PokerStars homepage
  • If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Implied odds in 4b pots

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Implied odds in 4b pots

    This hand made me think a lot about my 4bet calling frequencies in position and I strongly suspect they are completely off. How loose do you think we can call 4bets IP against different bet sizes and villains with different bluffing frequencies? What implied odds do you think we need to have against: 1) Someone who never 4b bluffs ie you are always looking at QQ+ and AK (maybe even KK+) 2) Someone with a buffing frequency of 20%+ who we think we can sometimes bluff or semi bluff on the right board texture Just to explain why I played the hand the way I did: I never thought he would call with a hand like 98s, I was almost sure I was looking at TT+ and AQ+ therefore the only combo beating me was QQ. The 4b could have been bigger but about 2.25x is my standard raise size (at 10NL it is usually more than enough to send the same message as 2.5x or 3x allowing me to bluff 4b a bit more often) Cheers, Tommy
    Last edited by TommyGun369; Fri Jun 21, 2013, 12:32 AM.

  • #2
    Villain does not have the right odds to call, although he has the third best "aces cracker" (76s and 87s are a tiny bit better) with 22% equity.

    When you make it $1.80, the maximum villain can win is the money in the pot + the effective stack (which is his).
    Max win = $2.75 + £10.16 = $12.91
    Price of calling is $1.

    Implied odds of less than 13:1 is way too small for a suited connector, I think. Although your range is super-strong, so you'll usually be stacking off often, 98s won't hit the flop hard enough for him to commit his stack on the flop. (Most of the time, he'll need to see all 5 cards to make his hand.)

    A stack to pot ratio of 2.4 to 1 is not conducive to +EV plays with suited connectors. As I'm sure you are aware, speculative hands like high SPRs. Big pairs like small SPRs. Villain was just a total luckbox here. In the long run, I can't see how he can make money calling 4-bets with hands like that.
    Bracelet Winner

    Comment


    • #3
      Very helpful reply, especially with the implied odds. At what stack to pot to price to call ratio would you start flating a hand like 98s vs a strong 3bet range?
      Last edited by InfinitOcean; Fri Jun 21, 2013, 03:04 PM.

      Comment


      • #4
        In general, with speculative hands I want implied odds of 20:1 for suited connectors and 15:1 for pocket pairs when I'm going set-mining.
        With hands like 98s, I typically want a stack to pot ratio of 12 to 1 or higher. It's pretty much impossible to get an SPR that high in a 3-bet pot unless starting stacks were 250bb.
        Bracelet Winner

        Comment


        • #5
          I would like to give a serious answer but:

          Max win = $2.75 + £10.16 = $12.91
          So this is what Mr Pitbull was refering to ITS INTERNATIONAL ITS INTERNATIONAL ITS INTERNATIONAL
          Last edited by GamblingProp; Sun Jun 23, 2013, 07:01 PM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Arty at what stakes do you think players use math like that?

            I use the 15 1 for set mining and 20 1 for speculative hand but when you say he has to call a $1 and you would then like a spr of 12 to 1 or higher im just wondering who would use that math because if you know who does then it would give you an even better read on there hand range preflop.

            So if for example i was playing you i would now no you just folded those types of hands pre giving me a better read on your hand.

            Anyway i dont understand why you only call with a spr of 12 to 1 if you can call pre with implied odd of 20 1.

            because in this sitiuation he had implied odds of nearly 13 to 1? and spr of 2 to 1 but you want a spr of 12 to 1 which would mean that hero needed like a $50 stack for villain with 89s to call?

            Sorry about my maths i round it off and im not sure if i fully understand your calculations yet but if you can understand what im on about i dont understand why 20 to 1 implied odds and the spr of 12 to 1 dont add up to roughly the same ammount of money, i figure with the 20 to 1 implied odds that hero would need a $20 stack for villain to call? but for spr of 12 to 1 he needs like $50

            Comment


            • #7
              Mike. SPR and Implied odds are subtly different things with different uses. The numbers might sometimes be close, but that's kind of coincidental. SPR is a ratio of remaining stack to size of the pot. Implied odds are a ratio of (pot+stack) to price of calling.
              SPR is used for making commitment decisions. When the SPR is very low, then it usually takes one bet to get pot-committed, and you're often all in on the turn. With a high SPR, you won't get pot-committed, and can bet-fold or check-fold, because you won't usually be putting your whole stack at risk.

