# Pocket Jacks

PhillyRed Chipper Posts: 35 ✭✭
Blinds \$300, \$500, \$500 (Ante)
Stack - \$38,000
Position - UTG +1
Hero:
Villian: Button, Covers

I open for \$1,500, Button Calls
Pot: \$4,300

Villain has limped almost every hand and called every preflop raise, 1 time showcasing K5o at showdown. He's been at the table for about an hour. With his loose tendencies, i constructed a 56% (744 combos) range for him shown below.

Flop:

I check, expecting Villian would try to steal the pot in position, he bet's \$3,000. I check-raise to \$9,000 hoping with his wide range for a fold and to scoop the \$7,300 pot. If he calls I put together a C-Range (353 Combo's) for him Below. I believe him to be sticky and float with hands as low as any pair, and some backdoor draws.

Check Raise Equation looking for a fold
(353/744) = 47.4 Call Range
52.6 Fold Range
EV = (53 x \$7,300) - (47 x \$9,000) =
-EV \$36,100

As shown below my actual hand equity vs his full range is 62%. I am still learning how to properly run these EV equations and I'm still confused sometimes so please correct any mistakes I'm making with my homework. The "Fold" EV Equation above was negative when he calls but my actual hand EV Equation in relation to a bigger pot is positive. Risking \$9,000 to win (\$4,300 Preflop + \$9,000 Villian Flop call) = \$13,300? Did i do that right or is it to win the full \$22,300 which includes my \$9,000 bet?

EV (62% x \$13,300) - (38% x \$9,000) =
+EV \$482,6000

Turn:

I really didn't like that card and at the table i don't have the flopzilla range muscle memory down yet so i completely botched the hand here. Working on it from home is very eye opening.

I checked Villain bets the same \$9,000.
Pot \$31,300
Pot Odds: 3.5 : 1

Need 22% Equity to Call which is about what I'm getting to hit the flush or set. Instead in the heat of the moment I saw i had the and decided to put my gambling shoes on and went all in for \$26,500 thinking maybe he'll fold this time or i'll hit my flush if he calls. I told myself if I'm beat I'll rebuy and gain information and learn from it later (now). He called with

I had 67% vs his full range at this point.
EV - (67% x \$57,800 Pot) - (33% x \$26,500)
+EV = \$2,998,100
It looks like it's +EV but I'm really not sure if I'm analyzing it correctly. Any thoughts would be appreciated.

• Red Chipper Posts: 4,308 ✭✭✭✭✭
Using the toy game FE concept isn't the most relevant one here. Subsections of your range all want certain things, and what you are trying to accomplish with this type of hand either lower EV then a better construction at best or very fancy at worst.
• PhillyRed Chipper Posts: 35 ✭✭
What do you mean by "toy game" Fold Equity concept? And I'm sorry but I don't understand your advice, would you mind elaborating?
• Red Chipper Posts: 4,308 ✭✭✭✭✭
Yes, I should rephrase/start over because you are doing multiple things here.

On the flop,
I check-raise to \$9,000 hoping with his wide range for a fold and to scoop the \$7,300 pot.

So you are treating your hand as XX and employing an EV equation to measure the value of a x/r. This is cart before horse: your hand isn't served best as a check-raise because you have other hands that fit into a polarized action better. So you start with what is generally a construction error then try to quantify its value. On the turn you repeat this process.

However, reading between the lines, it sounds like you are a subscriber or a CORE member and i will let the @TheGameKat or RCP staff answer further. Your equations don't look right and that's their duty to help you with.
• Red Chipper Posts: 142 ✭✭
Hey Joey. I dont have time to review the hand atm but I wanted to let you know about a windows feature called "Snipping Tool". Hit the windows key and type "snipping" until you see it. Once open you can select "new" and drag the cursor around the part of the screen you want to snip. It will create an image which you can copy and paste into the forum or save to your drive.
• PhillyRed Chipper Posts: 35 ✭✭
@MrFuss Awesome Tool! So much easier than what i was doing. Thanks so much!
• PhillyRed Chipper Posts: 35 ✭✭
@persuadeo @TheGameKat Thanks for your feedback. This is 1 of my first hand's I'm trying to analyze from home. For years I just played and never took the work home so this is very new to me. I have about 10-15 others that I've noted from recent sessions. But it won't do me any good studying those before I know how to breakdown this 1st one. I need guidance on how to study my hand's efficiently. Also, It sounds like I need to work on constructing more advanced ranges than my old ABC poker ways.
• Posts: 3,656 -
Hey @JoeyM can we break this down into pieces, please, I'm really not sure what it is you're trying to calculate nor where these equations are coming from.

