6

The responsibility to show first lies on the person who put in the last bet or raise on the last betting round. In your example, this will be the person who shoved all-in. If the second player sees those cards and his hand is not a winner, he can safely muck and the pot will be awarded to the shover. If the second player has the best hand and wants to win ...


6

As you can imagine, your equity in a heads up hand with no rake, where you bet preflop and deal out all community cards without betting, will be 50%. Other variations of this, such as the dealer winning ties or the introduction of a rake, will lower your equity (and since this is a casino game, I'm willing to bet that they have something in their favor). ...


6

*Range charts made with https://premiumpokertools.com/equity-calculator Here's my analysis! Assuming your opponent is min-raising about 80ish percent of hands preflop, a reasonable calling range against your small 3-bet size might be this: After the flop, removal effects make villain's range look like this: When you shove 3.5 times the flop, the villain's ...


5

TL; DR - I shove the turn. Personally i would have taken a more aggressive line than check calling the flop, but Hero's flop line is reasonable. On the turn it gets abit dicey, H has a strong hand on a board that easily runs bad. If H calls the turn, would H call a jam if the river was a J? A heart? If V had a strong hand like two pair, would he value bet ...


4

I think you played this hand ok, the only thing I see a problem with is your bet on the flop. This flop is a terrible one for TT, not only are there connected overcards here, but there is also a diamond draw. If you bet this flop, hands like JT, AJ, AT, Kx, Qx, and any 2 diamonds will always call. Most of the time if you get called you will be in bad shape ...


3

To expand on @Andrew Chin's answer, I think a good way to think about this situation is to consider multiple hands played using statistics (and a 65% chance of winning any given hand because you are playing the best ~15% of hands). Lets assume players reload after every hand and there is no antes or blinds for simplicity. If you played 10 hands against this ...


3

Preflop is ok. Flop: I would prefer a much smaller flop bet ($0.55-$0.80) because a) TT has some showdown and im not looking to inflate the pot and b) OOP there are many bad turn/rivers, and not many good ones. A smaller bet can get ATo-AJo, maybe 88+ to call, which gives us some value. A flush draw, any K or Q is not folding to a 2/3 pot flop bet. I can ...


3

TT, JJ, and QQ are all hard hands to play as you don't want to release them when you don't flop a set. You had a flop with 2 over cards out of position. You have a blockers on the straight so I would not be worried about that. I get taking one shot at the flop but after that give up. Or rep a Q and fire three times. If you are going to bet the turn here ...


3

Completely depends on your opponent. You can start out min-raising 90-100% but if he 3-bet shoves a ton then you can't do this. Or you can try limping and min-betting lots of flops, but he if shoves PF from the BB a ton, you can't do it (there is a hint as to how you should play against people who take those strategies themselves!). Against really good ...


2

Why are you only worried about quads? What beats you? 4 99 KK AA What hand might call that you beat? JJ - 33 (except 99) 2x 9x Hero should not have called pre flop with 2x Pre flop call with 4x is wrong. And he does not have 44 with 3 on the board. Pre flop villain should have raised AA, KK In heads up you would likely get a raise from 99 ...


2

The solution is actually known. I can solve it in 2-3 days using a server I rent for that exact purpose (studying poker) and some specialized software. To the answer from Ying Li: You misunderstand Nash Equilibrium in poker. If you played a perfect GTO strategy, you essentially would be unbeatable. There is no way your strategy would be beat by drunk ...


2

We have 52% equity against his range. Let's do a brief and rough ev calculation of all scenarios: Supposing bet size at 200$ in the 300$ pot. Donking 12% of the time we will be raised by a strong hand and have to fold: -200$ 40% of the time we will be called. Our raw equity is then around 45% of a 700$ pot. It will be hard to realize our equity as we are ...


2

KQ offsuit apparently has about 48 - 50 % equity against that range (I calculated this using an equity calculator). So, given that the all-in was preflop, you essentially have a coin-flip. So it's very hard to determine if a call here would be +EV or -EV, especially because figuring out that range is always very hard. So the calculation of equity can (and ...


2

I think you brilliantly misplayed the hand. Here are my arguments: You say that: I admit I am no pro poker player. And I think your opponent isn't either, because you both are playing short stacked. Actually, it's a live, friendly cash game. You have 40 BB and he has 60. Why aren't you buying in for 100 BB, so you can win your opponent's stack? There ...


