4337 * 6.85 (when we win) - .5663 * 3.32 (when we lose) = +1.09 EV, when we get called. It's a no brainer.

So if villain is folding 75% and calling 25%, so if we are faced in this situation 4 times
+2.38 (folds) +2.38 (folds) +2.38 (folds) +1.09 (calls) = 8.23/4 = +2.06 massive EV, which is what we would expect with our top range, but also because when villain is folding 75% of the time.

.................................................. ............

Let's consider a polarized villain's 1% 4bet range, which he/she is only 4betting with the intention of calling 5bet jams with... KK+, AKs.

We have 32.08% equity here vs villain's polarized 5bet call range.

If villain calls we lose -3.32 x% of the time.
If villain calls we win 2.38+4.47 = 6.85, y% of the time.

.3208 * 6.85 - .6792 * 3.32 = -0.28 EV, when we get called.

So if villain is folding 0% and calling 100%,
+0 +0 +0 -0.06 = -0.06/4 = -0.01 EV ~ BE-ish.

--------------------------------------------

As we are only using our 1% to 5bet jam in this example, the results are quite obvious.

A good excerise is to compare various balanced villain 4bet ranges, and villain's with hyper agg dyanmics where is the break even point + what equity you need (vs villain's calling/fold %) for 5b jamming 22+ for 100BB effective stacks... where against a particular villain, you may have +EV spots in the long run.

Because the other flip side to the coin is that, if a villain knows you are only jamming with your 1% holdings, and folding the rest (extreme example) how exploitable you may be seen as. Remember in context, the line here is to 3bet, with the PLAN to 5bet shove vs specific villains.

-------------------------------------------------
If bhoy's example, if we have 55 here, and the same villain stats... 12% 4bet range, and is folding 75% and calling 25%.

55 has 23.16% equity against his call range.

.2316 * 6.85 (when we win) - .7684 * 3.32 (when we lose) = -0.95 EV, when we get called. Nothing surprising here.

But if villain is folding 75% and calling 25%, and if we are faced in this situation 4 times
+2.38 +2.38 +2.38 +-0.95 = 6.19/4 = +1.55 EV. So this is extremely profitable / +EV vs this particular villain.

So interesting to see what is the BE point here (where folding or 5bet jamming is the same in this spot).


+2.38(x) - 0.95 (100-x) = 0
2.38x - 95 +.95x = 0
3.33x = 95
x = 28.52 Villain with a 28.5% fold to 5b jam 100+BB effective, is the same as folding or jamming ~ BE. So even if he has a 50% fold, it is +EV.

What about a villain with 8% 4bet range and 34% call / 66% fold... what's the edge here? what is the BE requirement here?
When we do go to showdown and 55's are shown, how will this benefit future plays vs villain?



So I think Mike, it's more of what is the BE % required against a villain's 5bet call/fold% here for +EV play, not so much how we are folding to a 4bet, because this line is specifically 3bet with the intention of 5bet jamming.

Last edited by Marc Rae; Fri Jan 17, 2014 at 07:02 PM..
 
Old
Default
Fri Jan 17, 2014, 06:45 PM
(#11)
spand42's Avatar
Since: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,496
Thanks for the great effort you put into that post Marc!

I might make a proper response once I've let it all properly sink in.

However I don't really understand the last bit of your post:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Rae View Post
So interesting to see what is the BE point here (where folding or 5bet jamming is the same in this spot).


+2.38(x) - 0.95 (100-x) = 0
2.38x - 95 +.95x = 0
3.33x = 95
x = 3.5 Villain with only a 3.5% fold to 5b jam 100+BB effective, this dynamic would be crazy.

Also in your last line of working, shouldn't x = 28.53 or is there something I'm missing?
 
Old
Default
Fri Jan 17, 2014, 06:55 PM
(#12)
Marc Rae's Avatar
Since: Aug 2013
Posts: 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by spand42 View Post
Thanks for the great effort you put into that post Marc!

I might make a proper response once I've let it all properly sink in.

