Opening Range From HJ

tengusteeltengusteel Red Chipper Posts: 119 ✭✭
edited March 2015 in General Concepts
In Hunter Cinchy's great article hear on RCP, he recommends the following range for opening from the HJ in Full-Ring Cash Games. All Pairs and all two broads without tens. I would like everyone's input on a modification to this HJ Opening Range. I've modified it for my play as shown below. I use the number of combos that Hunter suggest as a budget, but I reallocate some of the weaker offsuit combos like QJo to suited combos. My thinking is this increases how often I hit the flop by just a little, and it increases the number of times I make a bigger hand, potentially winning more money. Is my thinking flawed?

Hunter's recommendation is the first picture, my modifications are in the picture below this one.
2015-03-06_21h09_09_zpsruax0ow3.png

2015-03-06_21h09_29_zpsjo6vffok.png

Comments

  • tengusteeltengusteel Red Chipper Posts: 119 ✭✭
    edited March 2015
    Question 1:
    Should I have put the ATo combo in this HJ range or should I reallocate those 12 combos to something else?
  • tengusteeltengusteel Red Chipper Posts: 119 ✭✭
    I'm contemplating reallocation of the 12 ATo combos to this below.

    2015-03-06_21h24_35_zpsixcckok9.png
  • BotswanaNickBotswanaNick Red Chipper Posts: 696 ✭✭✭
    Do you have a link to the article? On first glance, this range looks too tight for HJ, and not skewed enough towards suited hands. For example I've never seen a HJ opening range that doesnt include all Axs (at least if stacks aren't too shallow).
  • BotswanaNickBotswanaNick Red Chipper Posts: 696 ✭✭✭
    Wow, I know I am not a pro or anything, but I have a lot of problems with that article. There seem to be some fundamental inconsistencies in several areas, at least that go directly against Ed Miller's and others thinking on this topic. For example, his "passive, deep stack" opening range includes all suited connectors and even suited gappers, but not all suited Aces? I don't think there exists a deep game were 75s is significantly more profitable than A5s. Also, his default button open range is very tight (30%) and his small blind default open is 68%? This is backwards as I understand it. Whatever your button opening range is, it should be much wider than your small blind open right? Please someone correct me if Im wrong.


    As for your specific questions about HJ opening, I think if you are playing deepish, you can at minimum widen to include all Axs (if you are uncomfortable including all of them, you can exclude A6-A7s) and all suited-connected broadway hands. These hands play great in deep games especially when in position and with the betting lead.
  • BotswanaNickBotswanaNick Red Chipper Posts: 696 ✭✭✭
    Sorry just re-looking at your adjusted range, happy to see you have all suited broadway also included. I've always considered ATo, KJo, J9s, T9-67s pretty standard opens from the HJ, but these are probably not required (and if you are opening this wide from the HJ, you need to be opening proportionally wider from CO and BU. Just remember, the deeper you are, the more you want to skew to suited and connected cards (if deep enough, I would abandon ATo and KJo in favor of smaller suited connectors and suited gappers), the shallower you are, skew more to big cards (and a tighter overall range).
  • SplitSuitSplitSuit RCP Coach Posts: 4,034 -
    Also, his default button open range is very tight (30%) and his small blind default open is 68%? This is backwards as I understand it. Whatever your button opening range is, it should be much wider than your small blind open right? Please someone correct me if Im wrong.

    On the button there are 2 players to get through, from the SB there is only 1 player to get through. Your SB ATS should be MUCH wider (usually 50%+) compared to your button ATS.
  • BotswanaNickBotswanaNick Red Chipper Posts: 696 ✭✭✭
    Yeah, 1 player still to act makes a difference, but I thought that SB guaranteed being OOP compared to Button guaranteed being in position post-flop more than made up for this, at least at reasonably deep stack depths. Is this incorrect? I seem to remember Miller et al recommending a 60-70 (or more) % opening range from button, compared to 30-40% range from SB, in the crushing small stakes 6max online book. Am I remembering incorrectly, or is this info out of date? Genuinely wondering, thanks!
  • SplitSuitSplitSuit RCP Coach Posts: 4,034 -
    Yeah, 1 player still to act makes a difference, but I thought that SB guaranteed being OOP compared to Button guaranteed being in position post-flop more than made up for this, at least at reasonably deep stack depths. Is this incorrect? I seem to remember Miller et al recommending a 60-70 (or more) % opening range from button, compared to 30-40% range from SB, in the crushing small stakes 6max online book. Am I remembering incorrectly, or is this info out of date? Genuinely wondering, thanks!

    I don't know if it was in any Miller books, but all things being held constant, your SB ATS > your button ATS.

    Now if you are playing against great players who will apply a lot of pressure to you in a blind war...that's another consideration all together...
  • BotswanaNickBotswanaNick Red Chipper Posts: 696 ✭✭✭
    Thanks for the reply. Also sorry for the rude tone on my initial post. I've been looking around and I think I might be opening on the wide side from the hijack. I even open all suited As from UTG in 6max games (100+ bb deep), which definitely seems like a mistake.

    As for button vs. SB steal percentage, I wonder what GTO % is from these spots. As a rule I try to have my default strategy as close to GTO as possible (or at least know what that looks like), before I start diverging towards more exploitative strategies. Because I'm playing Bovada where players are anonymous so stats aren't possible, GTO is especially important to have as a baseline.

    PokerSnowie opens 42% from the button, and that seems very similar to other sources I've seen for GTOish opening from this spot. But I cant find Snowie's ATS from the small blind, or any other number that is trying to approach GTO. I would still be surprised if it is higher than 42%. I understand using a 68% if you are exploiting the bb folding too much, but in the (online) games I play in, people are definitely not folding too much, if anything they are defending too much. And it seems like if we are opening 68% and BB is defending anywhere from 40-75% (100+ bb deep), I worry that we will be significantly -EV. Either they are defending the same range we are raising, in which case we have the same range but they have position (bad for us), or they are folding a bit more, but now they are playing a stronger range AND have position when they call (very very bad for us).

    Does anyone know Snowie's ATS from SB (not that Snowie is the end-all-be-all) or other GTO approximations? Is my reasoning faulty here? Thanks!
  • tengusteeltengusteel Red Chipper Posts: 119 ✭✭
    Snowie's ATS from SB assuming 100bb 5/10 9 handed

    2015-03-07_21h13_02_zpswwtkprwh.png
  • tengusteeltengusteel Red Chipper Posts: 119 ✭✭
    Note, I think it's always interesting what Snowie says, but I think Snowie does a lot of balancing that we don't need to do at 2/5 and 5/10. Also, I'm sure I could open as many hands +EV as a computer with solid GTO software.
  • SplitSuitSplitSuit RCP Coach Posts: 4,034 -
    Thanks for the reply. Also sorry for the rude tone on my initial post.

    No stress at all, and I didn't detect any rudeness...so no worries =)

Leave a Comment

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