2

It wasn't the worst move you could of made, that would of been check raising all in. You where right taking over the lead in the hand, I am assuming he was first in so the buttons range here is ATC, any two cards. I think your raise was slightly small, should of been at least three time his twenty and maybe slightly more. I really want someone motivated to ...


2

It depends on what you consider "optimal play". If you open only the top 15% of hands (77+,A7s+,K9s+,QTs+,JTs,ATo+,KTo+,QJo), you have roughly 65.45% equity against a random hand. Increasing this to the top 20% of hands (77+,A7s+,K9s+,QTs+,JTs,ATo+,KTo+,QJo), you still have roughly 63.56% equity against a random hand. I recommend using Equilab to ...


1

Not every hand has to have both blinds. In some games, when the BB from the previous hand leaves the table, the SB becomes dealer and there is no SB for the next hand. I think that's what you're seeing here. So although the game is normally 5/10, for this hand there's only a single 10 ante by player 1. Looking at the game preceding this one in the ...


1

This is a pretty expansive set of knowledge that you are asking for, and it would be hard to cover all of it in one answer. I can help you get to some resources that might lead you to finding out more about what you are looking for. You can read some books about this subject, there are a ton out there and there is certainly enough information to write a ...


1

I am probably one of the few people with significant experience in all three fields (mathematics, Machine Learning (and AI), poker). To answer is it known, the answer is probably not yet. There are two approaches to beating an imperfect information game with AI. The first has really nothing to do with Nash Equilibrium. The first is basically in a way, a ...


1

Poker is not yet a solved game. An optimal strategy has not yet been found. Trying to implement your or someone else's knowledge into a computer program will only result in a sub optimal version of you/them. If you want to create a bot that can for example beat every human over a long enough sample, you want to take a different approach. Now regarding the ...


1

In poker, there are never identical situations, because even if you play with the same cards and the same opponent for days, you will end up creating history and dynamics between you. However, you will end up facing decisions similar to what you have faced in the past. And yes, in the long run if you want to be balanced and unpredictable you will end up ...


1

Bet/Fold > bet/call > check/call Checking the river you miss so much value because your opponent will never bet worse hands that its a blunder. bet/call you bet for value and call because he has some value hands in his raising range. mainly smaller flushes, remember we were trying to rep a straight on the turn. bet/fold mainly because most people, ...


1

When playing heads up I find you almost have to open with anything, if you are normally a conservative player, heads up can be hard, especially if short stacked. Try and adopt a really aggressive strategy, as if you continue to play conservatively and your opponent is marginally more aggressive, they will eventually win due to the swallowing of the blinds/...


1

Anyone who sits out just to skip the blinds doesn't understand what's really happening. If you sit out and miss both blinds, once the button gets to you, you'll have to pay both blinds before you're even dealt cards. Same if you skip the SB. You are absolutely not getting a free ride through. Sometimes it may seem like you get by without paying, but it will ...


1

This answer will depend on whether you are talking about a cash game or tournament. In a cash game, you don't have to show. It is acceptable for a user to not show, wait for the river and then choose to reveal or muck their cards. That's perfectly acceptable etiquette. In case of both players not wanting to show, the last aggressor is usually required to go ...


1

This is a fairly straightforward statistics question. You should look into the z-score for further details. If we assume your results against this opponent follows a normal distribution, the Excel formula to answer your question would be: =1-NORMDIST(X, Y * A / 100, Z * SQRT(A / 100), TRUE) That's the probability your opponent will be ahead at least X BB'...


1

sharkscope.com lets you search for stats of some famous players, you can check it. Dont try blindly to copy/achieve that stats, your play depends on your opponent tendencies, your goal is to have profit, therefore you have to consider your opponent tendencies to play. Heads Up especially is very "wild" and your decisions vary a lot depending on your ...


1

EV = (F% * P$) + (1 - F%) * ((W% * (P$ + S$)) - ((1 - W%) * S$)) this formulae is correct only when P$+S$ = W$, where W$ is the amount earned at showdown. So this formulae as it is only applies at situations where villain open raises and we shove. As this is not always the case(not always W$ = P$+S$), a more general form of this formulae would be by ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible