I said previously that the "rule of thumb" is basically to balance half your decisions so that you continue half the time on each street and half the time you bet. So much of whether that decision is correct depends upon stack sizes.
The reason you actually should not do that is each bet grows progressively larger on each street so you actually could be a bit tighter since the result is a combination of all streets and if you are tighter you are more able to make it all back. On the other hand, if stack sizes are small enough and bets are large enough in proportion to them, that may become a reason to stay in with actually a wider range of hands, with either the potential to shove or chceck raise all in at some point depending upon stack sizes. If opponent makes the move and takes away your check raise, he will only be able to do it on a smaller percentage of hands.
IF you are out of position you actually can at times be looser given a small enough chip stack size relative to the pot. Ironically, being out of position is usually a key disadvantage that should actually require you to be much tighter than the 50% rule of thumb suggested, BUT NOT a disadvantage, if the stacks are large enough OR small enough. It seems unusual, but smaller stack sizes actually take away the advantage of position size not quite to the extent of large ones, but it allows the big oversized all in with a monster hand and it allows you to neutralize it by checking and making a decision on another street. Interestingly enough LARGE enough stack sizes hurt the out of position player less too but there is that akward range of putting about 12.5%-22.5% of your stack in the pot that is the worst spot to be in.
Additionally, if you are playing exploitative play and trying to reach post flop equilibrium, your hand range may be entirely different from opponent such that you will HAVE to be tighter even if it means giving up chips because you took on that decision when you started that you expected to be profitable before the flop and now continuing half the time may not be a strong enough hand range to do anything but get in a larger pot coming from behind with your range. Converely, in exploitative poker you may actually stay in more because in order to make up for sub-equilibrium decisions preflop, you may need to deviate from it more the other way. OR in some cases you will be even tighter to exploit opponent who overcommits or overbets at some stage.
The key is to understand how the relationship changes. As you tighten up preflop from equilibrium you will need to do MORE with it somehow after the flop in order to justify deviating from equilibrium. That could mean either looser than equilibrium or tighter depending upon opponents. As you loosen up beyond equilibrium preflop, you also will have to find a way to make more which could mean looser or tighter as well. But why would you tigthen up preflop? If your opponent plays aggressive or will call you down every street but not fold, you probably want either a better hand range to start with OR a hand that can draw depending on HOW much you can get out of it. If you are going to get a few large bets, but not a monster payoff, then you need to be tighter preflop. If you are going to be able to control the pot size at any point and get action when you hit, AND stacks are deep enough then you absolutely want to play lots of drawing hands.
If opponent has a clear mistake where he folds too much after the flop you absolutely want to play a lot of hands against him and make mathematically correct decisions with positve expectations. (i.e. you win with a 1/3rd pot sized bet 52% of the time.
Then there are the specifics of what hand. If opponent overplays his draws, you want to come in with ATs+ and A2s-A5s and any two broadway and T9 and 98 looking to make the big call with a higher flush draw and/or better straight draw or made straight. You want to call him with pairs and maybe even ace high and king high depending upon if he plays like that with his big hands too or not.
There are so many subtle adjustments that can be made, it's a matter of how to deviate from equilibrium, how to recognize whether someone is overbetting, and how to recognize their weaknesses.
No comments:
Post a Comment