Shoving AK Preflop (Quiz+Answers) | SplitSuit
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 2 ต.ค. 2024
- Take the AK AIPF Quiz for free here BEFORE you watch this complete video! www.splitsuit.c...
Using Equilab Video: www.splitsuit.c...
Free #poker EV Spreadsheet: redchippoker.c...
SplitSuit reviews the Ace King All-In Preflop Quiz results and gives you the exact answers for each question. Concepts include equity matchups with AK AIPF vs common hands like TT and ranges such as QQ+/AK, along with proofing all-in spots vs various player types. Math nerds welcome!
Want to see how the pros play Ace King? Check out SplitSuit's in-depth book Optimizing Ace King and see the playbook unfold: www.splitsuit....
A key concept to get from these EV calculations is that you are winning money in the LONG RUN, not every time. If you are exposing a $600 stack for a +$20 play then just be aware that you could easily be $2k+ in the hole before you start winning; and you might have to make this move 15-20 times before you are profitable.
Bingo!
Exactly! That's why I almost never shove or even 4 bet AK unless villain is in late position. It's just too much of a risk for so little EV, if it's even positive at all. Unless I know my villain can shove or even call a shove with hands like AQ AJ, or they are small stacked anyway, I'm just gonna call or fold and play postflop. If a king appears I can sometimes get more value out of the smaller pairs.
@@MrNicePotato You should have some AK 4bets to remain balanced. And if a play has a positive EV, even marginally, then a GTO player should make it.
If a LAG is 3-betting you in position, his plan is to steal the initiative, get you to cap your range by calling, and then outplay you after the flop, pushing you off almost your entire range with marginal holdings that may improve to concealed monsters (such as a flopped set with a baby pair.) When you 4-bet him, you un-cap your range, you bring both of you closer to commitment, which reduces the value of position, and you keep the initiative. You should 4-bet the LAG to punish him right away for playing too many hands.The board is not good for you because broadly speaking, that information is more valuable to him than to you.
That's actually a really cool way of looking at it!
Am I crazy for thinking it actually doesnt matter whether you remember your equity is 42% vs 46%? Doesnt fucking matter. If I'm all in preflop with AK I know I'm behind against a pocket pair but I have a coin flip to get ahead.
Hey James, I’ve been going through all your videos and watching them all. They are so good! Your hand breakdown is better than any channel I’ve seen. I love your logic and your thought on different lines.
Thanks for all your hard work.
Been playing 6 person .05 / .10 every day for a few weeks now and have never seen anything worse than KK go all in preflop. Maybe 10 preflop all-ins so far, every time has been AA vs AA, AA vs KK, or KK vs KK. We're all just a bunch of nits here in Ontario.
Those 4% guys are trolls
Appreciate the effort put into these videos James; it highlights some differences between equity pre flop and the actual EV of the situation. Gotta check that spreadsheet!
Thanks Richard!
120+BBs deep I've only seen 5-bet shoves with QQ+ in my games lately, so I opted for fold. (JJ very rarely.) I couldn't fold all of my AK, though so I won't be run over for being a nit in this spot.
Typically in the 1/2 games I play if someone 4 bets they have AA or KK, almost always. Most of the guys won't even put in a 3 bet with QQ let alone 4 bet AK. Against certain players I would always get it all in preflop with AK considering I've already put a decent chunk of $ into the pot, but against a lot of guys you need to learn how to fold it when facing 4 bets.
It really becomes player dependent, but in some extreme cases, I've seen people just call a standard open with AA and KK, without any intent on trapping. The amount of value they're missing out on in these situations is astonishing.
I did the quiz and I got my % answered correctly but it doesn't tell you what questions you got wrong or right after but I loved doing it
im the casw where we got 4$ EV shoving AK vs QQ+,AK, in a pot of 400$, rake will range from 6$ to 15$ depending the poker room, so it ends up being - EV in all situations (but in tournament)
At around the 7 min mark you mention the eff stack left = $165 which is the amount we are shoving for. Why isn't the effective stack $120, which is the amount villain is calling for? Just trying to understand where my mistake is to avoid committing future errors.
Altho it's +EV in a few of these situations , I don't like calling shoves with AK without a good read. I play poker instead of blackjack (or whatever game) for this exact reason. I'm not trying to flip a coin for my money... However, if the situation is right I've got no problem shoving with AK and putting villan to a decision =)!!
Sure it's easier to be the one controlling action through aggression, but we need to be able to handle being in both the driver's and passenger seats.
