Please help me move from NIT to TAG

Jimmy2dollarJimmy2dollar Red Chipper Posts: 8 ✭✭
I got Optimizing Ace King and the first homework assignment was on hand equity. I got flopzilla and entered in my starting hand range, much to my shock and horror I was a 14 percent starting hand range. If I do not expand my range I will loose money in lost opportunity. However I have no desire to become loose.

Comments

  • moishetreatsmoishetreats Red Chipper Posts: 1,819 ✭✭✭✭
    Start on the button by adding a select few hands. Then add a couple of those hands to the cut-off. Then to...

    Then go back to the button and add a couple of more hands...

    Note: As you're doing this, the essential component is NOT understanding how those new hands connect with flops. Rather, the essential component is understanding how your new range connects with flops. In other words, with your expanded range, you are representing different things, including fewer premium hands. Did that make sense?
  • RedRed Red Chipper Posts: 1,699 ✭✭✭✭
    I got Optimizing Ace King and the first homework assignment was on hand equity. I got flopzilla and entered in my starting hand range, much to my shock and horror I was a 14 percent starting hand range. If I do not expand my range I will loose money in lost opportunity. However I have no desire to become loose.

    I don't have the book so I don't know from which position it is aka from which position you're constructing these 14% ;
    - If it's EP/MP, it's fine. And expand it only if you are comfortable.
    - If it's LP, it is too tight as you don't seize enough opportunities to steal the pot / play postflop IP.

    This RCP podcast may help you to play more hands: https://redchippoker.com/how-to-play-a-looser-style-podcast/
  • Jimmy2dollarJimmy2dollar Red Chipper Posts: 8 ✭✭
    Yes, with the new hands added I will represent a wider range of opening hands and my competition won't necessarily be able to assume only premium hands are being played and therefore have a more difficult time playing correctly. Am I grasping your point properly ?
  • TheGameKatTheGameKat Posts: 1,268 -
    Yes, with the new hands added I will represent a wider range of opening hands and my competition won't necessarily be able to assume only premium hands are being played and therefore have a more difficult time playing correctly. Am I grasping your point properly ?

    I think you're grasping the point, but it's not one that's universally accepted: https://redchippoker.com/opening-ranges-seduction/
    Moderation In Moderation
  • moishetreatsmoishetreats Red Chipper Posts: 1,819 ✭✭✭✭
    Yes, with the new hands added I will represent a wider range of opening hands and my competition won't necessarily be able to assume only premium hands are being played and therefore have a more difficult time playing correctly. Am I grasping your point properly ?

    Yup! With a nod to @TheGameKat's post.

    Say that you only raise QQ+ and AK. Well, you'll be pretty easy to play against. Once you expand your range, then you'll be able to represent more hands on various boards (called "board coverage"). The rub, of course, is that doing so introduces a whole new element to how you have to play your ranges and your opponents (and stack size is essential).

    The good news? Say that the flop is Qd8h7d. With an expanded range, you can more credibly rep a good hand there. The rub? With an expanded range, you'll lose some credibility when the board flops AK5r.

