Dynamic Full Ring Poker

by James Sweeney

  Check. If we thought a bet wouldn’t get enough folds, or might even get check raised a lot, then checking is a very valid option. There is nothing wrong with taking our draw for cheap, especially IP when we don’t have a great idea on how well a bet would work.

  Bet. Let’s say his O-Range is 44-QQ/JT+/87s/76s/54s. If he continues with 88+, then we are only getting folds about 25% of the time here. Even with a ½ PSB we show an outright loss. Now, if he would continue with TP+, then he is folding 50% of the time, which makes a bet more attractive. But if we do bet, we are certainly getting check raised sometimes (by 54, 44, 77, etc.) and will be unable to take our draw for cheap.

  At this point it just becomes a math problem. If we bet and he continues with 88+, then we take an outright loss and thus should probably check (without reads that we could profitably triple barrel). If we bet and he continues with TP+, then we are probably getting check raised about 30% of the time and will be unable to take a cheap draw often. If we check, we miss the chance of possibly folding out better hands and keep the pot smaller in the event that we hit.

  If we check, which is the usual default play here, we can catch our draw for cheap and either induce a bet on the river (because we checked the turn), or induce a lighter call. We can also improve to our T or A and possibly have the best hand as well. In order to bet, we really want to have a good idea on how often he will fold to our bet. If we are unsure, or think he will continue too often versus a bet, then checking behind and drawing is perfectly fine. But if we know that a bet will get enough folds and not a lot of check raises, then betting is perfectly fine. Again, our play is totally based around our opponent, the turn card, their range, our image, and how they would continue versus our bet.

  The Delay CB

  There are times when a flop CB might not be the best play, and we can consider using a delay CB instead. A delay CB is simply a situation where we are the PFR, we check the flop, and bet later in the hand in an effort to pick the pot up. This play can be great against players that would mess around with our flop CB, but would play much more straight forward against a bet later on the turn or river. Let’s look at some things we’d want to consider when using this play:

  Our opponent would mess with our flop CB.

  A player who keeps CRing our CBs, or keeps peeling and stabbing later, can be a great opponent to consider the delay CB against. If our flop CB just wouldn’t show enough profit to justify making it, then we shouldn’t force it. We can just take the delay CB line instead, assuming of course that it looks real and would solicit enough folds.

  The line/turn looks real

  We need to make sure that either the turn card is believable, or that the line itself is believable. If the flop comes Axx and we would always CB QQ, sets, and AJ, then a delay CB doesn’t look very real. But if our opponent knows that we would check those hands behind sometimes, especially the QQ and AJ type hands, then the delay CB can look very real. We can also use believable turn cards. If the board comes 853 and we check behind, any J+ on the turn can look very real for our hand.

  A perfect example of this would be this hand. We raise with AsJs from the HJ. The SB calls and we see a HU flop of T84. He checks and we decide to check behind. The board looks like it should have hit his range a decent amount, and he is also notorious for CRing a large percentage of the time. Because we don’t expect a CB to show an outright profit, we just decide to check behind and play the turn out.

  The turn comes a Q and he checks to us. We’ve picked up some equity with that card, and it is a very believable card for our range. We probably wouldn’t have CB a hand like KQ or QJ on the flop against this opponent, so representing a pair of queens is very believable given our flop check. This is actually a great spot to bet for a normal CB size of ½ PSB to ⅔ PSB in order to try to pick the pot up if we think he folds enough of the time. If he calls, we always have outs, but we should expect folds a fairly large amount of the time given our play.

  This isn’t a play we tend to make all that often. Because we need information on our opponent (that he is aggressive against flop CBs), we usually don’t do this against unknowns or players that fold versus flop CBs often. However, this is a great play to have in our play book so we can take advantage of players who play flops too aggressively and play very straight forward if they “whiff” their flop CR opportunity.

  18.Value Betting

  While many players believe that poker is all about bluffing, solid players would argue that poker is all about value betting better than your opponents. If we are able to pinch out extra value when we have the best hand, and fold a few times when we are behind, we should be making some great profit. This chapter will look at the many kinds of value betting situations that arise.

  The Fat VB

  We make a “fat value bet” when we expect many worse hands to call. This is done strictly for value because we feel our hand is super strong and that our opponent has a calling range that is very favorable for us, for example, with the nuts: say QQ on a QJ63r board. Or on the river with AJ on a KT4Q3r board. But we can also bet for fat value with nuttish hands like 99 on an A9853, where, while we are beat by some hands, his calling range is still wide and favorable. While ending up with the nuts is a rarity, there are many other times when we have the effective nuts and we should fat VB.