I think people misread the AK $200 shove question as "Is it the best play," not "is it +EV." It's clearly not the best play if you're certain of QQ+/AK and 100% continue. There's no reason to get in an extra $120 at 42% equity. That's losing. The calling part is so +EV that, even shoving the additional 120% at 42% equity, the entire play is still +EV, but it's still the wrong play. I really object to the question, because the EV of the $120 raise is so negative, and that's not addressed, even though the overall spot is good enough that, even with that extra $120 in at 42%, you're winning (on this hand).
May I ask If your calculation is correct ? in the last example, you use a 39% equity. but you only have 18% Win equity and 20% Tie equity against QQ+;AKS;AKo. Since 20% of the time you tie the pot, calling the shove gives you -8 EV. You should fold. Am I wrong here ?
5:35 Considering high rake I think this is -EV play
Was in a cash game where the last two would get money. There was 3 of us left and one guy had by far the most chips. I call my BB and am raised all-in by the third player. The #1 player folds and I call with 78o and my opponent shows AK. If I lose then Im left with about 300-400 chips with BB being 160 chips and SB 80 chips. I hit a 7 on the flop and won against the AK. Totally lucky but I wouldnt of called if I didnt have a certain feeling about the hand. Ended up finishing second and winning a few hundred dollars. Yeah AK will win most times but in poker literally anything can happen.
I don't understand. Of course you're plus EV when all in pre with AK against a range that includes lots of worse hands?
I don't need 3 calculators to tell me that...
It's worth noting that, for question #3, if the rake in the game is 3.87% or greater, it is actually minus EV to 5bet shove AKs vs his range. Realize that our winnings are always reduced by whatever the rake is, but our losses are never reduced by rake (if we get stacked, we get stacked, regardless of whatever the rake is). In general, the existence of rake should make you more inclined to fold in these near coin flip scenarios.
While rake is important (and overlooked in this quiz), the margin of error is largely in your favor given players are more likely to loosen up too wide in a given spot rather than tighten up too much.
Of course. In reality, the times that you're up against an opponent whose 4betting range is EXACTLY QQ+ AK and NEVER folds to a 5bet shove are slim to none. But given the fact that rake live can be notoriously high depending on where you live (sometimes as high as 10%, $5 cap at 1/2), it definitely cannot be ignored in these types of equations.
True. But since the EV as-run was +$4, even if the rake were maxed for $5, it would again make the play almost exactly breakeven. Throw in any margin of error that almost always bends in our favor - and we're right back to positive land =)
I know this is an old video but hopefully I can get an answer maybe? The scenario where you 4bet AKo vs the Lag, if we assume the lag only jams with AA, wouldn't 4bet folding be more EV then 4bet calling, assuming that the villain doesn't know our strategy and can't exploit us?
Yes, though I might need to update my LAG assessment if they are *only* shoving AA =)
Last hand at 1/2$ 300$ stacks you can call 3bet ,there is no reason to 4bet -fold ,when you 4bet ,you transform a value hand into a bluff iif you are not prepare to call his shove , if he's unknown it's better to flat .
You are correct Jason. The point was not to say that committing is the only play - the point was to force technical exploration of a spot that many players overlook (either because they do it as a default or because they never do it).
Great video. Thank you very much for sharing knowledge
Nice instructive video. Where can I get the spreadsheet you used to make comparisons?
Thanks Paul! The spreadsheet can be downloaded here: redchippoker.com/free-poker-ev-spreadsheet/
Even without using the sheet dle Q3;
You are risking $155 (what you have behind) to potentially win $237 (the $117 in the pot plus the $120 left behind) We know that the equity is 42% (from the last hand) so we can estimate wherher $117/$237 is greater or less than 0.42. Ar a glance i estimated it neat 50% (its actially 49.3%) so, yes this is a good shove. It is +7% ev.
That is math you can do at the table if you know your equity in advance.
The amount yoi have already bet is 'gone' and therefore not part of your bet side, but part of the side you hope to win.
Whoops my bad i had my ratios flipped, and you add the amount won to the value. So its 155/400 and you want it to be LOWER than .42 (since more winnings makes it lower and mote risk makes it higher)
Or you can flip them all 400/155 > (1/0.42) but that math gets harder to do at the table.
You 4 bet he calls ace k 4 flops he all ins you call he had pocket 4s lol
Hello, James. I was wondering if you have any videos on the concept of probe betting and how to do it effectively, either on TH-cam or any of your other coaching websites. please let me know, if you ever have the time.
I can't think of anything off the top of my head Samantha. I know I talk about leading from time to time - but I've never done a full deep-dive video on it =(
Thanks this is actually value for amateurs and good exact numbers for advanced players!
The question starting at the 5 minute mark is no. You didn't include casino rake. Cash game in that scenario is mathematical -ev because of take unless it's a house game.