    Figuring out how to capitalize on an expanded range, though, puts you in position to win more pots. I know that's not rocket science, but it's still important. I would, however, be prepared for one of if not both of the following: (a) you'll likely lose often as you work on this, and (b) a coach/program would likely be helpful in navigating you here.
  • TheGameKatTheGameKat Posts: 1,268 -
    edited December 5
    I think an important point (expanding on moishe's) is that the nit --> TAG transition isn't just about preflop ranges. For example, a nit according to Miller is not that tight preflop, having a forked range that limps a lot of small-medium pairs and speculative hands. In fact I'd argue you could create three classes of bots that most people would recognize as nit/TAG/LAG, with the only difference in their stats being postflop.
    Moderation In Moderation
  • Jimmy2dollarJimmy2dollar Red Chipper Posts: 8 ✭✭
    Well, I am back from a rough night at the table, I don't think I made horrible choices, I was ahead at the time I made them. I called an All In from a lag, I had KK, he had AK off suit. On the turn a Ace came, like it will 1/3 of the time. I had pocket Queens, the flop came A K 10 . The player checked, So I knew he was afraid of the Ace. I figured I was in the middle of the K and 10 so I called his bet on the next round. The river came out with another 10, lucky for me he checked hoping I would bet. I checked because I knew my queens were dead. (He had made trips with the two 10's on the board)
    I am wondering after I saw two people bet the flop, the turn, and the river . the winning card was a Jack. The other guy had air, and the Jack was not even the highest card on the board. How do I think about ranges ?
    Anyway thanks for your guidance on getting me down the right road.
  • Jimmy2dollarJimmy2dollar Red Chipper Posts: 8 ✭✭
    What about mastering the board texture and how to play the top 24 percent of the hand range. It is about 50 different hands, I just have to figure out the whole put them in buckets thing. Does this seem like a good place to start ?
  • moishetreatsmoishetreats Red Chipper Posts: 1,819 ✭✭✭✭
    Well, I am back from a rough night at the table, I don't think I made horrible choices, I was ahead at the time I made them. I called an All In from a lag, I had KK, he had AK off suit. On the turn a Ace came, like it will 1/3 of the time. I had pocket Queens, the flop came A K 10 . The player checked, So I knew he was afraid of the Ace. I figured I was in the middle of the K and 10 so I called his bet on the next round. The river came out with another 10, lucky for me he checked hoping I would bet. I checked because I knew my queens were dead. (He had made trips with the two 10's on the board)
    I am wondering after I saw two people bet the flop, the turn, and the river . the winning card was a Jack. The other guy had air, and the Jack was not even the highest card on the board. How do I think about ranges ?
    Anyway thanks for your guidance on getting me down the right road.

    Post the full hand history, and we can do our best to offer some thoughts!

    (One quick note: if you confident that V was scared of the ace, then why didn't you bet when checked to on the flop? Especially if you were the pre-flop raiser -- this board hits your range quite well and better than V's...)
  • SplitSuitSplitSuit RCP Coach Posts: 3,930 -
    I got Optimizing Ace King and the first homework assignment was on hand equity. I got flopzilla and entered in my starting hand range, much to my shock and horror I was a 14 percent starting hand range. If I do not expand my range I will loose money in lost opportunity. However I have no desire to become loose.

    Good job taking this exercise seriously (and then going a step further to try and suss out where and why changes could be made)!

    Are you opening 14% of hands from everywhere?
    Just from EP?
    Are you playing 6max or FR? Online or live? Fishy games or reggy games?

    A number is just a number. Context is required to make sense of numbers in this game =)
    My new book lays out the playbook for AK. Grab your copy and start Optimizing Ace King!
  • Jimmy2dollarJimmy2dollar Red Chipper Posts: 8 ✭✭
    edited December 5
    I was playing the 14 percent in all positions. I woke up and my brain let me know that the 24 percent starting hand range is actually what I saw all the hands in showdown with. So now I actually know the average range of the card house as everybody plays almost all the same. Because almost everybody limps in if they can, to see the flop cheap, I need to create a range where i raise in first , and where I call and where I fold. My lack of aggression is preventing me from stealing pots with position and reducing opponents by not raising. Less then 10 percent of people who play take position into consideration. Only when it comes to putting out a weak bet to take a pot everybody has checked on. I think the reason why I played so tight was the emotional security of only playing hands where I was the serious favorite. I have only been playing live people instead of on the internet for about 3 weeks. If I do not adjust and improve it will be only about 2 more sessions before I am playing my hands face up with the nit range.
  • Jordan PowerJordan Power Red Chipper Posts: 230 ✭✭✭
    The card room is probably the worst place you could find to work on expanding your range. There needs to be a serious amount of off-table study to find where you should be opening up.

    Also, if you want to make your life a ton easier as you start out, do not define a limping range. Literally either raise or fold if you have the chance to raise first-in. And if a ton of people are limping, you need to be raising because as more hands are in play, the odds that you will have the best hand go down.

