SplitSuit.com

Configuring Our Poker HUD

A HUD is a very helpful tool that is unique to online poker v live poker. It helps us visualize real-time data about our opponents. Poker is a game of information, and the more we have, the better we should be able to play. Using a HUD is something you should heavily consider, assuming you are not using one already. But information is useless unless you understand how to utilize it, so this COTW will be all about the HUD stats you can consider using and how to use them better.

(Keep in mind that this post will be more about the HUD stats that I use. We can spout out stats all day that are useful, but at the end of the day, there is limited space for stats, and we should use the stats that we are most used to and understand their usage and implementation. It should also be noted that a HUD is personal. Different player types will use different stats. I tend to LAG and you will notice lots of my stats revolve around knowing how often a player is going to fold to a play that I make. If you play TAG, you may want to consider stats that revolve around how often your opponent will call with worse hands. Experiment with stats that work well for you and use the information that allows you to optimize your time at the tables.)

Basics HUD Stats:

VPIP:

This is one of the most important stats. It tells us how often our opponents are putting money into the pot voluntarily (so posting the blind and never putting another cent into the pot that hand does not count as vpip). I personally color-code this stat so I can quickly see if someone is playing too many hands, too few, and get a quick idea on their player type.

PFR:

This stat goes hand-in-hand with VPIP (and is also color-coded). It tells us how often this player is raising preflop. This stat should be taken in consideration with VPIP. A 15% PFR might seem high, but there is a massive difference in player type between a 17/15 and a 72/15. This stat can also be heavily tied with ATS.

AF (or AFq):

This section is saved for Mpethy. I do not use either of these stats, so he is the man to talk to for them.

ATS:

A player’s attempt to steal is very important for us. It gives us an immediate idea of the player’s positional awareness which is invaluable to us. So a player might be 16/13 with an ATS of 35%, and another 16/13 with an ATS of 15%. The player with the ATS of 15% is not very positionally aware, and doesn’t weight hands played from LP the same way the higher 35% ATS player would. So it helps us frame lots of information, everything from their 3B range to their open raise range from MP2. Also remember that ATS is relative to a player’s VPIP and PFR.

ATS is very useful in that it can help us build our 3b range. Say they steal, have a high ATS and a high Foldv3B, then we can mathematically go into Poker Stove, do some O-Range v Cont-Range calculations, and figure out an optimal 3B range, size, and frequency.

3B:

This stat tells us how often a player 3 bets preflop. This stat can help us frame a players range and frequency when they 3B, but can also help us plan out whether or not we steal or make a certain play preflop (like 4b/fold/flat). Make sure to check positional stats on 3B’s, as many players are tight 3B’rs in EP/MP, but have large 3B ranges from the button and blinds (usually due to their high resteal %s).

CB:

Knowing how often a player CB’s the flop is very important to us. If a player has a high CB, say 80%+, then we know that they will often times fire a flop CB regardless of their hand value. If a player has a low CB, say 40%, and they fire a flop CB, we can assume they probably have a stronger hand value. Remember, hand values are relative, so take everything with a huge grain of salt like always.

We can sometimes use CB to help us plan hands preflop. And we can also use their CB stat, coupled with their flop action, to make better players. Say a 14/8 CB: 55% raises UTG, and we call OTB with 22 and see a HU flop. The flop is Js 6c 5h, and he checks to us. Well his CB% makes us think he would only CB his strong hands, and thus his check is weak. So we can fire a bet here and expect him to fold a large % of the time, folding out the logical AK/77/88/99/TT part of his range.

Hands:

Another very important stat. We always want to take sample size into consideration. If we have 500 hands on someone, then we can assume their stats are more “real” than someone with only 30 hands. I consider 200 hands a starting sample, 500 a decent sample size, and 1K+ a great sample size. But also remember that people do change their styles. So I only show stats from the last 3months for players. Old stats are useless if they were 11/7 but now play 16/14.

Intermediate HUD Stats:

FoldvCB:

This is a very helpful stat for us. If we know that a player is folding a ton of CB’s, then we would want to CB our air almost always, regardless of texture, because they have a tendency to just fold outright. If we know that a player has a low FoldvCB, say 35%, then we would want to VB them like a fiend, and either consider not CB-ing or throwing multiple barrels as a bluff. You can also use “CallflopCB” if you want, but that doesn’t take into consideration how often they raise CB’s, and my style is based around folds in the first place, so I use FoldvCB.

Foldv3B:

For players that resteal a lot, this stat is a must. It tells us how often this player folds when facing a 3B. This could mean that they open raised, or even that they through-called and got 3B. If I am ever going to consider a resteal, I want to check how often this player steals and then I can do some simple O-Range vs. Cont-Range calculations to see if I can make an outright profitable 3B. As the game continues to mature, expect this number to constantly get smaller. Having an 80% Foldv3B used to be standard, but now a days, most good stealers are keeping their Foldv3B down around 65%.

You can use this stat for many uses. If you are considering a squeeze, you can look a the Foldv3B of the original raiser and the through-callers. You can consider this for bluffing. You can also consider this for VB 3B sizing. If you know someone has a Foldv3B of 15%, and that they are constantly calling 3B’s regardless, then when you 3B AA you should consider using a larger size for some extra outright value. Also remember this is relative to open raise. It is pretty standard to see a 10/8 with a Foldv3B of 40%. Well that is because his O-range is so inherently strong that he is not often releasing hands when you 3B him.

FoldvTurnCB:

This lets us know how often our opponents are folding in spots that we raise preflop, CB flop, and fire the turn again. This is useful both when we are bluffing (taking advantage of light floaters with heavy turn continuance ranges) or VB-ing (taking advantage of players that rarely release a pair as the pot continues to grow). Again, you can also use “CallvTurnCB” if you are a TAG and considering going for multiple barrels with like KQ on a Qxxx board.

WTSD:

A stat I don’t personally keep on my HUD, but it certainly has usage. If you see someone has a very high WTSD, then you know that they are rarely releasing single pair hands, and they tend to get very sticky with hands they deem valuable. Make sure to keep VPIP in mind when considering this stat. A 12/10 that has a WTSD of 25% is not even close to the person playing 60/5 with a WTSD of 25%. The 12/10 has an inherently stronger range when he plays pots, and thus will show them down. The 60/5 has an inherently weaker range, yet still gets to SD a decent amount, and thus with weaker hand values.

W$@SD:

Another stat I don’t personally use in real-time. This stat tells us how often they win money when they get to showdown. This is helpful for knowing how often they are getting to SD with weak vs. strong hands. This stat should be looked at with WTSD in mind. If you see an 18/12 with a WTSD: 16% and W$@SD: 60%, then you know they are getting to SD only with the strongest hands, and usually releasing marginal stuff somewhere along the line. But if you see a 42/17 with a WTSD: 34% and W$@SD: 41%, then you should consider only VB-ing this person, and occasionally consider a “light”VB.

Advanced HUD Stats:

Blind Specific Fold & Resteal:

I am just starting to use these more often in my own game, and they are super helpful as the game becomes more aggressive in terms of stealing and restealing. I keep both the SB resteal&foldvsteal and the BB resteal&foldvsteal up now. I don’t need to keep “callvsteal” up because 100-resteal-foldvsteal = callvsteal…and again, my HUD real estate is too precious to waste on things I can calculate myself in .2 seconds. Keeping both of these stats up help me know who I should be stealing from, who I might consider avoiding, and who I need to have a plan and balanced 4B range against. It also keeps me from having to go to the pop up and waste time that might portray “I am checking your stats to consider light 4B-ing you, so just one sec while I look at some more things please.”

FoldvFlopCR:

Certainly an important stat for those that fight for pots. I always like to know if someone is only continuing with the toppest part of their range when I CR them. If they are, then I can certainly consider bluff CR-ing their CB.

This is also useful when I flop big hands. Say I flop a set but their FoldvFlopCR is 85%. Then I probably don’t want to CR them as they will fold too often. So maybe I consider a check/call flop and donk turn. Or consider a check/call flop and CR turn. Again, a line change that I never would have considered optimally unless I had the information available.

RiverCallWin%:

I love this stat. It lets me know how often they win when they call the river. Now I can’t just use this as a stand alone stat, but I can take it into consideration of the entire hand. If I take the donk line (bet flop/check turn/bet river), and know they have a very low RiverCallWin%, then I can consider maybe betting a pinch more when I am VB-ing. I also know not to bluff the rivers against this person because they will station it often.

I can certainly use this stat with things like WTSD and W$@SD. If I know they are going to SD a ton, and their RiverCallWin% is very low, then I can consider VB-ing them to death. If their RiverCallWin% is high though, I can usually infer that they are only getting to SD with the strongest of hands. So that player is unlikely to pay off a VB with a wide range of hands.

HUD Pop Up:

As you get stronger with stats and your sample sizes begin to build on certain players, you can start using your pop up to get more detailed information on your opponents. The things I check the most often:

EP PFR:

If I see someone is a 15/12 and they raise UTG, I don’t really get a great idea on their range from there. I can assume it is tight, but there is a huge difference in my play if a player has a 5% raise from UTG vs. a 11% raise from UTG. The pop up can give me a more detailed look at their “exact” range from each position. A tighter EP PFR tends to imply they have the strongest of hands and there are more IO against their range. A wider EP PFR tends to imply they have a wider range that might not offer as much in IO, and thus calling might be less ideal.

MP PFR:

Same concept as above

3B% By Position:

If a player is 14/12 and has a 3b: 3% I might not be able to draw too much from that. But if I see that person has an EP3B: 0%, MP3B: 1%, LP3B: 5% and Blinds3B: 7%, I can start to get an idea on how they are 3B-ing in general. So if this person 3B’s my steals, I can see they are probably doing it with a wider range more often than not, and can consider either 4B-ing or floating due to having more information.

3B + CB:

I don’t keep this stat on my normal HUD, but will habitually check my pop up (even before I decide to flat a 3B) to plan out whether or not I am floating lots of flops, especially with mediocre pairs. If someone is 3B-ing wide, and not CB-ing often, then I know I can float more liberally and stab when they check to me. If someone is 3B-ing wide and CB-ing like 100%, then I know I can float and raise lots of CB’s when I miss. Again, more information just helps me make better plays.

Call Open Raise:

This is a stat I am considering putting on my HUD. This helps me put someone on a more specified range when they call my open raises. If I see their COR is 5% then I know they are really only calling my open raises with pairs (22-QQ). If it is bigger, then I can see they are calling wider and wider (going from SC’s, to BBs, etc)

Correlation Between HUD Stats:

Stats can be useful on their own, but if we look at stats coupled with other stats, we can get a more valid image and more correct idea of a player. This section will look at stat correlation that I use to get a better idea of ranges, player types, and also frame a plan of action for a hand.

VPIP & PFR Gap:

I do not use AF/AFq as I have found very little usage for it in my player profiling experience. But, I get a good idea of aggression based on this gap. Say we have a player who is 15/X. If that player has relatively small gap, then I can assume that player is more aggressive. They understand open raising as opposed to open limping…they probably CB more as a result, and are probably more positionally aware. But, if that player has a larger relative gap, then I can generally assume more passivity. The player will open limp more, cold call more, and be more fit-or-fold postflop. This gap takes FR momentum theory into consideration, and has a tendency to put you on the right track for stereotyping.

But also note that I have used the word “relatively” quite a bit. Say we have two players. A 12/10 and a 42/10. Both have a PFR of 10, but they are both very different player types given the width in gap. We can also use it from a “how far is the gap” POV. Say we have a 14/10 (with a 4 point gap) and then someone who is 24/18 (a 6 point gap). Well we don’t just want to say the 14/10 is more aggressive because his gap is closer together…because in the relative sense, the 24/18 is going to be much more aggressive in general.

ATS & 3B:

Let’s take a look at two different players. One is 15/12 with an ATS: 35% and 3b: 4%. The other is a 15/12 with an ATS: 16% and 3b: 4%. Both have the same VPIP/PFR/3B%, but we notice that their ATS differ significantly. So what can we infer from this?

Well we can assume that the player with the higher ATS is more positionally aware. They understand playing lots of hands from LP v EP, and they steal as an effect of that understanding. But, we see they have the same 3B%, so why do we care?

Well we care because each of these players would be 3B-ing for entirely different reasons. Say it folds to us OTB, we steal with T9s, and the BB 3B’s us. If he is the 15/12/35/4, then he is doing so because he understands you are stealing, and is thus restealing. If the 15/12/16/4 3B’s you, it is not as likely that he is restealing. He is 3B-ing because he feels his hand is strong enough to 3B you. So his range is going to be de-polarized, and the 15/12/35/4 is going be fairly polarized more often than not. This means you can approach them both differently in respect to your 4b/flat/fold game.