I was thinking the same thing
What if its a “she”? How does that affect the equity breakdown?
Hey! For question 3 I looked at the formula in the spreadsheet and I feel like I'm missing something. If the question is simply "is shoving +ev if he never folds?", isn't the calculation just: you win his stack 42% of the time, and you lose yours 58% of the time, so on average shoving is -ev (0.42*200 - 0.58*200 = -32)? I feel like I'm forgetting something really stupidly simple :D Thanks
And I guess this would mean that is it better to shove than to fold, because folding makes you lose the $35 you already put into the pot, when shoving makes you "only" lose $32 overall on average. Is that right?
Hey Rogor - your numbers are just slightly off. When you win you win his $200 plus the $35 you put into the pot earlier when 3betting. And when losing you only lose $165 since your earlier 3bet belongs to the pot.
Oh right, that makes sense. Thanks! Love the videos
You're very welcome ♥
I'm a regular viewer and love all of your videos, but I gotta say I love this video especially. The way you go through what you do is SO VALUABLE and, being the nerd I am, I LOVE how much everything you do is backed up with math. Congratulations on your channel bro, I'm a massive fan! Keep up the good work!
Cheers Andrew, and I'm so glad to hear you're enjoying the videos!
Hey James,gr8 work as always.Is there any way to add to the spreadsheet the rake?We need to define rake as % and cap.I guess if we take rake into consideration,EV changes..Am i wrong?My thought process is that whenever we are flipping, nobody wins in the long run because of the rake.Remember,in lower stakes rake rarely caps.
Sure. In the EV cell just modify the formula to and remove current rake from the first part (C7*C3) and remove maxed rake from this part: (C5+C3-C4)
I've never played in a game where rake doesn't cap (and I've played all over the US), but if you play in a game that offers uncapped rake chances are it's not a game that's beatable longterm...
thnx for the answer.Well tbh, I never played in NL uncapped games,however there are some private games full of loose fish(goldmines) where rake is 5% with cap at 20,plus 1 small blind for straight flush jackpot.Mostly PLO private games are uncapped but we are talking nl here.I agree, high rake games are only profitable if there are many whales with money on the table.Anywhay what i wanted to say from the start is that in micros online some plays are -ev because of high rake compared to the money played in a specific hand.
today I called all in with Pocket Queens and lost to A8 offsuit
he literally hit 2 pair on the flop, really?? smh
How often do you think A8 will beat QQ when all-in preflop?
James, what is the best way to ask you questions, that are not related to specific video?
www.splitsuit.com/ask
or
www.redchippoker.com/forum
♥
I thought AK vs TT is 48%!
Reason: I know that after the flop the Chance with AK(s) to win is approximately 50%, because of the 2 Overcards!
Or i think wrong?
Something makes all not much difference, is 22 or QQ not the same, if AK dont hit?
No. 22 can be counterfeited a small percent of the time on boards that pair themselves twice. Also, it’s not 48% because the times when TT hits a set, AK is practically drawing dead to A boat. Can’t even hit trips because the TT boats up. So that also gives TT a slight edge
is the AK vs QQ+/AK EV-calculation for the 200$ stacks example (EV = +4.26$) correct for tournament? Tournament chips do not increase linearly in value (since they translate nonlinearly into actual payout). So the case for shoving might be a lot more borderline (or even unprofitable)?
It's a little bit late but maybe I still get an answer.
In question 2 you calculate an EV of +4,26$ under consideration that you put already 35$ in the pot. In my understanding this means you lose on average 35$ if you fold (obviously) and you still lose 31$ on average if you shove. You lose less but you don't make actual profit.
Is that correct do I miss something?
Your question gets at the difference between relative and absolute EV, which is laid out in Optimizing Ace King (www.splitsuit.com/ace-king-poker-book). But the relative EV says your $35 no longer belongs to you and your options are between folding (0EV) and going all-in (+$4.26 EV). What you described is looking at it from the absolute EV point of view. In both views, going all-in is higher EV =)
@@splitsuit yes exactly that's what I meant, I just didn't know the terms :)
can you make a video about playing QQ. as a low stakes player. my thought process is assuming that when I raise pre. I am getting called by a hand with an ace or king in it. And when those flop. I shut down. I know this is wrong. But can't say why. can you please explain why I shouldn't be so scared to play QQ or even JJ
I think with that last question your answer would be correct on a 2/5 table, but 1/2? No, I'd need info to widen their range beyond QQ+. Forget AK, suited or not. At least, not in the games as I know them. I've spent entire sessions being the ONLY player on a 1/3 table who 3bets.