    Another thing I want to point out is that you're noting that the 'average range of the card room' at 24% based on what you saw at showdown. While I think that is a dubious statement already, I would note that generally the best hand is being shown at showdown and that will inject a bias toward better starting hands.

    The guy who mucked after check calling two streets could have been playing T8o and chasing a gut shot or something like that. Don't make a judgement like this that has the potential to gear your style of play to how others are playing at the table.

    Study off table, find a range with which you are comfortable raising and calling raises in different positions and then employ that at the table.

    If you're trying to learn solely at the table, you're going to have a bad time. Ask me about my experience in April of this year for a case study... ;)
  • Jimmy2dollarJimmy2dollar Red Chipper Posts: 8 ✭✭
    Thank you for your words of wisdom Jordan
  • EazzyEazzy Red Chipper Posts: 915 ✭✭✭✭
    for me the hand expansions comes as an exploit to my opponents. I start out pretty nitty, until I see obvious leaks I can capitalize on then I open my range against that opponent with the hands I can out play him (them against)

    Table full of nits 5 limpers...I raise from the BB SB any Kxs sometimes if ive been running cold and look supper nitty any Kxs Qxs...

    If no one plays back at your ever...raise more cbet and double barrel with wider ranges.



    guy tends to donk out with bet tells (small donk 2nd pair, large donk top pair check raise bigger hand check call draw type thing)..he's limped in, I may raise him from the btn with any 2 cards....I can play perfectly after the flop.

    The point is the more you work on getting control over your opponents the more places you see their range is too wide, or goes from very wide to tight, then the more hands you can play, either to bluff, or because you can comfortably get thin value.

    As you see these spots, often when your not in the hand...."if I was the big blind I could call him here with any two cards, and check raise any flop" and then see someone check raise him and hes folds...

    or you call someone with 66 in the btn...hit a set and when he bets the turn you raise and he folds...and you think I could do this with 86s hit 2nd pair and do the same thing for the same flop and turn and get the same results.

    After a while you see it happen, play a few extra hand get more comfortable, and change from nit to tag and in some cases even lag.



  • Faustovaldez123Faustovaldez123 RCP Coach Posts: 790 ✭✭✭✭
    @Jimmy2dollar stop focusing on ure preflop hands so much, ure hands are only relevant post flop and if ure able to take more of ure EV share via ure post flop lines
    COACHING NOW AVAILABLE HERE
  • LeChiffreLeChiffre NetherlandsRed Chipper Posts: 288 ✭✭✭
    edited December 7
    Wait, since when is EV shared?

    If someone has the choice between taking two lines and one of them is higher EV, that doesn't mean his opponent has a smaller EV.
  • Faustovaldez123Faustovaldez123 RCP Coach Posts: 790 ✭✭✭✭
    His opponents and us are always attempting to win more of our share of equity, and when we do we simply win more
    COACHING NOW AVAILABLE HERE
  • LeChiffreLeChiffre NetherlandsRed Chipper Posts: 288 ✭✭✭
    Ah equity, not EV then =)
  • The MuleThe Mule Red Chipper Posts: 776 ✭✭✭
    LeChiffre wrote: »
    Wait, since when is EV shared?

    If someone has the choice between taking two lines and one of them is higher EV, that doesn't mean his opponent has a smaller EV.

    Not sure if this is serious.

    It absolutely does. If your increase in EV does not come at the expense of your opponent’s EV, where do you think it comes from ?
  • moishetreatsmoishetreats Red Chipper Posts: 1,819 ✭✭✭✭
    The Mule wrote: »
    If your increase in EV does not come at the expense of your opponent’s EV, where do you think it comes from ?

    EV is not a zero-sum equation.
  • The MuleThe Mule Red Chipper Posts: 776 ✭✭✭
    The Mule wrote: »
    If your increase in EV does not come at the expense of your opponent’s EV, where do you think it comes from ?

    EV is not a zero-sum equation.

    Correct. EV sums to the pot, just like equity.