ATS/Blind Specific Resteal & Foldv3B:

I personally love this one as it makes my preflop life a breeze in aggressive positional situations. Now, it may seem like a pain to look at so much at once, but it gets easier the more you do it. This correlation often times gives me an idea on their Foldv4B. We cannot really use the natural Foldv4B stat because we often times don’t have a very large sample size on how a player reacts to 4B’s, esp 4B’s in a specific situation.

So I like to use ATS and Blind Specific Resteal to see how often they will be aggressive and resteal my steal. If they have a high ATS and Resteal, then we know they are positionally aware and understand aggressive 3B-ing a steal. Now, say we have a player who is 17/15 ATS: 42% SBresteal: 9% Fv3B: 72%. I steal with 44 OTB, he 3B’s and it folds back to us. I know from his ATS that he is positionally aware and understands what I am doing. His SBresteal tells me that he understands restealing and is most likely doing this with a polarized range given the range he is using and he is OOP. And his Foldv3B is over 70%, telling me he is selective with the hands he continues with as the pot sizes gets large.

We can estimate from all of this that his 3B range is nice and wide, very bottom-side polarized, and that he will fold to a 4B more often than not. There is usually a strong correlation between Foldv3B and Foldv4B, and couple that with the width of his natural resteal range, a 4B can be a very profitable play here (as a flat call is meh in current game conditions). From here, it just becomes a simple O-Range vs. Cont-Range calculation to select the optimal size/frequency/hand range.

Limp/Call & FoldvCB:

I love using this combination of stats for isolating players. If I see a player has a Limp/Call of 80% and a FoldvCB of 80%, then you can be damn sure that I am going to isolate them with ATC. I will probably even size my raise larger because I know they are going to call a ton preflop and give it up a ton postflop. This is just printing money, and I like printing money.

We can also use this for other player types. Say someone has a Limp/Call of 72% and a FoldvCB of 45%, then I know they are calling a lot preflop, but not always just going to roll over to the CB. So I need not only change my thoughts on sizing preflop, but also change my hand range because I can no longer just rely on getting a fold on the flop a ton. Again, we can make better plays, everything from size/plan/hand range given information gleaned from stat correlation.

FoldvCB & FoldvTurnCB:

Being I play a very aggressive style, these stats together make postflop play much easier. The correlation between these two stats can make line planning, even from preflop, 90x easier. Say we have a player who has a FoldvCB: 40% and a FoldvTurnCB: 90%. This means this player has a tendency to float CB’s liberally, but only continue onwards from the turn with the strongest of their hands. This would be the type of person I would liberally double barrel as a bluff, but rarely double barrel with a TP type hand.

We can also use this when considering value lines. Say we open raise with 77 and a 20/10 3b: 2% FoldvCB: 76% FoldvTurnCB: 33% calls in position and we see a flop of J73. We CB and he calls. The turn comes a 3 and it is our action. We know that he folds to CB’s a decent amount, so when he continues, he does so with a hand that he deems as fairly strong. But we also see that once he calls the CB, he tends not to fold to double barrels. So we can make a largely sized value double barrel, say 85%PSB, in order to max value all the way down. If he had a FoldvTurnCB of 75% then I might make a smaller bet to encourage a wider part of his range to continue, or even go for a CR instead. Again, take lines that are based on more than just his VPIP and PFR.

Conclusion:

When playing, consider using stats that work well for you, and also consider how the stats interrelate so we can make more optimal decisions. Lots of these correlations I have written about I have noticed through my own post-sessions analysis of players. They are all fairly logical, and I’m sure there are hundreds that I have yet to find. Always be looking to see how you can use different stats to come up with better lines (in sizing/planning/our hand range) while playing.

Hopefully this helps a ton for those of you new to stats and HUDs. This should be a great starter point getting you away from the default HUDs. Again, poker is a game of information, so get information and process it as best as possible to make life easier and more profitable. If you have any questions, please don’t hesitate to ask. And if you have your own correlations that you use, please share =)

Cliffnotes:

HUDs are good
Pick stats that work well in your own playstyle
Certain stats correlate heavily with other stats that can give us great amounts of information
Explore stat correlation on your own to find things that work for you
Enjoy and good luck!

*SS*

One of the bigger things I get when I work with people is the consideration of breaking into LAG play. LAG play, for those unaware, is notation for a “loose aggressive” player. There are tremendous differences between TAG and LAG players, but the common misconceptions of LAG players are what make it, in my opinion, the most profitable style in today’s micro games.

So other than the textbook definition, what is a LAG? A LAG is simply a TAG on steroids. A LAG plays more hands, they play them more aggressive, and because of this, must be solid on more levels. It is important to emphasize this…because LAG play is NOT for everyone. If you do not have your fundamentals down, if you do not understand most spots you get into, if you cannot quickly come up with an optimal, or near-optimal, line…then LAG is not for you. If you are not a winning TAG player, there is no chance you will be a successful LAG. A LAG is a solid player that understands situations, adjustments, and the ’secret’ ingredient that makes him successful, well-timed pressure.

Pressure is why this style is successful. When talking about pressure, it is important to note that the most amount of pressure can be placed while in position. Just the threat of putting a bet out makes most opponents play differently against us (us will now refer to LAGs), and usually in a more passive way. Because of that, LAGs will focus, even more heavily than a TAG does, on positional play. Everything is based on position to a LAG. Here is a positional heatmap by position by player type:

From SplitSuit Drop Box

(the darker the color = the more hands played)

You see LAGs focus everything on LP play, with heavy emphasis in the CO and button. This doesn’t vary at all from TAGs, as TAGs are very positionally aware and ramp up how many hands they play as they get closer to the button. But LAGs take this a step further and start adding more hands a bit sooner, and also add even more hands from the CO and button. A TAG might only steal 35%, while a LAG is constantly focused on pressuring every edge and may be stealing around 60%. This is your first step in transitioning to a LAG…you don’t just randomly jump from 13/11 to 20/18…you ease into it and get used to playing more hands, adding initially on the button, then the CO, then the HJ, etc.

The second part about pressure is actually why this style is so successful now a days, and even more so, at the micros. This is because the average player is better, and now understands not to make 200bb pots with 2nd pair…they understand folding in the SB and not over defending and getting into tough spots OOP…they understand not getting involved in too large a pot with single pairs. It is that same knowledge that allows LAGs to thrive. If players are folding at a certain threshold, then all a LAG player needs to do is pressure to that exact threshold to get folds. A LAG operates successfully in a fold-rich environment…and today’s games (where the tables have about 70% of people per table with a vpip of 15% or less) are perfect for it given the “standard threshold” players share.

Talking about players for a moment…let’s cover which tables are best. If you are playing 25% of your hands, and raising almost all of them…which tables do you think you are going to the best at? One where lots of pots are going multi-way? Or a table where lots of pots are going HU? Of course you would want the HU pots table. In a MW pot you are forced to have hands, and forced to hit hands in order to profit. In a HU pot you can apply more pressure, win with no hand, and get involved more often. Because of this you want tighter tables. I know many players that don’t play during the day-time because the games are filled with nitRegs and 24 tabling HUDbots…but why is this bad? If those players are just going to set-mine and thus fold 85% of the time postflop, why not take advantage of that? If they are going to play super face-up…why not abuse them for that? I prefer very tight tables when I am LAGing…something like 5%-15% table vpip and no real pressure spots.

Having other pressure spots on your table will make your LAG life hell. These pressure spots are people who don’t just roll over and play dead postflop, good shortstackers, and aggressive 3b’rs. Why? Good shortstackers will adjust and reship on you often preflop, esp when you steal against them. They get enough folds from your range if you have a 60% ATS (your O-range is 60% of hands, your C-range is like 10% of hands, so they get folds 83% of the time and make mega-profit from you). The aggressive 3b’rs will ruin your flow at the table, show other people that you aren’t invincible (which then creates a table dynamic where even 12/10 nitTAGs are trying to 3ball you), and put you in tough spots. The other player type will just float you often postflop (either in a value or float/bluff way) and will not just roll over to your aggression. Remember, a LAG operates best in a fold-rich environment…if a table isn’t giving that to you, then get off it and find any of another 400 tables that will.

One of the things that helped me play LAG was looking into my TAG game. I found the situations that made me shudder while playing TAG. If I faced a raise on a certain board, and hated life because of it, I noted it. If I hated certain turn cards, I noted it. While transitioning into a LAG I took all of these spots that made TAG-me shudder…and applied them. If I as a TAG, say 13/12, hated a certain spot…why wouldn’t 90% of other TAGs feel the same way? This helped give me a framework for looking at pressure situations and learning how to explore new ones while implementing them into my own game.

* * * * * *

I’ve mentioned a few times that fundamentals are way more important while playing LAG. In saying that, it should also be noted that your misunderstandings will be amplified, as the situation will arise more often. So if you CB poorly, then seeing that spot more often is going to burn you more money. If you don’t double barrel well, then you are going to be less profitable postflop. Again, if you cannot play a TAG style well, then adding more spots postflop is just going to murder your WR.

Let’s talk about postflop for a minute. There are some very important things to consider when moving into LAG play and playing more than just a preflop game. We already talked about where to add more hands when playing LAG (LP) and we do that in an effort to steal more preflop and also set ourselves up to be in position for postflop decisions. Of course, unless we are on the button, we will not always be in position…but poker is all about taking high probability set ups…so do your best to get that button.

The big thing I suggest to people is playing LAG preflop and TAG postflop. A TAG game postflop should be very solid at CB-ing, have a decent handle on dubbing, and should understand VB-ing well. A lot of people think that LAG play means you have to play like a damn nutball postflop…running complex bluffs, VB-ing 3rd pair, and mastering the over-bet shove. This is pure poppycock, and again, another reason why people play poorly against LAGs. Keep your standard postflop game while LAGing, but pay more attention to pressure.

It should go without saying that your range postflop will be inherently weaker. If you are playing 40% of hands from the button, you will not be hitting stronger hands very often. Your most standard hand strength will be air, then weak 1 pairs…so you have to be able to play these hands well. It should also be noted that your value hands should actually get paid a bit better, but not in a crazy way. It is more standard that if you run LAG in 6max that you can get crazy value with something like KJ on a K6344 board from any pair….but in FR, people still maintain their hand strength thresholds. What I mean by this is that people have an ingrained threshold of pot size per hand strength. They understand that they want to make AI pots with nut hands, maybe 40bb pots with 1pair, maybe 90bb with 2pr on scary boards, etc (these are just random numbers…the real numbers are different and change by player type).

These thresholds are actually what allow LAGs to have easy lives postflop. Once a LAG understands where a players threshold is with TP, then postflop is a breeze. Say we are playing against PAUL555, and PAUL555 doesn’t make a pot bigger than 35bb with TPTK. This means, as a LAG, we are focused on making, or threatening, a 36bb pot everytime we bluff. Why should we make a 40bb pot? Or threaten a 55bb pot if we only need the pot size to be/look like 36bb? Exposure is very important while LAGing…it is important while bluffing to look like you are exposing a large part of your stack and creating or threatening a large pot. A big leak of new LAGs is that they over expose themselves and would make a 65bb pot against PAUL555 as a bluff, when that is just too large and a waste of time and money. Pay attention to your exposure through your betsizing and planning of the hand, and exploit a players threshold to apply correct pressure.

* * * * * *

Common misconceptions:

People hear loose and assume bad, they hear tight and assume good. Do not confuse a LAG with a spewy loose player. A LAG is a finely tuned machine that understands pressure, position, and adjustment…a fish is a player that is too loose and doesn’t have an off switch. It is actually this misconception that helps LAGs make money. People will call your 3b’s OOP with hands like AJ and 44 because they think you are crazy and that you are going to spew a stack if they hit. Remember this…it is important.

People also assume your PF range is wider than it is, especially from EP. Look back to the heatmap…do you see a high concentration of hands being played from EP? Be aware of position, don’t put yourself OOP if you can help it.

People also assume that you do not adjust. They think if you have an ATS of 80% over the first 30 hands at the table that you will remain that way the entire session. If the table starts approaching you differently, it is time to change what you are doing. You can do this by tightening up and letting your image play for you, by out aggressing, or by leaving the table.