  When we get into a spot where we are considering a fat VB we need to considering the following:

  Our opponent’s range

  As always, our opponent’s range is the basis of most of our decision making, especially postflop. If we can appropriately visualize our opponent’s range, we can see how often they have a hand that could continue versus our bet. If we don’t have the nuts, and our opponent’s range doesn’t have many hands that would continue versus a bet, we might have a thin VB or bluff hand rather than a fat VB. We could also take lines that induce if their range is too wide and they have a propensity to bluff. Ultimately, we just need to pay attention so that we have an idea of what their range is and how it hits the board.

  Our actual hand strength

  With fat VBing we almost always have a nuttish hand. Either the actual nuts, or something super strong, like a set or so, that is beaten by so few combinations of hands our opponent might have. Often times SDV hands can fall into a fat VB category if our opponent has a major propensity to call lightly, or if the pot is smaller in size (and thus our opponent’s range is wider and more willing to call). Hand strengths are relative, and that is why we care about our opponent’s range versus the board.

  Our VB size: The VB size here is a total art form. We will run through a few examples though so we can see how to get to a great bet size. We also need to consider elasticity and board texture heavily. There are times when we have the nuts, but made by a bad card for the board, that would severely alter our bet size. And there are times when we might look to bet pot, or even bigger than the pot, against inelastic players.

  Let’s look at an example. Say we raise 88 to $3 from EP. The BB is the only caller and we see a HU flop of 833. He checks to us, we bet $4 and he calls. We assign him a range of 33-QQ with that call. The turn is a 5 and he checks to us again. If we look at how he hits this board we see:

  So, he has quads about 2%, a boat about 6.5%, and an overpair (99-QQ) about 52% of the time. Now we just need to ask ourselves some questions and then select a line:

  Is he a calling station?

  If the BB is a calling station, and we think he would call with all pairs, even ones like 66 and 77, then betting again is a simple decision. He will call with almost 100% of his range, and we beat pretty much everything. However, if this opponent were not a calling station, it changes things a little bit. If he would fold TT or QQ sometimes to a bet, that fact can drastically change the line that we want to take.

  What continues versus a bet?

  If the BB would fold everything but 55 and 33 to a bet, then a bet might not be the best play here. However, most players will call their pairs more lib
erally if they are getting decent pot odds. If the BB would call our bet with 99-QQ/55/33, then we should be betting as much as he would call this range with. If the BB is more elastic, then we might need to select a smaller size to ensure he continues with the second best hands like TT and QQ.

  Which size is best?

  The golden rule of bet sizing is “bet the most +EV amount.” Of course, on the river it is easier because we don’t have to consider our opponent drawing out on us or setting up future streets. As for the bet on this turn, we should bet what he will call that sets up the best river action. For instance, if we bet $9 on the turn (giving our opponent 2.5:1 outright), we can probably get a $24 bet on the river (giving our opponent 2.3:1 outright).

  That bet sizing isn’t bad at all. But if our opponent were very inelastic and would call the 99-QQ range for any number, we should really consider making two bigger bets, like $12 on the turn and $32 on the river. If he were very elastic, we should consider betting smaller, especially if a bigger size would get him to fold things like TT or QQ sometimes. Against such an elastic player we could even bet $8 on the turn and go for a smaller $17 bet on the river. Our size is totally based on how our opponent would react to it, and thinking about complete maximization. Remember, we cannot get a river bet unless our opponent calls our turn bet.

  We see that the big factors to consider in this spot are the elasticity of our opponent and the bet sizing. If we were OOP then we would also have to consider whether to go for a VB or to check and induce. But IP with a nuttish hand, we simply run through some simple questions and select a line. If we are confused, we should just bet the standard ⅔ PSB amount. We have a big hand, we want to make a big pot, and the size is safe and “normal.” It’s when we have information, like their elasticity or range contortion, that we start making more specific sizes and actions to create more exploitative action against that particular opponent.

  Let’s look at another example. Say we open AcQc to $3 from the HJ, the BUT calls, and we see a HU flop of KhTc3d. We CB $4 and the BUT calls. At this point let’s say he calls with a range of 33/KT-KQ/JT-AT/TT-QQ. The entirety of these VBing, and bluffing, conversations are based around the range we put a player on. If we pull up Flopzilla we see he hits like this:

  On the turn we catch a very nice Jd. At this point if we look at how his range hits versus that card we see:

  Even if we just look at the part of his range that is 2pair or better, he has that about 48% of the time. Of course, he would probably continue with the KQ, QJ part of his range as well, which just gives us more and more value. In fact, if we look at his range with 2pr or better and OESDs, we see he hits this board about 89% of the time, which is massive. So we certainly have a situation with fat value as we have a nuttish hand (the literal nuts at the moment) and he has a range that will continue a large percentage of the time if we bet.