However I don't really understand the last bit of your post:

Also in your last line of working, shouldn't x = 28.53 or is there something I'm missing?
NP at all.

I should have made it like this: (x = x%)
+2.38x - 0.95 (100-x) = 0
2.38x - 95 +.95x = 0
3.33x = 95

-----------

+2.38 x%
[villain is folding x% of the time]

- 0.95 (100-x%)
[100-x% is when villain calls with our -.95 EV]

= 0
[our break even point]


Last edited by Marc Rae; Fri Jan 17, 2014 at 06:59 PM.. Reason: oh yes, oops.. so many numbers.. it even confused me. post ammeded.
 
Old
Default
Fri Jan 17, 2014, 07:01 PM
(#13)
mike2198's Avatar
Since: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,485
Cool post Marc, ive copied and pasted this to look at in more detail, its interesting how people do the math differently. For some reason today i was just going to watch some vids on poker and then bhoy posts this so i ended up watching 1 episode on the mathematics of poker.

Im baffled with all this math the calc i saw on deuces was same as yours but he used combos as well, so he worked out villains range to call a shove 3 combos of TT 32 combos AQ+ 24 combos JJ+

Villains 3bet range was

99 TT 50% 6 combos
JJ+ 100% 24 combos
AJ KQ 50% 16
AQ AK 100% 32
A7s A9s 8
45s 65s JTs QJs 16

59 calling combos,102 combos - 59 = 43 folding combos
102/43= 42% fold equity

He also said he needs 52% fold equity for 88 to be a shove vs this range so i can only imagine no one at the micros is crazy enough for you ever to be able to shove 22.
 
Old
Default
Fri Jan 17, 2014, 07:05 PM
(#14)
Marc Rae's Avatar
Since: Aug 2013
Posts: 505
I think when combos are used, we are removing/adding holdings to weight/normalize towards a particular % range.

e.g. 3% is 99+, AKs. But we may realistically say TT+ and add a few combos of AKo. as an example.
Or.. JJ+ and add some combos of AKo and half combos of AQs.
 
Old
Default
Fri Jan 17, 2014, 10:20 PM
(#15)
Marc Rae's Avatar
Since: Aug 2013
Posts: 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by mike2198 View Post
59 calling combos,102 combos - 59 = 43 folding combos
102/43= 42% fold equity

He also said he needs 52% fold equity for 88 to be a shove vs this range so i can only imagine no one at the micros is crazy enough for you ever to be able to shove 22.

Just so it's clearer for you Mike.. what he is saying here is that out of the 102 with combos that villain is 3betting with, the villain is going to call off with 43 combos. Since he is folding 59 combos, he has a 57.8% fold (58% fold).


With those exact combos, it equates to a 7.69% 4bet range, and calling off with the 59 combos is 4.44%. What does 4.44% look like?.. TT+, AKs, AQs, AJs, AKo, and 4 combos of AQo.


88 has 37.86% equity vs this 4.44% range


.. and now you can do the rest using the above examples.. would be good to see what you can come up with in bhoy's hand, with 88 vs villains 4.44% here.
 
Old
Default
Sat Jan 18, 2014, 04:56 AM
(#16)
bhoylegend's Avatar
Since: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,261
Wow, so all this maths is what was behind what I was thinking on Thursday night?:

'Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eee, AKs BvB, lets do this!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!'
 

Getting PokerStars is easy: download and install the PokerStars game software, create your free player account, and validate your email address. Clicking on the download poker button will lead to the installation of compatible poker software on your PC of 51.7 MB, which will enable you to register and play poker on the PokerStars platform. To uninstall PokerStars use the Windows uninstaller: click Start > Control Panel and then select Add or Remove programs > Select PokerStars and click Uninstall or Remove.

Copyright (c) PokerSchoolOnline.com. All rights reserved, Rational Group, Douglas Bay Complex, King Edward Road, Onchan, Isle of Man, IM3 1DZ. You can email us on support@pokerschoolonline.com