* * * * * *

Some last minute notes on getting into LAG play. Some stats will change dramatically from TAG to LAG. Your VPIP and PFR will of course get looser and higher. You will notice your flopCB% will drop. If you were CBing 80% of the time as a LAG you would get killed in the longrun. Remember, people adjust to a certain extent, especially while the pot is smaller. So they will call your CB’s a little more liberally on certain board textures. You will also notice that your fold23b% will drop as well. You are stealing more, and it is important that you learn how to defend better when you get 3b. This will be my a mixture of 4b-ing, flatting and using position, and/or leaving the table.

I cannot stress enough how important position is. I’ve seen countless players try to get into LAG and they start by raising 22+/ATB/someSC from EP and go nuttier from there. They try to call a bunch of raises with SCs/SGs/Ax hands. These are people that are missing the big picture. Set yourself up for good profitable spots preflop, and we do that by using position with good playable hands or using spots where we can grab position.

Do not make mistakes! Easier said than done, but if you are making mistakes, your WR is going to suffer quickly. Because these spots show up so much more often, it is imperative that you either have few/no mistakes…or that you are very quick at finding and patching them. You will make less mistakes if you focus on position, VB-ing well, thinking through ranges, and exposure. LAG is still super simple poker because it is still poker. You just play a few more hands, apply a little more pressure, and make a little more money.

Good luck getting into LAG. Like usual, this is a guide and more of a “here are things to think about” rather than “here are the exact ranges and exact plays to use”. I apologize for those that will read this and hate that I didn’t make charts and such…but I assure you…put in some hours and you will grow a ton more from it. Best of luck on the tables, and stay off mine =)

Cliff Notes:

1.) learn to be a solid TAG before you start playing LAG
2.) position is 90x more important
3.) look for spots to apply pressure
4.) evaluate and adjust always
5.) leave the table if conditions become less ideal

(for those interested, I made a video showing a little of this LAG playstyle…Enjoy!)

*SS*

There are things that are inherently +EV and pretty much all of them are necessities: eating, sleeping, making money, wearing clothes. Without these we would die of starvation or embarrassment.

-EV things are almost always non-necessities: luxury and entertainment. But are they really -EV? From an economical standpoint in real $, yes. From a quality of life standpoint in entertainment dollars (E$), no. We would die of boredom without entertainment. Dying is generally a -EV proposition.

The only logical conclusion then is that people actually never choose actions that they calculate to be -EV. People always choose the best option available in their opinion and in some way or another try to accomplish their goals. Because of this and for the purposes of this article, accomplishing goals, whatever they are, is always +EV for the person trying to accomplish them. At least at the time the decision was made in their own mind.

Everyone is free to miscalculate expected value by overestimating, underestimating or excluding any and all variables in any decision they make. This is why some people choose illogical or irrational actions that end up being massively -EV for them. All the stupid things we have done in life probably seemed like a good idea at the time.

One entertainment example is buying a ticket to a hockey game. It is a -EV economical decision. You watch the game, spend a bunch more on overpriced drinks and souvenirs and come home with nothing to show for it but the experience and memories and worthless artifacts. But these experiences and memories are what make life interesting and therefore it is very difficult to determine what an entertainment dollar is actually worth.

Even more so, when coupled with the fact that people have different reasons for undertaking the same economical -EV decision. Some people go to the game because they are fans of the team or players, some like the social atmosphere, some just like the idea of excessive drinking and screaming. I decide that the entertainment value for a mid-level ticket is E$40 and I’ll spend $15 on concessions. My breakeven point for deciding to buy a ticket or not is $55 total for the event. I manage to get a ticket for $30 and they are having ½ price concessions, therefore I am left with a pretty big +EV decision when balancing E$ with real $ and decide to go. This is why the closer to the action you get in the arena, the higher the ticket price is as being closer to the action is more entertaining and therefore E$ value goes up.

The overall EV of any activity whether it be economical value, entertainment value or a combination of both, needs to be +EV for everyone involved for it to continue and survive. If any one group of participants become -EV in the activity, the activity ceases to exist because it requires the participation of all groups to function.

Gambling is a form of unnecessary entertainment, an apparently -EV decision, for most people. Yet they continue to deposit one quarter after another into that slot machine for a variety of reasons. Some people like to go to the casino to hang out with friends, some need something to do to kill an hour before work, some are in search of that elusive jackpot. These all have E$ value.

And what happens when they hit their one in a million shot? Bells and sirens go off in celebration and the casino manager comes out all smiles with a monster check and congratulates the lucky winner despite losing a ton of money. He doesn’t inform the winner that a one in a million shot at a $50k jackpot in quarter slots should cost him about $250k to win on average. The fact is that the player has determined that the enjoyment of the anticipation of a jackpot win plus a $50k overlay outweighs losing $250k one quarter at a time.

What would happen if the monster check was written out to “LOL Fish” and the staff came out and ridiculed the winner? One of two options: he either quits gambling or takes his winnings across the street to the next casino and proceeds to dump his entire jackpot in the next few months.

So how does this translate to the poker table? Poker clients do their part to bring fish in by literally giving away millions of dollars in sign up and reload bonuses as overlay on their entertainment value. At the table, we need to act like casino managers and make sure that the entire poker system remains +EV overall to everyone involved. If people become -EV overall at the table, they will either quit or switch tables, the same way the slot winner will quit or change casinos.

Fred is a 20-something and enjoys gambling with online poker. More accurately, Fred enjoys the rush of winning a big pot more than anything. Fred just sat down on your right at a 100NL table for 100BB and plays in a peculiar fashion. He limps in with 100% of his hands and calls a postflop shove 100% of the time with any pair or any draw because of his love of winning big pots.

You pick up pocket 2’s in the BB. Everyone folds to Fred who completes in the SB and you check. The flop is A74. Fred checks, you check behind. The turn is the marvelous 2. Fred checks, and you shove for obvious reasons. Fred snap calls and flips over 74o for 2 pair with 10% equity and yells “One Time!” The dealer burns and Fred does bink a 4 one time.

Now before you go and type LOL Fish into the chat box think about what exactly it is that you are saying. In your opinion, Fred made a -EV decision because according to your motives for playing the game, real $ equity is all that counts. However, if the -$80 real EV plus the enjoyment and rush aquired through anticipation of winning $100 (E$) outweighs the direct odds he needed to make the “correct” economical play, he absolutely made the correct +EV play according to his motives for playing.

Telling him that he played incorrectly is just as absurd as him telling you that you’re a boring person that doesn’t know how to have fun based on the fact that you’ve folded every hand for the past hour while you were card dead. Your motives, and therefore your decisions, are completely different and neither of you are ever making -EV plays according to your goals.

But we have a reg with a tilt issue sitting across the table and he starts berating Fred. Now we don’t really know much about Fred but we do know that embarrassment is a horrible thing to experience and greatly reduces E$. Fred could just be an idiot and he’ll quit playing because he is now -EV in the game due to his E$ value being reduced. Or, Fred could be an Ivy league student who plays because it’s what the cool kids do and figures he’s going to become good at this game now and starts crushing it within months

Either result is detrimental to the ultimate goal (making money) of the reg, who finds berating to be a +EV decision for the purposes of blowing off steam but mistakenly excludes the variables that lead to him accomplishing his ultimate goal from this calculation.

So whenever Fred binks a 4 on you, just smile and say NH. As long as he’s having a good time, you’ll continue to have a good time, too.

Just consider it your turn to feed the fish.

-JH1

This is not meant to be a braggadocios paper. This is meant to be a constructive paper to be used, in conjunction with other materials, to help you work towards being a better poker player. There is a very good chance that this paper will provide you with some considerations that would be beneficial off the table as well, and that is only slightly intentional. So with that as an introduction, let’s get started.

There are many things that make me different from you, and conversely, you different from me. Is everything I do better than what you do? Not by any stretch. And the most important thing to take away from that is that everything you do is not better than what others do. Life is a game. There is a start, there is an end, and there are a million different paths to walk from birth to death. However, there are certainly some paths, or styles of walking, that will make for an easier journey…and it is that jaunt that I want to talk about.

The first thing I do that most people don’t is think. And think in depth. Do you think? My guess is if you can read this you can, and if you are still reading, then you have an interest in thinking. But do you think in depth? The average person does not. Thinking in depth means that you don’t just come across information, internalize it, and then do with it what you feel is most profitable. Thinking in depth means you come across information, ask questions, formulate hypothesises, test hypothesises, ask more questions, consider more answers, and finally, draw a conclusion that is either definite or a factual opinion. But what does this have to do with poker?

Everything. If you cannot think in depth, you will reach a ceiling in your career quickly. Reaching a ceiling in poker generally means your WR has hit a similar ceiling. Thinking in depth will generally allow you to keep one step ahead of your opponents, which creates profit. Does this mean you should read up on 38th level bluffing and game-theory decisions based on the second-hand of a watch when you are playing 25NL? No. What it means is that you should constantly be keeping up on the most pertinent information for your game, your opponents, and your style…while also learning and considering different styles.

How else can you use thinking other than in game? Lots of ways. The biggest way is reading and off-table studying. I am in a very privileged position to be able to coach a game that I love…this necessitates thinking and also teaching. But most of all thinking. Thinking about putting into words why a CR with a FD on the turn with FE can be more profitable than just a c/c. Thinking about why I might want to flat call TT preflop rather than 3b a certain player. Just because I am coaching does not mean I should be the only one doing this. You should constantly be reading posts and hands and thinking “this player said a good line here is a CB/fold…why?”

I think in terms of 3 letters rather than 4. What does this mean? It means I think in terms of the “why” whereas most people think in only in terms of the “what”. For Americans (and I have no basis of this in other countries) I cannot fault you for this. Your education system has taught you to be results oriented. You have been taught to memorize that the sky is blue, that 2+2 = 4, and that a rhombus is a 4 sided figure with crooked-line sides. You were not taught to think about the why, just memorize and regurgitate answers when tested. This doesnt mean that you don’t consider the why, it just means you were forced to focus on the what, and then praised for that…so you repeated the action. Critical reasoning and logic are not major subjects taught in American schools and the country suffers because of that, and thus, you suffer.

Does that mean that I have always been logically minded? Good God no. I didn’t become logical until I was 19…and I would argue that I still have lots of work to do in acting upon logic rather than just thinking that way. How did I become logical? Well I was lucky to be in college and have my brain still be developing. I took lots of classes in math and business which taught a lot of theory and reasoning. So you are 28, out of college, and don’t enjoy theory…are you screwed? Not even close, and your brain is still developing too! The brain is a muscle and like trying to increase your biceps, you need to exercise it….and often. This is where thinking comes into place. Constantly be questioning. Question people better than you (be respectful of course)…do not just take things for fact.

The last sentence is why poker has remained profitable over the last 20 years. Poker books began hitting the market and lots of pros thought that would be the end of the profitable poker era. But what good is it if someone reads a book without thinking? So they learn to semi-bluff by CR-ing Fds…but is that going to make them super profitable? No. They will not understand the principle behind that CR (creating FE, having decent equity if given action, and blur our meta-range)…they will just know “I have a flushdraw, he bet, page 82 tells me to CR!” How does that relate to you?

How many times have you read “never fold KK preflop” “never fold a set on the flop” or “never minraise”? Probably more than you would care to admit. And how many of you saw 10+ people say it, and thought “well, that must be the right answer because XXXXX and YYYYYY said it…so I’ll take it as gospel and start winning mad dollars!”? That is wrong. You should ask why they are saying that. Consider some spots where maybe folding a set could be right, and then make your own assumptions. But what if your mental took-kit isn’t good enough to make the correct decision? ASK QUESTIONS AND KEEP QUESTIONING UNTIL YOU GET IT!

So now that I have beat that horse to death, spit on it, and then cranked on it a bit more (obviously done for a reason hint hint), let’s move onto another subject. Something that I do that you might not is figure out how to beat myself. I believe it was Michael Jordan who said that he became twice the player he was because he spent hours learning how to exploit his own actions. Find the best, learn to beat the best, become the best. Simple. When I started playing seriously I was playing 100NL as a 12/7 ATS 24%. My WR wasn’t as high as I thought it could be, but I also noticed quite a few other people running these numbers, so I figured if I was going to understand their ranges, I could simply explore my own.

In this simple exploration I found some leaks I had (hand selection from certain spots, stack off ranges, etc) and realized a lot of my similar-style opponents were doing the same thing (we were constantly shipping set v OP back and forth to eachother). So I spent 2 months learning how to beat not only me, but every other “me” out there. In doing this, I solidified my own game, fixed some leaks, and learned a whole new style at the same time. Within 3 months I was playing 14/12 ATS 38% and had double the WR. All from spending some time learning how to play against myself. This is still something I do every few months. I have solidified quite a bit of my flop and river game thanks to it, and am constantly striving at being the best at any table I ever sit at.