              Implied odds are something you can consider both pre-flop and post-flop, when you weigh up how much you are likely to win, and compare it with the likelihood of doing it, given the price you have to pay.

              Very few people are doing the precise math at the table, but solid players just know from experience that playing speculative hands in bloated pots doesn't work out well, unless starting stacks were super-deep.

              e.g. You and villain both have 100bb and it's BvB. Let's say villain opens for 3bb with TT, and you have 98s. If you call, then there is 6bb in the pot and you have 97bb behind. The implied odds pre-flop are 100:3 = 33 to 1. The stack to pot ratio on the flop is 97:6 = 16 to 1. With such a high stack to pot ratio, you're not pot-committed on the flop. If the flop comes T7x you can call a bet with your OESD draw, and still have room to fold when it misses.

              If instead, villain 3-bets to 9bb, and you call, the pot on the flop is 18bb and you have 91bb behind. The SPR is now 91:18 = 5 to 1. If villain pots it (18bb) with his top set and you call, you'll have put 27bb in the pot (almost a third of your starting stack), and you're suddenly pot-committed with 9 high. The pot on the turn will be 54bb. Villain will be committed to getting the rest of his stack in with top set, while you only have 8 outs and will feel compelled to call off most of your stack with less than 21% equity.

              In short, when we have speculative hands, we want to get in cheap and leave plenty of room for manuovre (including the ability to fold) post-flop. With big pairs, we want to build a big pot, to make it a mistake for speculative hands to play. With big pairs and big aces, we prefer low SPRs, because we want to get committed when he hit top pair/overpair/set. We want to get all our money in on the flop/turn when we are sure we have the best hand. We do not want to get committed on the flop if we just have a draw, because that would mean we are getting our money in bad and need to suck out.
              Last edited by ArtySmokesPS; Sun Jun 23, 2013, 08:21 PM.
              Bracelet Winner

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by mike2198 View Post
                Arty at what stakes do you think players use math like that?

                I use the 15 1 for set mining and 20 1 for speculative hand...
                In estimating implied odds needed you must consider how often your opponent will pay yo off as much as the effective stack. In deep money, as in properly stacked ring games, aware villains will only stack off with very good hands. So you sets usually get paid off less than in tournaments.

                Some more speculative hands, say mid-suited connectors late, cheap and in position, require at least moderately wet boards. And they can make one less likely to stack off.

                So, the necessary implied odds are very situation specific. Remember: Bridge is a game of cards played with people. Poker is a game of people played with cards. (paraphrase of old poker maxim)

                Good decisions!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by TommyGun369 View Post
                  This hand made me think a lot about my 4bet calling frequencies in position and I strongly suspect they are completely off. How loose do you think we can call 4bets IP against different bet sizes and villains with different bluffing frequencies? What implied odds do you think we need to have against:

                  1) Someone who never 4b bluffs ie you are always looking at QQ+ and AK (maybe even KK+)
                  2) Someone with a buffing frequency of 20%+ who we think we can sometimes bluff or semi bluff on the right board texture

                  Just to explain why I played the hand the way I did: I never thought he would call with a hand like 98s, I was almost sure I was looking at TT+ and AQ+ therefore the only combo beating me was QQ. The 4b could have been bigger but about 2.25x is my standard raise size (at 10NL it is usually more than enough to send the same message as 2.5x or 3x allowing me to bluff 4b a bit more often)

                  Cheers,

                  Tommy
                  1) If someone never 4b-bluffs then I'm not sure you should ever be calling. Calling rather than folding/raising is usually intended to retain the bluffs in our opponents range (to allow them to continue bluffing on future streets). That said, the higher the implied odds the more hands you can show an instant-profit with the times you spike the flop. Problem is, in 4-bet pots you will usually have poor implied odds.

                  2) Not sure, but you want to be in position and you want a very tight and well thought out calling range.