    Tipton defined it slightly differently, but in the end we are fighting our opponents for a share of the pot.
  • Faustovaldez123Faustovaldez123 RCP Coach Posts: 790 ✭✭✭✭
    The Mule wrote: »
    The Mule wrote: »
    If your increase in EV does not come at the expense of your opponent’s EV, where do you think it comes from ?

    EV is not a zero-sum equation.

    Correct. EV sums to the pot, just like equity.

    Tipton defined it slightly differently, but in the end we are fighting our opponents for a share of the pot.

    Yeah this
    COACHING NOW AVAILABLE HERE
  • jeffncjeffnc Red Chipper Posts: 4,339 ✭✭✭✭✭
    The Mule wrote: »
    If your increase in EV does not come at the expense of your opponent’s EV, where do you think it comes from ?

    EV is not a zero-sum equation.

    Not being a zero sum equation is a red herring vis a vis the question. EVs sum to the pot (ignoring rake and tips), so it doesn't matter that x + y != 0, because x + y = p and it makes no difference what p is: if x goes up y must go down given the same p.
  • moishetreatsmoishetreats Red Chipper Posts: 1,819 ✭✭✭✭
    jeffnc wrote: »
    The Mule wrote: »
    If your increase in EV does not come at the expense of your opponent’s EV, where do you think it comes from ?

    EV is not a zero-sum equation.

    Not being a zero sum equation is a red herring vis a vis the question. EVs sum to the pot (ignoring rake and tips), so it doesn't matter that x + y != 0, because x + y = p and it makes no difference what p is: if x goes up y must go down given the same p.

    Technically this is true. But, unless you are putting your opponent all-in, then your opponent has options which could then affect the effect EV once again. In other words, you're considering 'p' to be a constant.

    When talking about fighting for a share of the pot, though, 'p' is usually a variable. Once I call, bet, or raise ("fight"), then 'p' changes, and my EV differs in all scenarios.

    Yes, my opponent's EV will adjust accordingly in isolation. But, it's possible for both my action AND my opponent's response to be +EV. That's what I meant by EV not being zero-sum.
  • jeffncjeffnc Red Chipper Posts: 4,339 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited December 11
    Agreed it gets very complicated. Also agreed that once we reach a certain point in the hand and consider all money in the pot as history, then both players can be +EV*. Just saying that at any point in time we make the calculation, if one EV goes up the other goes down.

    *Really simple example for lurkers who don't get this: most have read from Sklansky that we only profit from our opponent's mistakes. This is not the same thing as saying you can't be +EV if your opponent plays perfectly at that decision point. You have AA and $20 in your stack. There is $100 in the pot on a board of :5H: :9h :QS: :7C: and your opponent has :2H: :3H:. You can see each other's cards. You shove and he calls. Both players have made +EV plays, no one has made a mistake, in fact both players have played perfectly on the turn. There are times you make +EV plays even if your opponent plays perfectly against you. If you said "I can't make my opponent make a mistake by betting $20 here, therefore according to Sklansky's Fundamental Theorem of Poker I should check", you'd be making a mistake. The mistake in this hand occurred earlier, and that mistake subsidized the pot, making it possible for both players to profit off of that in the future.
  • Jordan PowerJordan Power Red Chipper Posts: 230 ✭✭✭
    That example helped me a lot. I was a touch lost following this thread for a moment there.
  • jeffncjeffnc Red Chipper Posts: 4,339 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I called an All In from a lag, I had KK, he had AK off suit. On the turn a Ace came, like it will 1/3 of the time

    That's not really true, but I think you might have worded something wrong here....

  • jeffncjeffnc Red Chipper Posts: 4,339 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I'm not really sure how I started in thread in the middle instead of the beginning, but to the OP's original post - I think @moishetreats approach is good if you're trying to expand your range. But it's hard to know how much your opponents are paying attention to begin with, and how long it's going to take them to catch up to your changes. You might play a flop one way if you know your opponent knows you could have a suited connector there, and another way if you don't think they believe that.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file