In looking to improve myself, I also removed my ego and admit my every fault. Why is this important? Poker has no room for penis in it. My ego does nothing but hurt me at a table. Either I have an enlarged ego and I make incorrect decisions based around that, or I have a self-confidence issue that gives me a losing attitude. But if I remove all ego then I remove a huge results-measuring platform. My winning or losing doesn’t effect me because there is nothing to judge it against. I do not need to kill every person at the table. I do not feel I am going to get killed by anyone either. If I lose I am happy so long as I played well and if I win I am happy so long as I played well.

I also admit my faults. I am not the best at everything, but I am constantly striving to be. I know that I have areas of my game I could improve in. I also constantly evaluate my faults and also ways that I can improve upon those. Also, as in poker, not every loss is a negative (that sentence makes sense, I assure you). So faults may turn out to be LR beneficial, however rare, it still happens. So make sure you evaluate what faults now are holding you back and creating loss, and fix those first. If you know your fault is tilt and that you are tilting away 3/4BI per session, then you need to patch that ASAP. If you know that you get a bit cocky and have winners tilt allocating for 1/5BI per session, then you should patch that, but focus on the tilt first. Everything is about balance and there are only so many hours in a day, and so many days in a year, so focus on the more important things that will show a gain well before you focus on the LR-lower-earn activities.

I constantly focus on the basics. While lots of people feel as though they have the basics of CR-ing built and that they are mentally able to handle 5th level bluffing, I am constantly focusing on rebuilding my ground floor. The ground floor is always the most important. If you try to build a 2 story house on top of a basement, and dont fortify the basement level, how the hell do you expect the 2nd floor to not waiver during a windstorm? A huge thing that separates you and I is that I am constantly evaluating and reworking my basement.

So while you are focusing on the ramifications of CR-ing the turn and light 4-betting, I am focusing on making sure my 3b-ing is strong and that my bet sizing is stronger. There are only so many things our brain can focus on during any given hand (especially when we only have 15 seconds to make a decision while 8 other tables beep at us)…so what is logically more important? The spot that comes up once every 950 hands? Or the spot that comes up every 80 hands? Or what if the spot that came up every 80 hands gave us a +/- 7PTBB earn/loss or the spot that came up every 950 hands gave us a +/-25PT/100 earn/loss? Learning to balance what is important vs. what is less important is not only important in poker, but in life? What is more important…reprimanding your kids for a -20 to you now, +150 to you later, and +600 to them later? Or not reprimanding for +55 to you now, -100 to you later, and -300 to them later? Life is about balancing…and there can always be a mathematical assessment given to every side so long as you have balancing metric against.

My demeanor is another huge difference between me and other people. Now most people that actively join forums, and spend durations of time there, tend to be open-minded individuals that have an interest in the theme of the forum. However, remember that poker often times brings 16-24yr old males, often times of which are testosterone injected individuals that have massive ego issues (does this sound familiar?) The huge difference is that I realize this, and make sure that I do not let my ego get in the way. I do not get in my head that “I am the best and you all can just suck it”…I understand that I am better than 90% of my competition yet understand there are better people than myself and also understand that helping people that need assistance is a good thing.

Why is helping people a good thing? Well for one I get a lot of self-gratification out of it. Utility is very important. Value = Cost + Utility. My cost is the time it takes me to write something up (for a paper like this it costs me about $450 with time balance, and for a normal post about $14) and the utility surpasses that by insane amounts. However, the utility I get might also increase people’s winrate, which would subsequently lower mine (they might lower my advantage against them directly and also take money from fish before I can get it), so say on top of that they take an extra $55/$13 per post. So I lost on average about $3.88/post, but I would say I more than gain about $9/post on utility. So the worth of my post, to me, is about $5.12…which is more than positive.

So another part of demeanor is my attitude. I try my best not to berate, in any form, any person. I will berate people who I think are just trying to get free information without attempting to do any work (I have a severe distaste for lazy people that feel they are entitled to anything). I also berate people that are rude to others…and that is about it. And this demeanor goes way beyond just my posts, this follows me to the tables, and then into my real life. I try my best to never berate while playing, especially live when it is easiest to do so (at least on-line I always have another 8 tables beeping at me). This not only educates, but it minimizes their loss now, and also minimizes the amount I can win from others because they now know that I can think). So my demeanor is positive because it not only makes me more now (with a utility v. cost analysis) but also makes me more in terms of my opponents spew-rate. Hint: being nice and positive not only makes us more money in terms of direct cost, but also has long term ramifications in terms of utility, relationships, and overall minimal costs.

What else makes us different? My balance of practice vs. theory. I never really appreciated this concept until I read NL Theory and Practice by Sklansky/Miller (imo, the bible of NLHE cash-games ftr). But there is a huge difference between theory and practice, and a huge correlation in success by understanding both, even just to a minimal extent. There is a reason I spend almost 2x the amount of time studying as I do playing. There is a reason my brain is constantly thinking of situations and not just grinding out the same 11/8 game. There is a reason why I play 100%vpip and play 100%LPvpip, and create other “crazy” scenarios to put myself in. The reason being that without theory, I am weak in practice….and without practice, my theory is useless.

Life is the same way. I can be the most proficient business thinker in the world…amazing in marketing theory and entrepreneurship and overall business savvy…and yet this is useless if I am not out creating businesses or consulting or participating. And it is useless if I create 100 businesses without any backing of theory to give backing to my business rationale. It is useless if I can tell you how to “groom the “perfect” child into adulthood” if I cannot do it while in front of a child….and even more useless if I just groom a child without understanding what factors are important to their development. It is important that we spend time understanding all of it and learn what is more important in what instances (it is more important that you spend un-theorized time with your child than lack of time with massive amounts of theory). Learn this ASAP and learn how to balance. Life is about balance, if you cannot do it, learn to. Everyone is able to do this, albeit to different extents, but you can learn and improve easily.

Something I suggest to everyone is to get a “protegé” of sorts. Why? Because it forces you to put everything you read about in this paper to use. It forces you to focus on demeanor, it focuses on you articulate thoughts (which forces more thoughts and creates a more predominant focus on theory), it forces you to think, and force you to focus on your on leaks and patch them along with your protegé’s. Obviously do with this paper what you want…and I don’t expect even 40% of to read the whole thing, and I don’t expect even 15% of those to really realize this information…but if you can put even chunks of this information to use, then you will see improved equity in poker, in your personal life, and in your longevity as a person. So I wish you luck with everything and hope you can use this for your own self-improvement and hope it all works out well for you…and hopefully in a year from now you are writing a paper to help other people with no financial earn at all =)

*SS*

PSA: Call and Re-Evaluate
Just quit it. Or at least stop misapplying it.

Evaluate: to determine or set the value of;

Re: A prefix added to the start of a word. Indicates “again;”
25NL – 100BB stacks

Hero is dealt Ah Ks on the BTN
Preflop: Unknown UTG calls $0.25, 5 folds, Hero raises to $1.25, 2 folds, UTG calls $1
Flop ($2.85): Ad 9s 4d

UTG checks, Hero bets $2.25, UTG raises to $7, Hero ???

Hero doesn’t know what to do, so he “calls $4.75 to re-evaluate the turn?”

George: Should I call and re-evaluate on this table?
Jerry: What do you need to call and re-evaluate for?
George: Call and re-evaluate is now the number one line in poker.
Jerry: You know why? Because people like to say “call and re-evaluate.” “Excuse me, do you want to call and re-evaluate?” “We should call and re-evaluate here.” “What? No call to re-evaluate?”
Based on the definitions above, re-evaluating implies that we are going to determine the value of our hand again. This means we would have already thought about the value of our hand at some earlier point.

How do we evaluate our hand?
Step 1

- Put villain on a range.

- Compare our hand (or more accurately, our range) to villain’s range.

- Determine how to maximize value (or minimize loss) against that range.

Step 2

- Figure out how villain’s range will react to your action.

- Decide what you’re going to do based on his anticipated reaction and his range.

You already know what’s going to happen a high percentage of the time in the hand posted above:
Turn ($16.85): x

UTG shoves, Hero???
You’re exactly in the same spot with exactly the same information as you were on the flop. But you went ahead and put money in without a logical reason for doing so – your only plan, if you can call it that – was to fold to a shove because $17 is scarier than $7 and you thought folding the flop was weak. If you’ve played any amount of poker you know that’s what he’s going to do probably 80%+ of the time. That’s not calling to re-evaluate. That’s spew.

Calling to re-evaluate requires that you are going to gain new information that will help you make a better decision after villain’s next action. In the above example, you already had all the information you were going to get. c/r flop = strength/air and lead turn after c/r flop = strength/air. If you cbet and then don’t know what to do when you get raised, you have failed to think through Step 2. If you’re reading this, I assume you at least always think through Step 1.

So how do we use call and re-evaluate effectively? We use it in situations where villain’s future actions will give us information that will help us make better decisions.
25NL – 100BB stacks

Hero is dealt JJ in the BB
Preflop: UTG fish raises to $1, TAG BTN calls $1, Hero calls $0.75

Hero calls because he wants to keep UTG fish in the pot and doesn’t want to play a big pot OOP against BTN who probably has a decently strong range of broadways and PPs with some SCs.

Flop ($3.90): Qh 9s 4d

Hero checks, UTG checks, BTN bets $2.75, Hero re-evaluates turn and calls $2.75, UTG folds
Hero knows that BTN will stab here with 2nd pair, an OESD and overcards based on reads and stats. Hero also knows that BTN will not continue to stab with those hands on the turn and will only bet for value with TPTK+ and check behind everything else. Hero knows that BTN will call down for showdown with good 2nd pair type hands when weakness has been shown and our line looks bluffy.

Hero’s plan is to c/f to any turn bet (non-J of course). If villain checks behind turn, Hero will valuebet/fold the river because 9x/77-88/TT will call along with the Qx hands that beat us.

Notice how hero logically re-evaluates the turn even before he makes the flop call. We all know that betting or raising purely for “information” is a terrible reason to put money in the pot. Calling purely for “information” is far worse.

Any time that you are in a spot where you don’t know what to do, “What do I do now?” is not the important question. “What did I forget to think about at a prior point in this hand?” is the important question. If you consistently plan your hands, you can avoid nearly all of these situations where you don’t know what to do and put an end to the practice of using poker cliches to justify your actions.

-JH1

* * *
Important Things to Remember:

1.) MINIMIZE LOSS, MAXIMIZE WIN

2.) WHAT IS UR BETTING ACCOMPLISHING?

3.) POTT (Plan based on Our range, Their range, and Texture…an acronym I created as a simple thought framework for our actions)

4.) OUR BET SIZING IS NOT THE SAME Vs. EVERY OPPONENT

5.) WHEN BLUFFING, BET WHAT IS NECESSARY, NOTHING MORE

6.) WHY DO WE BET? WE BET BECAUSE OUR HAND HAS VALUE…OR TO BLUFF, WHICH SUBSEQUENTLY GIVES OUR HAND VALUE.
* * *

Bet sizing, as I’ve estimated in one of my videos, can be one of the biggest determinants in a long-run (LR) win-rate (WR). Most people spend little to no time thinking about bet sizing, and because of that, they miss out on lots of value. I think that getting bet sizing as close to “perfect” (maximizing value) can net a player between 1.5-1.8ptbb/100. Obviously, to be a well rounded player, you have to know how and when to use certain plays (i.e. when to c/r over b/3b, when to CB, etc.), but bet sizing will help these plays make more sense, and also help them max value for you.

Getting value can be done in two forms, making the most on your winners, and minimizing loss on your losers. A very important thing I need people to understand before I begin is an economic principle that states “minimizing loss is the same thing as maximizing value”. (please…continue saying this for a few moments…let it truly sink in) This will be important when I go into what your sizing truly accomplishes. In this post I will look at preflop sizing, postflop sizing, and also VB/CB sizings. Another very important thing to take into consideration is that bet sizing, along with everything else in poker, often cannot be “perfected” real-time. How we size our betting/raising pf, postflop, or otherwise, is still player dependent. Some people have thresholds of comfortability in calling bets/raises, other people have no care in the world, others use math so precisely that we must counteract that by giving incorrect odds. Please remember that while reading this, this is post assumes quite a bit (and I will try to make sure I explain what/why I’m assuming) and your actual play needs to be adaptive, like everything else in this game.

