Home
(0 votes) 
February 5, 2015
Offline
So I was watching Collin Moshman’s new Progressive Knock Out video. Early on Collin makes the comment “Because villain is likely to call us wide here [to grab our bounty], we need to tighten up our shove range. I thought this made sense to me. But now im just not sure.
However, I then confused myself. Because if this is true for the PKO dynamic, then it presumably follows that it is true regarding Nash ranges. Or have i missed something?
And if it does hold true for GTO push/call ranges, then why is this so? Surely if Villain is calling too wide, then we can ADD hands to our shove range, ie widen it. Not tighten it up!
Similarly, in a PKO tourney, if Villain is calling too wide, surely we are able to widen our shove range, not tighten it up! In game though, intuitively, I always do tighten up my shove ranges in a PKO.
I guess my confusion is this: it seems logical to me to need to BOTH tighten up my shove range in a PKO (because I’m more likely to get called), AND loosen up my shove range…villain is calling wider, therefore I can push wider.
WRT Nash, which way round is it…loosen or tighten up our shove range vs a too wide call range? I always thought we were correct to widen up our push range here in order to exploit.
Help!
February 20, 2015
Offline
Here is my understanding of it.
In a regular tourney, I can shove wider if I know my opponents are calling too tightly. If I know my opponents are calling too loosely, I have to shove narrower than Nash.
Conversely, if my opponents are shoving tighter than Nash, I have to call tighter. If my opponents are shoving looser than Nash, I can call more loosely.
This is a question of range, and Nash is just a point on the range spectrum—economists call it “profit maximization”—where, if everyone plays the same way, you’re playing as optimally as you can.
There’s a video series on here that explains the math behind PKOs in terms of determining how to modify ranges. And there was a live sweat several years ago on Twitter when DannyN13 went super-deep in one of these. He had to play excessively tight while short-stacked because of the size of the bounty on his head. He *knew* he had less fold equity because of the bounty.
Hope this is helpful.
TPE Pro
December 6, 2012
Offline
The Riceman said
Surely if Villain is calling too wide, then we can ADD hands to our shove range, ie widen it.
What makes you say this? I mean, where do you see the value coming from, that makes hands that would otherwise be unprofitable to shove suddenly profitable if V is calling wider?
February 5, 2015
Offline
My god I can’t believe I am still struggling with this…I have been studying this for years I thought I had got it.
To take an extreme example, say V was calling the very worst hands…72o or whatever which is way outside what he should be calling in a particular spot…then I am able to shove wider than Nash because V is going to be even further behind my range than he would have been calling a more appropriate range, therefore I can widen up my push range.
Jesus! I really thought I understood this stuff finally now I just feel like an utter dimwit.
February 5, 2015
Offline
I get it that if Villain is calling tighter than Nash then I should widen my range…omg…there is a glaring inconsistency here staring me in the face.
I give up. I am an utter twit.
Foucault said:
“where do you see the value coming from, that makes hands that would otherwise be unprofitable to shove suddenly profitable if V is calling wider?”
Yes I can see this, and this alone is enough to make me want to crawl in a hole and hide.
So Andrew, please take pity on me, seemingly I am not bright enough to work this out…if V is calling wider, how does it help us to shove tighter?
I still feel there is some merit in my thinking. The equity of hero shoving Q8s is better against a V call of 72o than it is against a V call of J5o, for instance.
TPE Pro
December 6, 2012
Offline
Yes, your equity when called is (slightly) better when V calls wider. But to take your example, Q8s is not much more of a favorite against J5o than it is against 72o. So you don’t gain all that much, and what you lose is fold equity. Especially in spots where ICM is a significant factor, it is very possible for your opponent to make calls that are bad for both of you and beneficial to the rest of the table. And Q8s is not favored at all against, say, K6o, which is probably a more realistic example.
Of course when you have AA you are typically happy to see a wider calling range. But for most of your shoves, getting folds is the best case scenario, and you get fewer of them when opponents call wider.
February 5, 2015
Offline
Foucault said:
“Yes, your equity when called is (slightly) better when V calls wider. But to take your example, Q8s is not much more of a favorite against J5o than it is against 72o. So you don’t gain all that much, and what you lose is fold equity. Especially in spots where ICM is a significant factor, it is very possible for your opponent to make calls that are bad for both of you and beneficial to the rest of the table. And Q8s is not favored at all against, say, K6o, which is probably a more realistic example.
Of course when you have AA you are typically happy to see a wider calling range. But for most of your shoves, getting folds is the best case scenario, and you get fewer of them when opponents call wider.”
I’m glad I started this thread.
So when they say “if villain is calling wider, hero should tighten up his shove range, and if V is calling tighter then H should widen his shove range”, we are not even talking about ranges per se, we are talking instead about betting and folding frequencies…”V is calling too often, therefore we should shove less; V is calling too little therefore we should shove more often”.
Or are ranges and frequencies synonymous? Have I just crawled up my own posterior in other words? 
TPE Pro
December 6, 2012
Offline
You’re always going to shove your best hands. So the only way to shove at a higher frequency is to shove a wider range (more weak hands).
February 5, 2015
Offline
Ahhh…a tighter shove range and a smaller shove frequency…not synonymous…yet strangely somehow… synonymous…(two fingers dragged horizontally over one eye 60’s style)…
February 8, 2017
Offline
I think you now understand why wider call range means we should tighten shove range, but I’ll throw some EV calcs your way to help solidify the concept.
Assume blinds 100/200 ante 25 and effective stacks of 2400 (12bb). We’re considering open jamming the SB at a 6 handed table. We’re risking 2300 to win a pot of 450.
A) Villain calls 40% of the time and we have 36% equity against his range.
EV = (0.6 * 450) + {0.4 * [0.36 * (450 + 2200) – (0.64 * 2300)] }
EV = 270 + [0.4 * (954 – 1472)]
EV = 270 – 207
EV = 63
In this scenario we are profiting 63 chips or 0.315 bb.
B) Villain calls 60% of the time and we have 42% equity against his range.
EV = (0.4 * 450) + {0.6 * [0.42 * (450 + 2200) – (0.58 * 2300)] }
EV = 180 + [0.6 * (1113 – 1334)]
EV = 180 – 133
EV = 47
Even though our equity has massively improved when called, we now only profit 47 chips or 0.235 bb.
If you take T8o vs 40% of hands it has 36.34% equity. Increase villains call range to 60% and T8o has 41.31% equity. So T8o would win slightly more vs 40% than Example A, and win slightly less vs 60% than Example B.
Similar hands have relatively similar differences in equity against those ranges. Most pairs and unpaired hands with 2 bigger cards benefit more than T8o from a wider calling range, but all of those hands are going to be profitable shoves vs any calling range. Hands much worse than T8o will see less equity gains from being called wider.
Hope that helps! 🙂
Most Users Ever Online: 2780
Currently Online:
22 Guest(s)
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)
Top Posters:
bennymacca: 2616
Foucault: 2067
folding_aces_pre_yo: 1133
praetor: 1033
theginger45: 924
P-aire 146: 832
Turbulence: 768
The Riceman: 731
duggs: 591
florianm1: 588
Newest Members:
CSerpent
KJ
Tillery999
sdmathis89
ne0x00
adrianvaida2525
Forum Stats:
Groups: 4
Forums: 24
Topics: 12705
Posts: 75003
Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 1063
Members: 12010
Moderators: 2
Admins: 5
Administrators: RonFezBuddy, Killingbird, Tournament Poker Edge Staff, ttwist, Carlos
Moderators: sitelock, sitelock_1
