|
|
did some math, and found that double barrel (turn+blank river) with 0 equity hands is still -EV even when villain folds a significant portion of his range on the river.
as to the first point, my calculation shows that roughly villain has to (immediately) fold a x% of his range that is higher than the hand equity for the semibluffing to be a better (more +EV) choice than checking. And of course this is in a vacum, the real value of semibluffing comes from blancing our value range, so even semibluffing is slightly worse than checking, the EV we conceded should be more than compensated by our value range. That said, exploitively speaking, we SHOULD in fact consider whether semibluffing is better than checking, even when our hand has massive equity.
Another case: I opened KTss UTG+1, 3 callers. flop QJJss, I cbet, fold, fold, BB calls. BB is a $1/$2 reg who I anticipate will call down a lot on blank runnouts because it's a textbook situation (they overestimate opp's bluff frequency on paired boards, let alone the two spades) where they will overcall us. Turn blank, he checks, here GTO-wise I can and probably should barrel turn, because villain rarely has naked trips, he's either on a full house or a Q, and in BB he will have a lot more Q than a fullhouse, we on the other hand could have all sorts of J including AJ down to J8s and depending on our image we may perceptively 3 barrel AA-KK also, and on the other hand we have not much suited spades because for one we might check nut flush draw for the A high showdown value, and second we opened UTG+1 we don't have a lot of low SC or gappers, and the board blocks two of the big spades too, so if we 3 barrel here it could be well balanced. BUT, exploitively speaking i know this guy is calling too much on blanks, so I just decided to check turn instead to realize my massive equity, since he's not folding more often than my equity%.
|
|
[复制链接]
楼主