                  Also my 2-cents on your thought process: You thought villain had a range of TT+ and AQ and you had everything but QQ in that range crushed... so you check and give a free card? That doesn't make any sense. Villain is unlikely to fold anything in that range on the flop. Seems like a perfect spot to value bet.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by RockerguyAA View Post
                    You thought villain had a range of TT+ and AQ and you had everything but QQ in that range crushed... so you check and give a free card? That doesn't make any sense. Villain is unlikely to fold anything in that range on the flop. Seems like a perfect spot to value bet.
                    I wanted to get all the money in which I did (no value lost) so the only question was on which streets to bet. I could try and go for 3 streets of very small bets; bet, check, shove; bet, shove; check, be, shove. To be honest I do not know which of those lines is the best one to take but the advantage of my chosen one was:
                    A) If I was wrong with my ranging and there were some speculative hands in his range as well I give him a chance to bet with air and gain some free $$ which I would not have got otherwise. Once he calls with something like 76s for example I do not see him checking behind and completely giving up on the hand. He would almost certainly try to bet and make me fold AK or other A highs I could possibly have do not you think?
                    B) I am not worried about giving away free cards. Neither of the hands in his perceived range had more than 2 outs to outdraw me
                    C) Checking OTF also serves well for balancing purposes. If I check in 4b pots on that board I am not necessarily giving up which might give me some free cards in the future when I am 4b bluffing or actually holding AK (if he is good enough to take notes that is)

                    Originally posted by RockerguyAA View Post
                    1) If someone never 4b-bluffs then I'm not sure you should ever be calling.
                    Cannot really agree with this statement. Why would not you call with a speculative hand when you know you are behind if stacks were deep enough? When you call you do it either because you want to keep bluffs in villains' ranges or you are drawing to the bets hand and have the right implied odds to call. I just wanted to know what the "right implied odds" are because everyone seems to think they are a bit different.
                    Last edited by TommyGun369; Wed Jun 26, 2013, 06:23 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by TrumpinJoe View Post
                      In deep money, as in properly stacked ring games, aware villains will only stack off with very good hands. So you sets usually get paid off less than in tournaments.
                      If that was really the case I would raise and apply maximum pressure on villains every hand I play with them and they would fold anything apart for their monster hands like top 2pair plus? Maybe in a perfect world but this would be way too easy. If you never bluff and always have a monster in big pots then yes, any observant villain will stop paying you off and you will not win anything when you hit a very strong hand. This is one of the reasons why it is important to be aggressive with your strong draws as well as your made hands. If you notice someone is stacking off super tight just keep pushing when he is passive and fold when he is suddenly willing to put a lot of money in the pot. Easy game. You can literally bluff those guys every single hand until they adjust. Which at microstakes happens very slowly or never.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by ArtySmokesPS View Post
                        Villain does not have the right odds to call, although he has the third best "aces cracker" (76s and 87s are a tiny bit better) with 22% equity. When you make it $1.80, the maximum villain can win is the money in the pot + the effective stack (which is his). Max win = $2.75 + £10.16 = $12.91 Price of calling is $1. Implied odds of less than 13:1 is way too small for a suited connector, I think. Although your range is super-strong, so you'll usually be stacking off often, 98s won't hit the flop hard enough for him to commit his stack on the flop. (Most of the time, he'll need to see all 5 cards to make his hand.) A stack to pot ratio of 2.4 to 1 is not conducive to +EV plays with suited connectors. As I'm sure you are aware, speculative hands like high SPRs. Big pairs like small SPRs. Villain was just a total luckbox here. In the long run, I can't see how he can make money calling 4-bets with hands like that.
                        Thank you for your answer Arty! I am glad to hear that I am not the only one who thinks that if I only ever have a super strong hand when I 4bet he does not have the right implied odds to call. What I was more interested in was what we can call with and play postflop IP against someone aggressive who has some bluffs in his range when he 4bets. I certainly do, which means I can be outplayed postflop even if he completely misses the flop. How much does someone need to bluff and then be willing to let go postflop to make the implied odds 13:1 right for us to call and play our position as well as our hand? Just imagine I was holding a hand like AhTh and decided to turn it into bluff once I get 3bet and the flop comes 9s8s6c. It does not matter if he had AA, 99, T7 or 32o he will win the hand either way. I know it is impossible to come up with an exact number since there are so many variables included in postflop play. I am just looking for a rough estimate and a discussion. I really appreciate everybody's input. Keep it up umbup:

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by TommyGun369 View Post
                          I wanted to get all the money in which I did (no value lost) so the only question was on which streets to bet. I could try and go for 3 streets of very small bets; bet, check, shove; bet, shove; check, be, shove. To be honest I do not know which of those lines is the best one to take but the advantage of my chosen one was:
                          A) If I was wrong with my ranging and there were some speculative hands in his range as well I give him a chance to bet with air and gain some free $$ which I would not have got otherwise. Once he calls with something like 76s for example I do not see him checking behind and completely giving up on the hand. He would almost certainly try to bet and make me fold AK or other A highs I could possibly have do not you think?
                          B) I am not worried about giving away free cards. Neither of the hands in his perceived range had more than 2 outs to outdraw me
                          C) Checking OTF also serves well for balancing purposes. If I check in 4b pots on that board I am not necessarily giving up which might give me some free cards in the future when I am 4b bluffing or actually holding AK (if he is good enough to take notes that is)
                          I don't disagree with what your saying here, but I do have a couple thoughts about it. Regarding A, the range you assigned villain includes no air or semi-bluffing type hands. Everything in his range is either calling, value raising, or folding. You can expect a check-back very often if not always. Regarding B/C, I agree this is a reasonable spot to balance your range by including some stronger hands in your checking range. In my opinion AA is only strong enough to do that here due to your ranging of villain. Against other ranges this flop is probably too wet to slowplay a pair in my opinion. Also, I personally do not think that sort of balancing is necessary at 10NL unless you know villain is a decent regular. Against a random villain you are just trashing value.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by TommyGun369 View Post
                            Thank you for your answer Arty! I am glad to hear that I am not the only one who thinks that if I only ever have a super strong hand when I 4bet he does not have the right implied odds to call. What I was more interested in was what we can call with and play postflop IP against someone aggressive who has some bluffs in his range when he 4bets. I certainly do, which means I can be outplayed postflop even if he completely misses the flop. How much does someone need to bluff and then be willing to let go postflop to make the implied odds 13:1 right for us to call and play our position as well as our hand? Just imagine I was holding a hand like AhTh and decided to turn it into bluff once I get 3bet and the flop comes 9s8s6c. It does not matter if he had AA, 99, T7 or 32o he will win the hand either way. I know it is impossible to come up with an exact number since there are so many variables included in postflop play. I am just looking for a rough estimate and a discussion. I really appreciate everybody's input. Keep it up umbup:
                            It is really hard to answer these kind of questions. In fact, as far as I know there is no exact answer to this type of question. I feel like you guys are focusing on implied odds too much here though. In 3bet/4bet pots the pot odds play a much more significant role. Also, your not going to be looking to completely smash a flop like when set-mining. There will be many more opportunities to continue with a hand post-flop, be it value betting, semi-bluff betting, bluffing, check-calling, value check-raising, bluff check-raising... edit: You want to be playing a range that can call or raise 3bet/4bets enough that villain can't profitably 3bet you with any two cards. That is a good place to start in working out a general answer.
                            Last edited by RockerguyAA; Wed Jun 26, 2013, 06:29 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by TommyGun369 View Post
                              What I was more interested in was what we can call with and play postflop IP against someone aggressive who has some bluffs in his range when he 4bets. I certainly do, which means I can be outplayed postflop even if he completely misses the flop. How much does someone need to bluff and then be willing to let go postflop to make the implied odds 13:1 right for us to call and play our position as well as our hand?
                              I don't yet play 10NL, so this is tricky for me to answer. In my experience of lower stakes, I have never flatted a 4-bet and seen a flop. Calling 4-bets (other than 4-bet jams) just isn't in my playbook. I'm always folding or 5-bet jamming.
                              You probably can have a range for calling 4-bets when stacks are deep and villain has some bluffs in his 4-bet range, but I'm not the guy to ask, because the situation is alien to me. (I rarely have a stack of more than 150bb, for a start!)
                              Bracelet Winner

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X

                              X Cookies Information

                              We have placed cookies on your computer to improve your experience on our website. You can change your cookie settings at any time. Otherwise, we'll assume you're OK to continue.