RERUN POTD #105 FT Friday: Turns into Mid Day Monday
Versus an almost all-in, I try to expand my range. Was I right?
From December 31st to January 4th I barely logged into Substack, when I logged in today I realized I had punted. I forgot to post the rerun scheduled to run Friday January 2nd. So I am sharing it for all of you below. At the conclusion of the post there will be a #onemorething and a video of an #IOU that I shared with Premium Subscribers in the Discord channel. If you’d like to become a Premium Subscriber you can do so here or you can pay for an hour of private coaching with me and contact me at any of the methods outlined here.
When looking at any sort of computer outputs in poker, I find it helpful to psychologize the computer. They are EV-maximizing machines, but if someone asked me “Why does the solver bet K5 here?”, an answer of “It’s the highest-EV play” is true, but not satisfying. In order to learn from outputs, humans need to hear (or read on this very blog) reasoning that makes sense to them. An example of a play that humans have internalized quite quickly and solvers have not, because it requires running FGS and most outputs one looks at are single-hand solutions, are “save your tournament life” plays. That means plays like leaving one chip behind when betting the river, half-stacking preflop, and a variety of similar plays.
However, whenever I research these sorts of plays with FGS, I notice a difference between how computers play these spots and how humans do. Humans get all-in postflop way less often than computers. Let’s say you raise to 2bbs, I have 11bbs and make it 10bbs, and you just call. So we have less than 5% pot to play postflop; the solver might recognize that on 1% of runouts you don’t get all-in postflop, and that tiny sliver of EV you gained is worth more than the EV of shoving preflop. Humans will often play that spot in a way where they try their hardest to *never* get all-in preflop, when it’s unclear if that is even the best strategy. When explaining the play to a human, it’s easy to say something like “your primary objective is to not get all-in postflop,” but without a baseline of “but you’ll still get all-in 99% of the time,” that primary objective is a little meaningless. The primary objective is really to not make some sort of disastrous fold that costs you dearly.
In today’s hand at the FT of the GG Super Million$ at Triton Cyprus 2023, I get cute and try to not get AIPF when I have one of the best hands possible to shove. It didn’t end up costing me because I won an all-in, but it could have.
Triton Cyprus 2023 - Event #1 $25,000 GG SUPER MILLIONS
(125k/250k/250k) (SB/BB/BBA)
We are 6H at the FT Payouts are 918k, 623k, 415k, 339.5k, 272.5k, 211.3k
UTG (13.45M) folds, HJ (3.95M) folds, Robert Heindorn (3.1M) makes it 1.3M in the CO, I (3.9M) call K♦️Q♦️ on the button, SB (7.5M) and BB (7.6M) fold
Flop (3.225M) K♥️8♥️4♥️: Robert shoves his final 1.8M, I call and beat his A♥️J♦️
What I Was Thinking
My thought process in this hand was pretty simple. I thought KQs would be very close if Robert shoved, but since he half-stacked, I figured I’d lose less money if someone behind woke up with a great hand, and there might be some runouts where I could fold or check it down, so I figured the half-stack upgraded KQs from a borderline decision to a clear call. I flopped top pair and he shoved; I had a no-brainer call and I held.
What I Got Wrong
The fundamental question here is, how is his 5.2bb range different from his shoving range? If he shoves, I am supposed to fold KQs, and calling is losing around $11k. In the sims I ran, he is never supposed to make it 5.2bbs. I am not sure if that means he is never supposed to pick a large commiting raise size that is less than all-in, but if we say it is, then we are traveling down a node HRC never travels down, and I need to determine if his 5.2bb range is the exact same as his shoving range or if it is weighted towards specific hands. Let’s say, for instance, he never makes it 5.2x with suited broadways and always chooses to shove them, then I’m rarely dominating him and should probably just fold KQs.