  Now comes the important question: what do we want to bet? At this point we need to consider a few things:

  How often will he continue?

  We see from Flopzilla that he is hitting that turn card pretty hard. He makes lots of two pair hands, sets, and some straight draws as well. At this point we just need to ask ourselves how often he would continue if we bet. If he would continue with all of his range versus a big bet, then we should make the biggest bet possible that he would continue against. But, most players aren’t totally brain dead, so we don’t want to make a PSB against a player who would realize that we would only do that with a hand like AQ or KK here. Against this player we need to select an action (and size if we bet here) that blends in with our normal strategy.

  Pot geometry

  In an ideal world we could just start firing off big bets in an effort to get him to put in a large amount of money and create the largest pot size possible. If he were a calling station who is very inelastic, then we would want to heavily consider larger sizes. If he were a normal elastic player, then we would just want to choose the largest size that blends in with our normal betting strategy. So if we would fire $10 with TT and bluffs here, we would want to use that number here as well. While it always sucks not being able to get our entire stack in with the nuts, we need to remember that our goal is to take the most +$EV line when VBing.

  Is betting the best play?

  This is something we always want to ask ourselves. Would checking induce better action? Is he a calling station who would rather call than bet? If we were to check here, would he bet his entire range? Would we be able to CR and create a larger pot size? Would I only bet the nuts again on the turn and would a check be read as weak/SDV? Against players who would always bet if checked to, checking to induce a bet could be a great play here. Always consider our opponent and how he makes mistakes, especially when we are OOP.

  What we see here is that, especially from OOP, there are times when checking can be a great play to induce better action. However, against players that make many more calling than betting mistakes, we should just look to bet/bet/bet at sizes they would call/call/call. If we are ever confused or don’t have information to lead us another way, betting outright with the nuts will never be a bad play. However, if we have information, we can take a more exploitative line against our opponents.

  Let’s look at one more example. Say we have TT in the CO and call a $2 raise from EP. We see a HU flop of J76 and he CBs $2.5. We call and see a 2 on the turn which he checks. We check behind to get to SD as cheaply as possible. The river is a T and he bets $6.5. At this point we have to do some thinking:

  We have the third nut

  It is always to important to double check the board and our hand. We have the third nut on the river as we lose to 98 and JJ. But does this player raise 98 from EP? If not, then we only lose to JJ, which has 3 combos. Would he always bet JJ on the turn in an effort to build the pot? If so, then maybe he has even less combos, if any, of hands that beat us in his range.

  What would he bet like this?

  As usual, we need to build his range. He might take this line with a hand like QQ+ trying to induce on the turn. He might turn AK into a bluff and try to stab the river. He might take it with a hand like AJ trying to pot control. He might have a 66/77 type hand that was getting tricky on the turn. If we don’t think he can have a Jx in his range (other than JJ) due to raising from EP, then we know his range is more solid on pairs and sets. The better the player is the more strong this bet will be in general, as this line isn’t a great bluff line.

  What would he call if we raised?

  If we raised, would he call with anything? If so, how elastic is he? If we think a MR might get called by his entire range, but a shove would only get called by sets, it becomes a math problem. If we think he would always stack off the big pairs, then shoving here becomes a great play.

  What size should we use?

  Let’s doing a few $EV equations to see which bet size is best:

  Assumptions: We raise to $19. He calls 60%, folds 35%, we lose the rest of our stack 5% of the time:

  Assumptions: We raise to $23. He calls 50% of the time, folds 40%, and we lose the rest of our stack 10% of the time:

  Assumptions: We shove. He calls 30% of the time, folds 55%, and we lose the rest of our stack 15% of the time:

  Our size in these situations is all about the frequencies at which we can expect action. There are times when we might get called less often, but we make so much extra money when we win that it becomes worth it. Here is a simple example. Say we have the nuts and are considering two actions, either raising 3x or shoving. 3x would get called 50% of the time, and shoving would get called 20% of the time. The pot is $20, his bet is $10, and we have $100 left in our stack.

  Again, our size should be based on our opponent and their expected frequencies. While it is technically +EV to shove every time we have the nuts, it might not be optimal. But never considering making overbet shoves can be a leak, especially in situations where our opponents would call it enough of the time to make the shove better. Bet sizing is a great way to
add extra value to our bottom line, and can really hurt us if we do it poorly.

  Fat VBs are crucial to our success. Making sure that we take optimal lines with our big hands and make the most amount of money possible can be the difference between a great WR and breaking even. Again, consider bet sizing, their range, their logical calling frequencies, and their elasticity. If we are able to put it all together, we can easily maximize the value of our strong hands.

  The Thin VB