So let's start with the first part. What is a "check-raise equation looking for a fold"? I'm pretty sure there's no way of calculating EV analytically here. I suspect you're trying to apply something that indicates how often you need a fold for the check-raise to be profitable? Please clarify your intent and we can go from there.
Moderation In Moderation
• PhillyRed Chipper Posts: 35 ✭✭
@TheGameKat Sure. Yes, your wording was correct! I was trying to apply how often I need a fold for a check-raise to be profitable. I put together his pre flop calling my raise range (O-Range) and his (C-Range) by calling my flop check-raise. I learned this from a Split Suit Video. The Range I put together had him folding 53% of the time.

As far as the EV equations I displayed, I'm assuming I made some more mistakes there on top of how I constructed my range and played the hand at the table. Was I not supposed to put the 53% FE into an EV calculation? (EV calculations just being Hand Equity %)?
• Posts: 3,656 -
With betting streets to come you can calculate current equity directly/analytically but not EV. I'll try to get back to this later if nobody else has jumped in.

But conceptually, here's something to consider. Let's say you determine that a flop check-raise is profitable (+EV). That's all well and good, but what if another line makes more \$\$\$? In other words, simply determining that something is +EV does not necessarily mean it's the best line. And as persuadeo notes, from general principles and range construction ideas, a check-raise here is probably a bad idea.
Moderation In Moderation
• PhillyRed Chipper Posts: 35 ✭✭
@TheGameKat Ok Thanks! Looking forward to hearing about the better lines I could have used here.
It looks like in this @SplitSuit example he did calculate a preflop EV using the FE% so still a little confused about where and when to use the different formula's.
• Posts: 3,656 -
If you'll give me the link to that video I'll try and decode what's going on.

I used to be a physics prof and engineering students would frequently ask "what formula do i use for this?" I suggested to them that if they asked themselves what precisely they were trying to determine, the "formula" (if any) would be apparent, but that understanding what was going on had very little to do with plug-and-chug.
Moderation In Moderation
• PhillyRed Chipper Posts: 35 ✭✭
@TheGameKat Go to about the 15:20 point of the video to see his Fold Equity calculation in relation to Outright EV
• Posts: 3,656 -
edited October 2019
Okay I've never heard "outright EV" used in this way before. What he's talking about is the immediate EV of this light 3-bet and the effect of blockers. It doesn't attempt to include subsequent EV in the lines in which V calls the 3-bet (which isn't surprising since that's basically impossible analytically).

I'll get back to this later if nobody else has broken it down. I don't think the situation in the video has much to do with your hand.
Moderation In Moderation
• PhillyRed Chipper Posts: 35 ✭✭
Ok, thanks for taking the time to help. In the meantime, I'm currently reading Poker's 1%, which is very eye-opening so far.
• Posts: 3,656 -
JoeyM wrote: »
Ok, thanks for taking the time to help. In the meantime, I'm currently reading Poker's 1%, which is very eye-opening so far.

Oh now you've done it lol. That book tends to produce lively debate here.
Moderation In Moderation
• PhillyRed Chipper Posts: 35 ✭✭
Hahaha good to know
• Posts: 3,656 -
edited October 2019
@JoeyM I wanted to make some general points about hand analysis here that I hope will help you moving forward, as well as maybe saving time for others.

One of the exciting moments for most players who decide to study poker is that what seemed like a turbulent ocean of confusion actually has a mathematical foundation. We can calculate things! What can also happen, however, is that in "calculating things" we can sometimes lose sight of the actual purpose. Here's an example:

You hold the on a flop of and are HU IP. What's the probability your opponent holds exactly one spade and one heart?

We can calculate that, but the information we obtain is almost entirely useless.