Preflop:

There are 3 main times that we bet size preflop; opening, 3b-ing, and ISO-ing.

For opening, I generally advise being a little more rigid in your sizing. The times to change your sizing are against 1.) bad players or short stacks in the blinds when you’re stealing 2.) if your sizing is more variable preflop (you range from 3-5bb) or 3.) if you’re very active at the table. Preflop is the most simple step of our hand that is sometime made out to be difficult. People have very distinct ranges so we should therefore not stray too far from the parameters that are given.

When there are short stacks in the blinds and we open as a steal, I suggest going to 2.5-3. Most short stacks are playing so many tables that they cannot/will not differentiate your sizing from strong to weak hands, and most importantly, they are going to shove over with any good range (so why bet 4bb when 3bb gives the same info? (we lose more when behind, win the same amount when ahead). Also, when you’re very active I suggest 2 things 1.) make your preflop sizing smaller (3-3.5) and 2.) CB smaller than PSB (will go into this more in the next section). Minimize that loss…

3b-ing is very stack size dependent. If a fullstack (100bb) opens to 4bb, then we should be sizing our 3b roughly around 13-15bb (pot is 4bb+1bb+.5bb, so 5.5bb+our call is 9.5bb)(this size gives opponents about 2:1), we should size up with big hands to a.) increase pot size, b.) leave a nice SPR (Stack-2-Pot ratio, concept made popular in Professional NLHE that gives a framework around planning and commitment ranges), and c.) get direct value on our hand). When the opener gets to be about 70bb, it becomes a little different because of the SPR left after their call. Also think about what odds you are giving yourself if they 4b (if you 3b a raise with 76ss, and they 4bshove, then you have to call a TT+/AK range getting 3:1), what SPR will be left if they flat call, and what your plan is for the hand. I suggest 3b-ing a little larger OOP. It will lower SPR and make your postflop decisions a little easier. The main exception is against very loose players that raise a lot, but don’t necessarily call a 3b often. I would size this down (so they open to 4bb, I would go to 10-11bb with AA) to give them perceived odds.

Now the important thing to to remember about 3b-ing, and about all betting in general, is to think about what you are trying to accomplish with it. Will your 3b only polarize their range? If a tight player raises EP, a 3b from us will probably isolate their range to QQ+/AK (which will often 4b, sometimes fold, and sometimes call). If this is the case, we would want to 3b a bit bigger with our bigger hands (make the most if we have AA and they have KK and board comes A hi, or if they will fold whiffed AK, but wont fold it pf, etc).

Against stealers, we can 3b how we wish. KNOW YOUR OPPONENT BEFORE YOU DO THINGS AND HAVE A GENERAL PLAN FOR UNKNOWNS (this general plan can be to stack off any over-pair, play a small-mid pot with TP, and only small pots with weak pairs). If a tight steal range steals on you, you should only 3b strong hands and size them a bit bigger to max value in case of 1.) bad flop for them or 2.) lower SPR + increase commitment perception. If a wide steal range steals on you, you can 3b normal with big hands, smaller with naked re-steal hands. THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH CALLING A STEAL OOP IF YOU DON’T SUCK POSTFLOP AND YOU HAVE A HAND THAT HAS a.) SMALL-MEDIUM POT POTENTIAL W/ LACK OF 3b VALUE OR b.) GOOD IMPLIED ODDS WITH DEEPER (than in a 3b pot) STACKS.

Say it folds around to the CO who steals for 3.5bb. SB/BB are tight, and we are OTB, I would only 3b to around 12bb. I would do this because 1.) as a bluff, it’s all I need to raise to for it to be effective being villain is OOP and it doesn’t offer him good odds on his pair hands, 2.) if I have a big hand, the pot will still be 25.5bb with me IP (so about 3.x SPR), which is a very easy pot to play, and 3.) it’s good to have a balance between these. Now, if the button folds, and SB folds and I were in the BB, I would make my sizing the exact same. Most people feel as though they should raise bigger in this spot, however, in general, it is better not to. Most people feel they should raise larger because 1.) it discourages people coming along with more hands, and 2.) we are OOP. Well in general we want people coming along with more hands. Either they come along with 2nd best hands when have a strong one, OR they come along with draw/small PP hands that you can beat with a CB (and don’t forget that because the sizing is a bit “smaller” that it has to work less often as a bluff than if the size were bigger). In general, smaller sizing encourages a more mistake-rich environment, and because of this, we don’t want to size up when OOP.

ISO-ing is a very fun part of preflop play. An ISO is when there is a limper, or a few limpers, and we raise in position to isolate a player, preferably a weaker player (this weakness can be in the form of seeing too many flops, being weaktight pf/post, stacking off light post, etc) in a HU pot. There are issues with ISO-ing though. For instance, say 3 people limp, and we are going to ISO TT in the CO, there is 4.5bb in the pot, so we make our sizing to 7bb. If one of the people call the raise, we can expect that at least one person behind them will call as well, as pot odds + perceived implied odds have been given. I would not suggest ISO-ing with weak hands if there the first of the limpers is much looser and calls lots of raises, as better players will call behind them for the reasons stated above. Doing this would leave you in a large pot, with a weak holding multi-way…obviously things we don’t need to force upon ourselves.

For ISO-ing I suggest making bigger sizings when the limper is a weaktight/fit-or-fold player. In the previous example with TT, a standard pot size raise would be to 6.5bb total. We raise to 7.5 to get more value. Inversely, against a more weak-loose player, I would size it down to around pot, possibly a tad bit smaller. In doing this we are in position (as we should be a large % of the time while ISO-ing) and can play a pot out. This play doesn’t end with just a CB the way an ISO v a weaktight player does. Because of this, we want to give ourselves as much playability as possible, and smaller raises leave deeper stacks so we can play poker and utilize our full play-book.

Pre-flop sizing isn’t nearly as important as postflop sizing. However, it does set you up for SPR decisions postflop (with big hands we want to commit sooner than later, having a small SPR in a big pot makes our decisions very easy while retaining high value), attract or dissuade calls, and allows you to steal in a more LR profitable way. Also, because limping preflop is a function of FR that is generally not seen as much in 6max; we combat it by using isolating to our advantage. ISO-ing gives us direct value on our hand (it’s done in position, can pick up the pot there, and is especially effective against weak/tight players that are very fit-or-fold postflop) and is huge in both changing our image and profitability.

CB-ing:

CB sizing is very much dependent on your image, villain, plan, and the board (again, think ‘POTT’). If we raise often (we will say pre-flop raise of 14+) I would suggest making your CB sizing a little smaller. Most people advocate 2/3PSB CB in every instance, which I disagree with. 2/3PSB is a nice number that is easy to remember, but too many people get married to this sizing and even use programs to ensure that 2/3PSB is always used. If you are in position, and open-steal a steal hand running 19/16 on a table, SB (12/8) calls only, despite board texture I would lean towards making a 1/2PSB sizing. This does 2 things. 1.) We lose less when behind and 2.) this type of player will not continue without a hand, wont float often, and will only raise/call with a piece of the board. These fit-or-fold players are very easy to play against, and should be abused while keeping us very profitable.

For example, $100nl, full stacks: say we have 94s and open steal to $3.5 from the CO running 14/9. Only BB calls who is 12/7 (well assume his range is just about only PP’s, which generally isn’t too far from the truth). The flop comes 85J. Now, lets do some awesome math. If we 1/2PSB the flop ($7.5 in pot, so $3.75 bet) we need this bet to work 33%+ to be profitable (your risking 1 unit to make 2 units, 2:1, 33%). Now, if villain only has PP’s, he will flop a set 8.5:1 (or ~12% of the time). Now if BB will never float a PP, and will only call/raise with a set (which again, isn’t too far from the truth for these types of players) and we never put another dollar in the pot if we are given action, then we are making quite a profit on this bet. This figures out to be $7.5(.88)-$3.75(.12)=6.6-.45=$6.15 profit. Picking this spot up ~16x will net us 1BI.

However, lets looks at the more traditional 2/3PSB CB. We bet $5 into the $7.5 pot. We will assume the same information about villain only giving action on sets (so 12% of the time), never floating, and no money going in after action is given. Now watch the formula carefully. $7.5(.88)-$5(.12)=6.6-.6=$6 profit. And for a full PSB CB its $7.5(.88)-$7.5(.12)=6.6-.9=$5.7 profit. Now notice the profit side of the equation stays the same in all the examples. There is nothing more to gain by making a bigger bet…we win the same amount no matter what our bet size. What does change however, is what we lose the more we bet. The loss side of the equation goes up every time we increase our bet. This is obviously bad for us. Now this example is nice and easy because it assumes many simple things, and shows us a very basic example of spending more to make the same amount (something we don’t want to do). However, as we start playing different opponent, the call frequency of our CB will go up, and thus make our minimizing loss target that much more important.

The example just given shows a very simplified hand that doesn’t happen all that often. Yes, there are times that we play a hand like this against a 20 tabling nit, and yes, we can use this plan against them. However, the average regular is becoming tougher to play against, and thus are not as nit as the example. Because of this we have to adjust a couple things.

1.) The tougher the opponent, the more adept they will be at reading your bet sizes if they differ*

2.) The tougher the opponent, the more they understand that poker doesn’t have to end on the flop (aka, they will value float PP’s against you, especially if you don’t double barrel with a decent frequency)

So lets talk a bit about CB-ing regulars, tough opponents, and thinking individuals. With these players we need to be a tad bit more rigid in our sizing. The better the player, the more your betting should be consistent hand-to-hand with them, especially in HU pots. Now I’ve said this a few times, and will probably say it a few times more, but against people that cannot think we can fluctuate our bet sizing to work best for us, against thinkers we have to more consistent as to not tip our holdings off. With that in mind, lets look at a hand.

Example: $100nl, full stacks. Folds around to the Hi-Jack where we open to $3 with 65s at a non 3-betting table. Solid regular is the only caller from the BB. Pot ($6.5) 4h 2s Tc. Solid regular checks, Hero ???

Let us just assume Hero has to bet here.

Now our bet will mean different things to this type of opponent. A smaller 1/2PSB will probably get looked up a bit lighter, especially if Hero doesn’t have a double barrel range (this is very important because having a double range will deter villain from calling lighter in fear of getting doubled off his hand). A lot of the advice on the sizing, plan, etc of this hand are based around our own double barrel frequency, or, villain’s perceived double barrel frequency of us. If a villain knows that we don’t double barrel…then CB-ing naked isn’t going to be a great idea and you will have more value if you check the flop behind against a thinking regular.

Why? Again, it’s easy to float us without a double barrel frequency. In this spot we need to bet as the stipulation stated (just makes the example work better, there are times when checking here is better). We already stated that without a double barrel frequency that 1/2PSB is bad (will get floated more often, and we only fold out bricked overcards, which aren’t really in the range because he would have 3b them pf). So then we can 60% potbet, 75% potbet, or PSB (I’m taking 2/3, or 66%, out of the equation so people stop thinking so narrowly on that number). Lets see what each one might do:

60% potbet might get floated a tad more. Assume when we are floated we are drawing to 4 outs only, which we will probably get 2 cards to hit (this CB effectively gives us 2 cards for the price of 1, because with most of his calling range here he will check the turn either for pot control or to CR). We can assume that villain’s pf range is 22-88, 99-JJ 10%, QQ+ 5%, some SC’s (fairly logical range for a TAG calling OOP from a steal). 60% potbet will get floated by all PP’s/Pairs, assume bluff CR’d 10%, and value raised 7% (this number comes from how often he’ll flop a set here, the most logical value-raise range).

Math: $X = $6.5(.13) + [(.70)(.16)$14.3 - (.70)(.84)$3.9] – (.10)$3.9 – (.07)$3.9

(Assumptions: 13% of the time we take it down without contest, 70% of time we get floated, 10% bluff CR’d, and 7% value CR’d. When we get CR’d, we give no further action and just lose our CB. When we get floated we will win that 16% of the time (2 cards to come as stated earlier). No VB implied in this equation)

.845+1.60-2.29-.39-.273 = -$0.51

if we add in a VB that will get called 40% of the time for $8, we have: $6.5 (.13) + [(.7)(.096)$14.3 +(.7)(.064)$22.3- (.7)(.84)$3.9] – (.10)$3.9 – (.07)$3.9

.845+.96+.999-2.29-.39-.273 = -$0.15

75% might get floated a tad less here. However, there are some frequency changes that happen here. The first is that the bluff CR will tend to decrease slightly. Thinking regulars tend to assume that smaller bets mean smaller hands, and are also able to CR those small bets for a smaller price themselves (while maintaining the same perceived strength). Also, some regulars will value float this a little less. They begin to take out 22 and 33 from their float range, and some begin to take out everything 22-99 that didn’t hit a set. While this may seem counter-intuitive because the bet size is only ~$1 more, it does play a psychological role in a villain’s decision making. (This is just pricing in terms of marketing. Certain price points are more appealing and attractive to a customer. Generally (when value-added isn’t a factor), smaller is more appealing.) Lets assume same range of 22-88, 99-JJ 10%, QQ+ 5%, some SC’s. 75% potbet will get floated by some PP’s (60%), assume bluff CR’d 6%, and value raised 7%.