I am not sure if Robert’s range is perfectly balanced, but I’d imagine it’s close enough; this is not like a spot where someone only shoves small pocket pairs, and suddenly T9s becomes a more appealing call than AKo. The main thing I got wrong in ranging Robert is that since he splits his preflop raising range between min-raising his very strong hands and bluffs, and 5.2xing hands like 77, AJo, QJs that will always fold to a three-way all-in. When I call, I’m opening the door for the big stacks in the SB and BB to try and bluff me by going AIPF with hands like 77 or KTs. They occasionally win 11bbs without showdown, and if not, are often getting all-in vs. me with 6bbs dead in the middle very often, a pretty nice spot. Given that Nic Chouity folded AJs in this hand, I don’t think vs. my actual opponents I was leaking much EV by risking getting rebluffed, but it’s always a concern.
It’s possible that I would want to flat call with a range of the very top and bottom of my range, like AA and ATo, but KQs would never get in there. It’s a hand that has smooth equity and is too good to fold if the SB or BB go all-in. Even if one of the blinds goes all-in and Robert goes all-in, I cover Robert so I can still ladder, I am getting great pot odds, and Robert will rarely have me dominated as he’d min-raise with QQ+, AK, and AQs.
The other thing that matters in the HRC output, but maybe not in real life, is Robert raised just small enough that when I shove and the blinds fold, he folds around 30% of the time. Many of the hands the solver folds to a jam are bad offsuit aces, which are ahead of KQs, and getting them to fold is worth a ton for me. Some players always stack off after raising to this size; some players are capable of folding after putting 40% of their stack in the middle. I am not sure which type of player Robert is, but I’ve seen enough folds in spots like these that I need to shove and take the chance I can induce a fold.
To recap: I do get to expand my range when Robert half-stacks, but not because it gives me an escape route if multiple people go all-in, but because I can sometimes win the pot without showdown. I want to ensure the blinds behind play as tight as possible, and going all-in is the best way to do that. The EV difference between calling and shoving is about $5k, which is about how costly VPIPing KTs is when Roberts makes it 5.2bbs. When you or others half-stack it can lead you into unusual spots. As a skilled poker player, I usually lean towards plays that will give me more decisions later in the hand where I can push a skill edge, but sometimes you just need to go all-in.
Types of Errors
Half-stack silliness
Grade
I was right that Robert’s non all-in raise size allowed me to play more hands, but not because it gave me the ability to not get all-in preflop if there was crazy action behind, but because I am able to occasionally win the pot without showdown or get all-in with Robert’s dead money in the pot. Had Robert covered me by a little bit, or if he had a stronger pseudo-shoving range that had hands robust enough to call a three-way all-in, then I could fold to a lot of action behind and I could see the argument for having a calling range. In this spot, though, shove or fold seems to be the dominant play with range, and I failed to find it. However, I did correctly intuit that I got to expand my range a little when he half-stacked, and I nailed the exact pip that gets to VPIP. So for that reason I’ll give myself a
B-
POTD #105 onemorething
I spent the whole blog writing about the preflop of the hand, so let’s talk about the fun and wonky postflop output. Let’s start with the obvious play to me, Heindorn pure checks range on the flop. He has 40% range vs range equity and is covered by me and is trying to not get all-in. He should not play aggressively with range and while shoving could get me to fold a chop or AQ no heart, those are the only better hands he is inducing folds from and shoving guarantees he gets all in a lot of the time on the flop. Once he checks dark, you see the problems with half stacking preflop. Now to be fair, king high mono boards are not common and are advantageous for the button here, but when he checks I bet 1bb into 15bbs 46% of the time on the flop and generate folds 27% of the time. If he shoves the flop first-in for 6bbs AJ no heart is a close fold for me, if he checks and I bet 1bb AJ no heart is a close fold for him. Just as my preflop just-call allows big stacks to leverage their position to win the maximum versus us, his preflop size allows me to leverage my position postflop to win the maximum from him. Sometimes you can save yourself and sometimes you just have to go all-in because the alternative is much worse.