Now the general RCP/CORE philosophy is to promote an approach to poker that is based in mathematics, hence all the spreadsheets and equations. We really had no choice, our team is dominated by math geeks. And I worry sometimes that such an approach fails to emphasize what it is we're actually trying to achieve.

So to get back to your main question of "did I analyze this hand correctly?" the answer is no. You've essentially calculated the probability your opponent has exactly one spade and one heart. I recognize this is one of the most frustrating parts of studying poker, in that we give you all these tools and you want to apply them. So my general advice would be, before you reach for an equation or spreadsheet, write down what it is you're trying to accomplish.

The answer should invariably be consistent with the general question "how do I maximize profit in this spot," but since each hand is different, try to identify what makes the current one unique/interesting. This helps see the common themes.

To put it another way, I'm 100% sure that when @persuadeo responded above, at no point did he calculate anything. And that's not because he's lazy - he provides a great deal of free and valuable information here - it's because calculating some EV related to the profitability of a flop check-raise has basically nothing to do with deciding what action you should take here.

So now you're asking "how do I know when to use these lovely spreadsheets?" And I'm afraid this is another source of frustration because the glib yet honest answer is that you'll know when to use them when you're more experienced. But to hopefully simplify things, make sure the situation you're analyzing is directly analogous to examples provided for any spreadsheet/formula, and then see if the quantity being calculated is actually something useful. That is, does it indicate what action you should take.

One other guideline. The reason more seasoned players would not try to calculate some sort of EV of the check-raise here is that there is a lot of money left to play. Many of these EV calculations are only directly applicable for all-in situations. So take a step back and think about this conceptually rather than being seduced by plug-n-chug formulae.

So to return specifically to the first bit of analysis you provide in the OP. It is possible to calculate whether a check-raise here generates auto-profit if we assign bet-call and bet-fold ranges to our opponent. But that is mostly uninteresting since it doesn't address the question of how we maximize profit in this hand as a whole. If we check-raise and get called, for example, are our actions going forward likely to be profitable? Or have we bloated a pot in which we're OOP while simultaneously strengthening V's range?

Moderation In Moderation
• PhillyRed Chipper Posts: 35 ✭✭
I recognize this is one of the most frustrating parts of studying poker, in that we give you all these tools and you want to apply them. So my general advice would be, before you reach for an equation or spreadsheet, write down what it is you're trying to accomplish.

The answer should invariably be consistent with the general question "how do I maximize profit in this spot," but since each hand is different, try to identify what makes the current one unique/interesting. This helps see the common themes.

@TheGameKat I could tell you were a great professor. You're teaching me to ask different questions, which will save me from studying my hands in the wrong areas.

If I were to write down what I was "originally" trying to accomplish here, it was a fold on the flop from Villian with his ~53% bet-fold range. As far as how do I maximize profit in this spot, I really don't know...yet. Or how to go about finding that answer...yet.

I can say I should have avoided bloating the pot on the flop in this spot. That doesn't seem profitable when he calls. As @persuadeo mentioned my hand doesn't serve best as a C/R. If I'm c-betting at a ~70% frequency with a (2:1 "bluff: value ratio" in mind), It doesn't even fit into my 48 combos of value betting hands of top pair or better. Maybe I could still C-Bet and include it in my semi-bluff ratio with a chance to improve and/or win at showdown or just Check / Call and see what develops on the Turn. When the hits the turn. its not a great card for me but still leaves me with some equity, so I could have check /called again.

Where do you suggest I go from here to figure out what action/line i could have taken in this spot?

• Posts: 3,656 -
Let me say I think it's a genuinely tricky spot, although that's often the case OOP. Your opponent has a wide range, but how sticky are they postflop? Can you bet for value here? Your hand isn't crying out for protection, but I think a smallish lead here is a decent hybrid bet, giving both protection and extracting value.

If the flop goes bet-call, I suspect you check the turn, but it's not a pleasant spot since check-folding seems pretty weak.

I think one thing is clear: this is an interesting hand to analyze and recognizing that is a good sign.
Moderation In Moderation
• PhillyRed Chipper Posts: 35 ✭✭
He seemed very sticky and did call my c/r with mid pair. So he would've called my C-bet as well.
The hotness feature of Turn cards has the a slight advantage for hand equity. It's interesting to see the good vs bad Turn cards here and play accordingly.