Math: $X = $6.5(.27) + [(.6)(.16)$16.25 - (.6)(.84)$4.875] – (.06)$4.875 – (.07)$4.875

(Assumptions: We will win the pot outright 27% of the time because of lowered float frequency. 60% of time we get floated, 6% bluff CR’d, 7% value CR’d. When we get CR’d, we give no further action and just lose our CB. When we get floated we will win that 16% of the time (2 cards to come as stated earlier). No VB implied in this equation)

1.755+1.56-2.457-.2925-.341 = +$.23

if we add in a VB that will get called 30% of the time for $10, we have: (.27)$6.5 + [(.6)(.112)$16.25 + (.6)(.048)$26.25 - (.6)(.84)$4.875] – (.06)$4.875 – (.07)$4.875

1.755+1.092+.756-2.457-.2925-.341 = +$.51

You notice that earlier we spoke about making smaller bets because the earn is the same, but the loss is increased (thus smaller loss = more value). However, the point we are learning here is that certain betting works best against certain people. People that will value float you more are going to provide more issues. But, as we are doing the math out here, we learn that bigger bets create different action, and thus bigger is sometimes better, even with bluffier type hands.

Lastly, lets look at the PSB. This is going to be a tough bet to use as your full-time CB, but there are strategies out there that do employ a full PSB for CB-ing against regulars. This type of bet should minimize floating, minimize the bluff CR, and strictly isolate their range to bigger hands that all beat us. This type of bet leans on the side of math and combinations. We know the basic idea of a person’s range, and given board texture, can figure out how many combos they could have that hit that board in a way that would call a big bet here.

Math: $X = $6.5(.79) + [(.1)(.16)$19.5 - (.1)(.84)$6.5] – (.04)$6.5 – (.07)$6.5

(Assumptions: We will win the pot outright 79% of the time because of lowered float frequency. 10% of time we get floated, 4% bluff CR’d, 7% value CR’d. When we get CR’d, we give no further action and just lose our CB. When we get floated we will win that 16% of the time (2 cards to come as stated earlier). No VB implied in this equation)

5.135+.312-.546-.26-.455 = +$4.19

Now this should be eye opening. If nothing else, I’m sure you never thought that betting more (and really only $1.63 more) would deviate people’s actions so much, or that in doing so we make ourselves more profitable by a large margin. Remember however, that this is against more thinking players, and that is why the float/bluff %s change the way they do. Against more calling station people, the float % will raise drastically, and bluff raising will almost diminish to nothing. Play with these formulas a bit to see how bet sizes change per player type.

In doing all this calculating, the goal was the show you how frequencies change based on our bet sizing. I’m not saying that one bet size is better than the others in your “everyday CB”…but I am saying that you should keep this formula in the back of your head. Think about what your bet accomplishes, and then what size accomplishes the action you desire. This is a great way to start manipulating opponents, and creating value in spots you may have thought were near breakeven previously.

Quick example to see how this can add up for you:

if a fish will fold 50% of the time, and you always bet 1/2pot (needing to work 33% of the time), we make 17% value, which is about 1.88BB (7.5BB pot, 7.5BB v 3.75BB bets).

Say we do this 1 time per 100 hands (15/12 means we see 15% of flop, minus ones we take down pf, and ones we play MW, etc).

If we CB PSB v a reg and say we make a 4.7BB profit. We can slim this down to 3.2BB for simplicity. And say this happens 1 time per 100 hands.

5.08BB in 2 hands out of 100, so we can expect to make ~25 Buy-Ins, or 1.27PTBB/100, per 100K hands (5.08/2*1000). Now these are fairly large assumptions in the worst-case scenario (not taking into consideration times we hit hands, get paid off, or improve on later streets…just that the CB takes it down and we win, or gets action and we lose), and look how profitable it is to tweak your CB size slightly.

* The obvious counter-balance to this is keeping your bet sizing more rigid, which has been discussed a few times.

VB-ing:

VB-ing is very difficult to talk about without examples. However, there are a few types of VB’s. There is VB-ing the nuts (strictly figuring out how much villain will call), VB-ing because you beat like 85% of this range, and thin VB-ing, in which even when getting a call, you won’t be ahead always. VB-ing the nuts is simple and really just revolves around Hero thinking about how much villain will spew off. For instance, say we have 88 on an A836Q board. We CB flop, bet the turn, and are on the river. Well if we think villain has an A, and will hardly ever fold TP, then we should fire ~pot (of course, if we know this info, we should be potting all streets to ensure we make the biggest profitable pot possible). If villain thinks we never bluff, but is still in here to the river, we should either shove or bet 65% pot. The reason for this is that villain is only to the river with a hand like 2pr or set, or is getting very sticky with a TP hand. Against this player I like a shove here because he might flat 2pr if you bet 65% pot, but wont fold if you shove, because people hate to fold 2pr.

When you VB expecting to beat like 85% of their range, and either get called by better or raised 15% of the time, then betting is a bit different. In this spot I generally tend to hover around 70%PSB. The reason we can’t shove here isn’t so much because we could be behind, but because there are hands in the range that are just weak 1pr hands that we don’t want to fold. Think about it this way.

We have 9T on a 94QT6 board. We think he will always call TP up to 100%PSB, but if the price is bigger, he’ll fold it. Also, he will call 1pr hands up (4x, Tx, and 9x) up to ~70%PSB. Obviously he might have a hand that beats us, but we will assume 85% of the time we are ahead here.

The best bet here would be one that hovers between 100%PSB and 70%PSB, leaning towards the lower side of it. The reason being that he will call wider if the bet is smaller. Think back to the CB-ing calculations. So hovering around 70% will ensure we get calls from a wider part of the range, not just the TP hands. It is much more valuable, in general, to get calls from a wider part of the range than just the slim part that might call a huge bet.

Thin VB-ing is a hard thing to talk about. It relies on correct reads and range analysis, and is heavily based on player types involved. For instance, you can thin VB 76 on a 754K8 board against a fish, and you can generally get away with a 30%PSB bet on the river with a flop bet/turn check. (This is thin because if you bet 75%+PSB then he would fold everything, so the thin part is the bet size coupled with the calling range) Thin VB-ing is more useful against fish, and a lot of value can be had by learning to utilize the small bet against them. Remember, a smaller bet tends to get called wider (whether they justify it by “pot odds” or “omg, cheap price”, they still call it more). So learning to take the “donk line” (fire flop, check turn, fire river) will greatly increase your overall profitability in HU pots v cally people. For instance, take a hand where we check the BB with KJ, flop is QJ7, we bet 1/2PSB, get HU with a fish. We check a 5 turn, he does as well. The river bricks off a 2, now the pot is about 8BB. Betting 4BB is a good idea.

Why? Well this bet is 1 / 2 for block, 1 / 2 for value. We think he will call any 1pr type hand for 4BB, and also think that he will raise only hands that beat us (generally true). This limits loss when behind, but also allows ourselves to get value on the times he calls with worse pairs. It’s also good because say we want to show down, if we check, we not only allow him to check back hands we beat, but also he sets the price for SD (which will generally be 5-7BB).

Conclusion:

So in this post we really focused on basic preflop sizing, CB-ing, and VB-ing. However, the main thesis of this paper isn’t really to tell you which size to use in which spot, or what VB % is best. The main thesis is to think. Think about why you are betting, what your betting accomplishes, and then how to maximize your betting, both in a single instance and in a general strategy. I have provided some basic thought process tweaks that will prove to be profitable if implemented, but not all exact sizes and frequencies will work well within a given strategy. So try different sizes against different player types in different spots with different hands, and see what works best for you given your style. Best of luck in your thinking adventures…and remember…maximize that value!

Cliffnotes:

POTT = Plan based on Our range, .Their range, and .Texture
When ISO-ing, bigger v weak-tight players
When CB-ing, think about what your size accomplishes
Think about what your bet is doing. Do you only fold out hands you get value from, and get called by hands that beat you? If so, your bet is bad
VB, VB, VB

(Thank you to all that helped proofread and bounce ideas!)

*SS*

You hear and read all the time about exploiting your opponents’ weaknesses, and you should be looking to do that at all times. However, something I have come to realize is that I am naturally better at certain things in poker and naturally worse at others. In a perfect world, I could exploit my opponents’ weaknesses in all situations. But let’s face it:

Most people are not great at every aspect of poker.

I don’t know, maybe you actually are. But for me, I had to admit to myself that most of my profit comes from very specific situations. So in conjunction with one of my October goals, I made a list of all my strengths and weaknesses and am really trying hard to make a conscious effort to get myself into situations that exploit my strengths. Just for an example, I am not very good at playing in 3-bet pots out of position. Regardless if it is “+EV” or not, why would I put myself in a situation where I set myself up to fail? Sure, I might be trading a +EV action for a 0EV action, but consider that there are many +EV situations in poker; you aren’t obligated to take every single one of them.

Just to give you an idea of what I came up with as some of my strengths and how I intend to exploit them:

Value betting: Pretty straight-forward. It’s something I’ve been working on over the months and I feel I am decent at it. This tells me I should see more flops and not try and play “flop police” every time I have position and am facing an MP open raise. I should look to play a “small ball” strategy and keep preflop pots smaller, thus setting up smaller c-bets. I should 3-bet a tighter range, especially when OOP.

Hand reading: I’ve developed this skill pretty well, IMO, and it really goes hand in hand with value betting. To exploit this, I can flat more hands in position against regs (lots of suited connectors, suited aces, KQ type hands, small pairs) and use position and board texture as a way to steal pots when I completely miss or don’t flop a set or only flop a draw but don’t improve on the turn. I should also be looking for spots to double barrel when I think people are weak. But mostly, I should be playing the bulk of my hands in position (LDO) because hand reading gets way easier in position.

An example of a weakness I will look to avoid:

Playing 3-bet pots without a pair against unknowns: I hate the feeling when they call my 3-bet, flop comes Qxx and they check call or flat call my standard 1/2 PSB. Hey man, I’m repping QQ+, wtf are you doing calling??? And I don’t know if they have AQ/KQ, an underpair that decided to float because I “obviously have AK”, AK that decided to float because AK is teh nutz, second pair, a set, a draw, etc etc. They are unknown, what’s their range for calling? Who knows! I suck in theses situations for a few reasons. One, I’m bloating the pot with nothing. Two, I can’t really assign them a logical range because they’re unknowns, so I pretty much have to give up the pot after putting in a decent amount. Three, I feel obligated to c-bet pretty much every flop when I 3-bet, for fear of giving my hand away as an obvious AK if I check. So IMO, I should be more willing to flat in position against unknown opens, call or fold OOP, where I can make better use of my strengths (remember…getting value and hand reading?) Yeah yeah….playing AK OOP w/o initiative sucks. So does value-towning yourself against unknowns and building a pot when you don’t know where you stand. Of course this is totally situationally dependent (stack sizes, who’s in the pot, etc etc etc). And I’m only talking about facing unknowns. Against players you have statz and reeedz on, it’s a whole different ball game. What I can do in the meantime is work on assigning a base range to an unknown based on factors like position, stack size, mutitabling or not, etc etc, or choose not to play AK OOP for a 3b vs an unknown.

So in conclusion…What I’m really trying to say is this:

1) There are many +EV situations in poker
2) You probably aren’t great at every single situation that comes up
3) You aren’t obligated to take every +EV situation that arises
4) If you aren’t good at playing a theoretically +EV situation, it might not actually be +EV for you, and 0EV is better than -EV.
5) In light of all this, always be working to improve and not just avoid situations you are weak in

For me, this makes sense. We play poker to take advantage of our opponents’ weaknesses. But how about putting ourselves in situations that take advantage of our own strengths? It seems to me that if I frequently get into spots I am familiar with and can maximize my profits in, and avoid situations I don’t know how to handle and will probably just be spewing, I will be way farther ahead, even if that means trading a theoretically +EV action (raising or calling) for a 0EV action (folding). And it’s certainly true that we should always be working on situations that we are weak at. I’m just pointing out that you can and should be deliberately putting yourself in situations that best take advantage of your strengths.

I’d like to reference this classic thread on avoiding difficult decisions, by Grunch. His context was a little different, but I think this concept of “avoiding difficult decisions” goes beyond betting patterns. Getting into situations you are less familiar with and are not taking advantage of your own strengths is getting you to make difficult decisions, IMO.

As an interesting aside, you should note too that in the same way a +EV move (raising with AK OOP) may not be +EV for you if you don’t know how to play that specific situation, a move might be technically –EV and at the same time +EV if you know you can outplay your opponent. What Poker Stove does is calculates hand EV. It doesn’t calculate the probability you will out play or get out played. Poker is a game of situations, not cards. Raising because “I have a good hand” is a narrow view of the game. Raising because “I have a good hand, and this guy is weak postflop, so I can probably win without a showdown” is getting yourself in the right direction.

Thoughts/comments can be PMed to I vi ii V7 on the 2+2 forums, or my email, jaronpaige@gmail.com

- I vi ii V7

I’m not an expert poker player. But I have had a lot of experience with moving up – and down – in stakes. I started out like most clueless poker hopefuls and played extremely high for the size of my bankroll. After winning a few freerolls and floating around in the micro SnGs, I moved over to cash games. And there I sat with my $20 at a couple of 10NL full ring tables. After nearly busting my roll more than a few times I decided that there must be a more sensible way of managing my poker money. This article is from the perspective of a part-time full ring NL player that has managed to never make a single deposit out of pocket in the first 2 years of his poker “career.”

Before we get started, keep in mind that Bankroll Management is for winning players. If you are not a winning player, I encourage you to stop reading now, bookmark this article for future reference and read up on some good strategy to get you started in the right direction. Until then, following the advice in this article will not help you, and the stakes you choose to play at will only determine how fast you lose money.

The ideas contained in this article are not sourced as I could not possibly compile a list. Many of these ideas have become common knowledge in the 2p2 community and have been repeated in countless threads. Several people that come to mind from which I have drawn ideas regarding this topic are: Fimbulwinter, Phzon, WCG|rider, Alan Schoonmaker and of course Mason Malmuth

Winrate:

We have an engrained notion in our poker psyche to not be results oriented – at least this is what we strive for. However I assume that most people still have that results oriented mind hiding somewhere no matter how much they try to suppress it.

It is somewhat odd then that we think of winrates with such importance. If we follow the logical conclusion of calculating our winrate, it ultimately ends with the answer to how much money did you make if we apply the use of winrates with our results oriented minds. It’s good to set goals, but setting goals as far as winrates are concerned is not a good idea because you do not have complete control over your results. If you don’t meet those goals you’ll be disappointed in yourself when you shouldn’t necessarily be.

However there are much more useful ways of using winrates, especially to help us when moving up in stakes:

1.) Winrates help us compare our performance at different levels in a more relative sense. You will, or should, make more money at 100NL than at 25NL if you are a winning player at both levels. But that doesn’t really tell us anything, because it’s based on dollars won. Winrates throw out the dollar figure and replace it with a Poker Tracker BB per 100 (ptBB/100) figure. Now we can compare apples to apples when comparing our performance at different stakes.

2.) Winrates help us think in terms of big blinds rather than dollars, as stated above. It would be wonderful if poker clients would allow us to display big blinds in our stack and the pot rather than dollars. It would make moving up much easier by letting us play our regular game, not playing scared because your stack is now double the size in dollar amount, and not have to adjust to new bet sizes. I have yet to find a client that does this, but thinking in those terms instead of dollars won is a huge step towards moving up in stakes.

Sample Size:

It is important to ensure that you are in fact a winner at a certain level before moving up. Most people underestimate the required sample size that is needed to even start analyzing their game. In my experience, you can really only start to analyze your game after 20k hands, and after 50k hands your analysis can start to become quite solid. But those 2k and 5k hand samples are not going to do it. Keep in mind that most multi-tablers out there can put in that many hands in a single sitting. And at the same time, 50k+ hand breakeven, heater and downswing samples are very possible.

That said, once you are confident in your sample size and your accomplishments over that sample size, you are on your way to moving up. You can now be confident that if things don’t go well at the next level, you can always come back down, re-tool your game, make some money, and rebuild your confidence for another shot. You essentially have the data to back up the fact that says you should never go busto if you are able to move back down when necessary.

Playing Your Game:

After successfully beating one level and taking a shot at the next, do not change anything. Play the same game. Play it cautiously and focused, but not scared. A lot of us have made the mistake of playing differently based on our inexperienced perceptions of the new level. The only major difference between the old level and the new level is that there are a few less fish and a few more regs so don’t mess with what’s working.

You’ll also need to keep buying in for the same number of big blinds. You can’t play your game if you try to play it safe and buyin short to protect your bankroll. If you normally buyin for 100BB but want to take a shot with 60BB, your hand values are going to change drastically and your style could become a losing one solely based on the new math behind your stack size.

Be observant and take notice of anything different in the general table dynamics that you haven’t seen before. Is this level tighter, looser, more aggressive, more passive, 3bets more, squeezes more, etc?

You might look at your stats after a significant sample size and realize that there is a big difference in your stats between the old and new levels. If you are sure that you aren’t playing scared and haven’t changed anything, it may just be that you are not being allowed the same opportunities that you were previously although you are still playing the same game. For example, your VPIP/PFR could drop from 15/12 at 25NL to 13/10 at 50NL without changing a single thing in your game. If the new level has better players that are not limping as much, and there’s more 3betting going on, those are just two of many possible reasons that you haven’t had as many opportunities to enter the pot where you did before. There are potential variables like this for all sorts of stats.

Figure out what those differences in table dynamics are and come up with a strategy to try to exploit them. There are going to be adjustments that you’ll need to make to improve as a player and to achieve success at the new level. It’s part of growing as a player. But don’t change anything drastically. Ease in with one adjustment at a time, if it doesn’t work, forget about it and go back to your default style until you find something that works better than your default.

Variance:

Variance is going to seem huge when you take a shot – mostly because you will feel like you are playing with 2 buyins or deepstacked. This is another reason why it’s important to think in big blinds rather than dollars. Taking a shot and running good feels awesome. But all too often taking a shot ends up in running bad and/or playing bad and this will be devastating.

As I stated in the intro, Bankroll Management is for winning players. The problem with taking a shot is that you do not yet know if you are a winning player at the new level, so you need to follow the rule that losing players should follow. You need to decide how much you can afford to lose and consider that money to be dead and gone. An added bonus to thinking like this is that the money shouldn’t matter as much to you and you will be better able to play your game optimally.

It is always important to review your hands, but especially so when you are attempting to move up. If you have hit a bad run, review every hand where you put money in the pot and see if you actually played well and just got a bit of negative variance, played poorly, played scared, or did not maximize value in spots you could have – you’ll need to review every hand for this last one, not just your largest winners and losers.

Be Flexible:

If your shot at moving up is successful you should try to play at the new level as much as possible. But don’t force it. If the games are not good at certain times of the day for the new level, the old level probably has more good games running. Don’t ever hesitate to sit in a good game. Table selection is key to moving up as well as to building confidence.

Some people are able to table select across multiple levels and it works very well for them. A super fishy 25NL game is way more profitable than a table of 50NL regs any day so if you want to fire up more tables but there’s no good 50NL tables left to waitlist, play that 25NL table. I can’t personally play multiple levels because it messes with my bet sizing – I need to continue to work on thinking in big blinds – but you should certainly give it a try.

Monetary Bankroll:

You will find people that say there is a standard bankroll size that you should have, usually in the 20 to 30 buyin range. Everything in poker “depends” on many variables, and bankroll is no exception.

There is a mathematical formula for calculating a bankroll plan for your individual needs that includes the most important variables (and also shows the need for significant sample sizes, as stated previously):

Bankroll = Comfort x Standard Deviation^2 / Winrate

Comfort is the only variable that you get to decide on in this equation, and it’s your own personal choice. It has been suggested that a comfort level of 2 allows an aggressive, high risk bankroll while a comfort level of 4 is more of a conservative, low risk bankroll. This is essentially a risk of ruin formula.

For example, if your comfort level is 2 with a standard deviation of 80 big blinds / 100 hands and your winrate is 8 big blinds / 100 hands your bankroll would need to be: BR = 2 x 80^2 / 8 = 1600 big blinds, or 16 buyins at 100 big blinds per buyin. With the same standard deviation and winrate, someone with a conservative comfort level of 4 would require a bankroll of 32 buyins.

As you move up in stakes, you are going to find two definite trends. Your opponents will be progressively more aggressive and make fewer mistakes. More aggressive games will result in higher variance and a higher standard deviation, while tougher opponents making less mistakes will result in a lower winrate. Therefore the risk of ruin formula will show that you will require more buyins at higher stakes than you would at lower stakes.

Of course this does not take into account the shear dollar amount that is required to mass multitable. You may have a monetary requirement of 20 buyins for your level, but you are going to need more than that if you are playing 18 tables or more for the simple reason that you have to have money left over to reload your stacks.

That said, you do not need to increase the size of your bankroll requirements just because you are multitabling in regards to variance – 1000 hands played over 1 hour will yield the same variance as 1000 hands played over 10 hours – but you may need to increase the size of your bankroll requirements in regards to a drop in your winrate if playing multiple tables causes you to lose focus somewhat.

Psychological Bankroll:

There is another level of bankroll management that most people overlook. That is their psychological bankroll. Many bankrolls have been destroyed by playing beyond psychological bankroll limits. You may have the monetary bankroll to play in a game that you can beat. But you have to figure out and get beyond what that money means to you.

When I started at 25NL I played extremely scared because $25 was more than my hourly wage at my day job and the thought of losing $25 petrified me. There are a whole gamut of ways to perceive the value of money: what it can buy, your salary, your rent, your groceries, etc. But if we continue to perceive our bankrolls in this way, it will hinder our progress.

“At the poker table chips are money, but money is nothing. Think of chips only as a tool to extract other chips from other players” – SplitSuit

Playing above psychological bankroll limits can be devastating. If you hear someone talking about “moving up to where they respect my raises” or getting rostucko by moving up to win back losses faster, these are people that are playing above their psychological limits. They are most likely playing tilted and the money matters a lot to them. Bankrolls can disappear within minutes if they hit a bad run or let their tilt overwhelm them.

The comfort level in the bankroll requirements formula is a measure that can be used to quantify your psychological bankroll. We can rearrange the formula to figure out exactly what your minimum comfort level is.

Comfort = Bankroll / Standard Deviation^2 x Winrate

To use the rearranged formula, think about your current regular game. Use the standard deviation and winrate numbers that you have data for, but instead of your current bankroll, use the minimum bankroll size that you would be comfortable playing your regular game with. This calculation will tell you what your baseline comfort level is, which can be compared to your monetary bankroll requirements. It is a good idea to make sure that both psychological and monetary bankroll requirements are met to be able to play your game optimally.

The best way that I’ve found to get over the value of money when taking a shot at moving up is to actually play one level higher than the level I’m attempting to move up to, and then move back down to the level I’m taking shots at. You do not want to do this if a lost buyin at the higher level will adversely affect your bankroll. When you come back down, the money will not seem to be as much when you’ve been watching pots that are twice as big.

Another psychological factor that influences moving up is downswings while taking shots. Most people will refuse to set a stop loss, saying it’s a bad idea. They say that if the games are good and you are making correct decisions, there is no reason to leave. If that applies to you, then good for you for not letting tilt affect you. But for most of us, we can not honestly say this is true. We may say we’ve lost 3 buyins as a favorite and that we made the correct choices so we should keep playing, but we need to take this one step further and ask ourselves if we will be able to continue to make correct choices after losing x number of buyins and set stop losses if necessary, especially when taking shots.

There is also no reason to stay at your regular game if you are on a downswing. If you are insistent on playing through it, it would make more sense to move down a level and minimize losses, because minimizing losses is exactly the same as maximizing profits. This concept applies to both individual hands and your bankroll management as a whole.

Setting Goals:

It’s a good idea to figure out exactly what your purpose for playing poker is. If it’s just for enjoyment, you can treat your bankroll as a budget. There aren’t too many hobbies out there where you can have a good time and actually make money, too.

If you want to play poker on a more serious level it is a good idea to progress goals. These goals may be anything from learning about specific strategies that you are seeing as you move up to learning about table selection.

A lot of people also like to set monetary goals if they plan to withdraw funds from their bankroll to purchase something they would otherwise not buy. Maybe a new car or a surround sound system. These can be good goals for helping you work towards something, too.

It is also extremely important to set an end goal. What is the specific final goal you are working towards? It might be to be a 200NL pro, or a 50NL semi-pro to supplement your income or anything in between or beyond. Once you’ve reached these goals, always set new ones to work towards. This will help your continued growth as a player.

Planning Your Move:

I have created a Bankroll Management Excel sheet for you to download so that you can manage your bankroll and take shots optimally with a concise plan.

The first sheet “BR Requirements” allows you to quickly see possible bankroll requirements by adjusting the variables. It also lets you do a reverse comfort level lookup to see exactly what comfort level you are enjoying right now with your current bankroll and stakes, or to figure out what your baseline comfort level is as discussed earlier. If that comfort level is getting up there, why not take a shot?

The second sheet “BR Plan” allows you to enter your variables for multiple levels. You can start to see what your minimum bankroll requirements are for each level once your sample size is large enough to ensure your variables are accurate. You can then start to estimate standard deviations and winrates based on your past moves up in stakes and what kind of bankroll you will require in the future. It will also tell you that once you reach a bankroll threshold, you should start considering taking shots at moving up.

The white areas are for you to adjust values. The blue areas are formulas. I chose not to lock the formulas so that those of you who want to can adjust these as well if you prefer to work in big blinds per 100 instead of big bets.

You can download my Bankroll Management Excel Sheets here.

In Conclusion:

I haven’t covered nearly everything that is involved when moving up in stakes and taking shots, but I hope that this article has helped you in some way as it has helped me in figuring out what I need to do to reach my goals in this game.

Success in managing your poker career requires the same skills that are required while playing the game. You need to gather enough information to formulate a plan, act on that plan, and manage your money to meet those goals. Everything will not always work out but you have the tools to figure out what went wrong and you will be better prepared for next time.

- JH1

I am going to talk about two things that I feel go hand in hand with each other but are very different when you talk about poker strategy individually.

First off I’m going to talk about Ranges, and more importantly learning to Range. As a live player turned internet player, I’ve had to learn what everyone was talking about when they assign villain a certain “Range”. It was a term that I had never used before in my poker playing because in live play (I was a very feel based player, and relied on body language of opponents to help me make decisions) you see and have a feel for what players are doing, but in internet poker you don’t have that luxury. I quickly realized putting opponents on ranges was extremely important and crucial in maintaining a solid win rate. So you must make a decision, based on how the hand is played by your opponent, on which likely hands your opponents have: PP, SC, Broadways, etc…, and then you simply make a plan depending on how your hand stacks up against your opponents range.

The second thing I’m going to talk about is a subject that I’ve had some problems with as a poker player: Learning to get comfortable when playing Out Of Position (OOP). When I started playing poker I never thought about position and it’s relevance in a hand or the outcome. I was more along the “I have a good hand I’ll bet/raise” or “I don’t have a hand I’ll just check/fold”. Position and understanding position can make your Win Rate (WR) soar. We all know that being in position and acting after everyone is a huge advantage, but what about those hands where you have a hand, but don’t have the initiative, or the luxury of knowing what your opponent(s) are going to do since you have to act first. I used to be truly uncomfortable being OOP, but now no longer feel like I am costing myself money when I call a raise from the blinds or get called by someone in Late Position (LP)

So let’s begin:

Learning To Range:

First off, there are a few things you will need to know about before you can truly put your opponent’s on a Range:

1.) Player VPIP/Player type: it is almost impossible to Range read correctly if you don’t have an idea of what the other player is doing. A person with a VPIP of 8 is effectively playing AQ+ and 55+ (rough estimates just for point making) while an opponent with a VPIP of 40+ can have just about anything. So knowing opponent tendencies and what they are doing is the first and most important step in Range reading.

2.) Position: more importantly what position your opponent is in. The same player that plays 8/6 from Early Position (EP) could be playing 25/20 from Late Position (LP), This goes directly with knowing your opponent and what player type they are.

3.) What your opponent thinks you have: Think about it! How can you correctly read your opponents hand if you don’t know what Range they are putting you on. If you raise w/ AA in EP and get called by a LP player (w/ stats of 12/7) who suddenly springs to life on a board of 9s8c4h, it’s very likely this player types Range hit this flop hard (flopped set) and is putting you (correctly) on AK or JJ+ (again estimates just for example) and is trying to build a big pot knowing you likely hold an over pair, but if you are only looking at your hand thinking “I have AA and they just must have TT-KK” you will be getting stacked very often. Once again it all boils down to #1, knowing your opponent’s and their style.

4.) Board texture: This is another very important part of ranging. In most situations that board will tell you what villain is likely to have, of course there are always times when they will show up with some completely random stuff, but overall the board will dictate the likely ranges of your opponents.

Ranging really breaks down into two, sometimes three parts. For the most part you should have a very good idea of your opponents range after the first two betting rounds, (pre-flop, and flop) this is the most crucial time when you start assigning opponents their ranges. Most of the players you will play against will let you know if they are wanting to play a big pot (top part of their range) or merely looking to get to a quick/cheap showdown (middle to bottom part of their range). As the hand is played on you should be narrowing your opponents range as you go. Some hands simply won’t make sense as the hand is played out, and you can take them off of the initial range, and have an even narrower range by the turn and river. On occasions the third step involves an opponent that has tried to hide their likely range to you and will spring into action on a later betting round. The important thing to remember here is that the most recent information you have involving your opponents range is the most reliable…i.e. If you get called pre flop and on the flop by a normal tag running anywhere from 12/9-14/10, and then they all of a sudden check raise you all in on the turn, this is basically always the top part of their range (made hands). Actions taken by opponents on later streets are always (for the most part of course) a better inclination of your opponents likely range, but for the most part, you should have your mind made up after the flop betting round what your opponents likely range is and how you plan on maximizing profits against those ranges.

Playing Out Of Position:

Learning to get comfortable when playing OOP is a huge step in becoming a winning player. Yes, you can be a winning player by simply trying to not get into bad spots OOP, and playing the majority of your hands in LP, but inevitably the time will come when you get into spots/big pots OOP, and you might as well get comfortable with it rather than trying to avoid situations that otherwise are +EV.

The first thing I needed to realize when playing OOP is that in certain situations it is ok to check call (c/c) the whole way. When you have an opponent you know is a bluffer or is uber-aggressive, it is ok, even correct, to give them rope and let them hang themselves. One of the most useful statements I was ever given in my poker career was the following: (this is directly quoted from Split Suit (SS)) “you have to let opponents make mistakes against you.” The way this pertains to playing OOP is on occasion if you take the betting initiative or go for the check raise (CR) you are allowing your opponent to play correctly, even perfectly, against you and your range.

The second thing (probably should be the first) is knowing your opponent (see a pattern here), and their range (see above!). The opponent and their position give you all you need to know about how, and if, you should play against them. If you are in the BB w/ KQo and the button (who has an ATS of 40+) raises first in, you have a situation where it is probably better to call than 3bet, even though logically you are way ahead of their range, but by just calling you are giving them that rope to hang themselves when you flop TP+.

Playing OOP offers you a few different lines you can take that are not possible when in position (IP). Check raises, leading into the pre flop raiser (donk bets) and one of my favorite lines I use against uber-aggressive blind stealers (someone with ATS of 40+): I will call their steal with any 2 cards, (and I do mean any 2). I c/c their flop bet and then I lead the turn (This play works so often I can’t believe I’m giving away my play) I know this is basically just a float, but when OOP the lead into them on the turn almost always gets them to lay down their hand. The majority of the time they have nothing and would’ve folded anyways, but this line is representing so much strength, competent opponents will give you credit for something big often and fold some solid hands that they would’ve like to seen a show down otherwise.

In closing the above two situations (as all poker in general) depends on your opponents. Some plays and situations will work and are very effective against certain player types but will never work and is basically spewing against another. The job to figure out the situation and player type is your job.

- MpimpjuiceM

“Good Play Makes Good Stats; Good Stats Do Not Make Good Play”

The title of this article seems to be ridiculously obvious, but a lot of people don’t get it. In the stats thread on 2+2, the most common question I get is: “What should X stat be?” Even if you assume that the player asking this question assumes we are talking about the standard 2+2 tight/aggressive style of play, the question is evidence that the questioner believes there is a style of play, a set of perfect stats, that will make them a winner. If you think this, you are thinking backwards; good stats do not result in good play; good play results in good stats. Your focus always should be on making the right play at the right time; good stats follow from a series of good decisions.

Here’s an example. I get a lot of posts in the stats thread from people whose VPIP/PFR stats are roughly 14/7 or so, and they usually have a small, but positive win rate. They ask me, “I should raise more PFR, right? My PFR should be about 10 or 11?”

Well, yes and no. These players have noted the correct problem, but the incorrect solution. I look through the stats of people whose preflop stats look like this, and invariably their position stats look something like this:

Button: 19/14
CO: 15/11
HJ: 14/9
MP2: 12/8
MP1: 10/6
UTG+1: 10/5
UTG: 10/5
SB: 18/8
BB: 10/5

When you look at these stats and you ask yourself: “Does this person need to be raising more preflop?” The obvious answer is, “not really.” This player is somewhat positionally aware; although we would like to see even more aggression in late position, basically, this person gets it—he raises premiums in early position, and he opens wider as his position moves closer to the button.

The real problem here is not that the player should be raising more, it is that he should be calling less. The real problem here is that this player has failed to accept that, in general, it is better to raise or fold in early and early middle position than it is to open limp or limp behind. So this person’s leaks are primarily two-fold—in early position he is open limping, and in middle position he is being tempted too often into limping behind a previous limper rather than raising or folding.

Invariably, when I filter this player’s stats for hands they limp, I see a lot of red—they are losing money seeing these “cheap flops.”

So rather than tell these players to raise more, I tell them to fold rather than limp in these negative EV spots, and they wind up changing their stats not from 14/7 to 14/11, but from 14/7 to 12/9, and their win rate explodes.

This example highlights the importance of making correct decisions, rather than playing for stats. In the example, just looking at the stats the player had, the PFR was too low in comparison to the VPIP; thus the player thinks “raise more,” because we think additional aggression is always the answer, and online poker culture respects a 15/11 TAg, but derides as a “nit,” somebody who plays 12/9. But in reality, at the table, this type of player is making bad decisions by limping; the “bad” stat was not the low PFR, but the high VPIP.

Here’s a second example, just to drive the point home. In my leak finder sessions, I analyze stats for a lot of players who are winning, but dissatisfied with their win rates. A typical player’s stats looked like this after 95,000 hands at NL $50:

VPIP__________________15
PF____________________12
AF____________________3.2
3bet__________________4.8
W$WSF________________38.7
WTSD_________________24.6
W$SD WR/bb100_________???

If you didn’t see his win rate, this player would be the envy of 2+2; his stats are a near perfect representation of the tight/aggressive style of play.

Here are the actual stats of the player:

VPIP__________________15
PF____________________12
AF____________________3.2
3bet__________________4.8
W$WSF________________38.7
WTSD_________________24.6
W$SD WR/bb100_________2.1

So what we have here is a situation where a player’s stats are practically perfect, but the win rate—2 big blinds per 100 hands, 1ptbb/100—is barely better than break even.

Looking at these stats, there is simply no way to tell what the player’s leaks are; but he must be leaking like a sieve, or his win rate would be three to four times higher. So how can you have “perfect” stats and be leaking like the Titanic? It’s easy—you make bad decisions at the table. As it turned out, this player’s leaks were primarily a tendency to stack off light with overpairs and losing most of the money he put into pots he 3 bet (although he was winning most of the pots). He thought he was doing everything correctly—3 betting button steals, building big pots with his premiums, keeping his aggression high; he even said to me, “How can my stats be so good and my win rate so bad?” as if good stats are supposed to guarantee good results.

The basic point I am making is not that your stats don’t matter. They do. But all they do is describe the way you played. Who really cares if your aggression factor is 3.2 if half the time you are betting or raising you are on the express train to value-towning yourself? It’s not much consolation; “Well, I just lost a stack, but at least my AF for the session will be high.”

Your focus has to always be on making the best decisions you can make—don’t try to play 15/12 or 21/17, or whatever. Use the stats for their intended purpose—to evaluate your play after the fact, not as goals to achieve.

-MpethyBridge