So, would I be right to say the take away is unless you can pin being up against KK / AA, or if the stacks are absolutely massive, shoving AK is never wrong preflop? Never wrong in the sense that it's +EV, not that it's the most EV.
I ask because at my weekly cash game I have had 2 instances where people shoved into me or I shoved AK suited or off and they show up with A3s, or when i had AsKs he had JsQs. Seems obvious but despite losing both of those I feel I should always call their jams with QQ+/AK, and because they love to give action, always 4b if I get the opportunity.
I'd say you are on the right track there =)
Tsiphon yeah your basically flipping against everything besides kk and aa. it does get tricky when your playing a ring game and you have reads on people and there are a bunch of raises and reraises you might want to let it go...but the majority of the time I think its a profitable play to shove or call a shove with ak
Furthermore, Do you have any resource to see the math behind why 2 overcards are almost always about 42-47% against the lower pocket pairs preflop. Is it simply 5 opportunities to hit 6 outs, plus a few extra super rare happenings like 4 to a flush, double board pairs counterfeiting and stuff like that, minus set potential for the PP? I typically only see the statistic thrown out but never explained. I'm honestly fine with just taking it as fact, but I'd like to be able to explain it to any friends I'm getting in to the game.
I don't have that information handy unfortunately. I'm assuming Wizard Of Odds has broken it down at some point?
Shouldn't we take in account the rake for close EV spots? Because when you are barely EV+ and substract the rake then you are losing money (especially for medium stakes online because the rake is bigger)
Arnaud HALVICK you are correct. His math is missing that for cash games and therefore wrong.
This EV calculation has confused me.
Surely the calculation is simply ($Win x %Win) - ($Loss x %Loss).
Would that not give: ($118 x 0.42) - ($165 x 0.58) = - $46.14
How is my calculation wrong??
Because you have the wrong $Win =)
Ow, so would you include the possible extra $120 win from your opponents stack?
I.e. is the calculation: ([$118+$120] x 0.42) - ($165 x 0.58) = $4.26
It makes sense now, thank you!
You're very welcome =)
In the example (3?), when we open and face a 3 bet from a LAG who has position on us; I understand wanting to 4 bet a size that could allow us to fold vs a shove. I also think it can be sensible to use the range you assigned for villains stack off range. But, I'm not sure I understand how those two ideas work together. IF villain is shoving that range AND we are not going to fold, then why make a non all in 3 bet that commits us to stacking AK when we figure to be a dog if the money goes in?
I mean, if we are trying to give the illusion of fold equity then I'd assume it's to induce some % of bluffs, no? But if we think the villain just isn't going to shove any lighter hands and we figure to be an equity dog vs his shove then aren't we just kind of allowing the player to decide if he wants to play for stacks or not while not giving ourselves any strategic upside? Because he could decide to flat some hands or he can decide to put all of our money in. So where is the upside compared to just shoving ourselves or if we think that villain will not make many mistakes against our 4 betting AK either by flatting w some worse hands or by jamming some bluffs into us then wouldn't calling be better?
I'm not trying to correct you by any stretch of the imagination I'm just hoping you'll kinda clear this up for me.
I guess we would want to have some hands in our range that raise and fold here so using a bet size that allows us to do that seems warranted but my intuition is telling me that the reason we do want to have some hands that raise fold in this range is exactly because we don't want to let villain play perfectly against us. But, somehow, it seems like this very specific case (assuming your assumptions hold) doesn't induce mistakes or even allow mistakes and so why not just use an over bet jam instead of giving villain an extra strategic option without giving ourselves one???
I kind of feel like we should not raise less than all in if we A) would prefer folds to jams
And
B) we are def calling vs the jam
So maybe this should be a call vs a player who is very aggressive.
Hopefully that makes enough sense to warrant a response.
Great video as always James, your stuff is the best by a mile.
The sizing thing is a strategic function - not a function of us holding a single hand. We want to choose a 4bet size that we can use with both value hands AND bluff hands - and around 20-25bb is the default starting point for that. Going to 50bb is committing as well, but likely minimizes any chances of inducing callv4bet or 5bet bluff mistakes...
ak would 3bet less often than qq+. how should we fix this in your numbers?
this may explains why shoving AK against 3bet is counter-intuitive.
Why would AK 3bet less often than QQ+? Do you mean from a combo perspective or something else?
my opponent 3bets and I do not want to assume that this means that his range is QQ+/AK. I want to assume that he will 3bet all 12 combos of QQ+ but he will 3bet only 5 out of his 9 AK combos. By this assumption his 3bet range is slightly stronger and makes my AK way weaker. So my question is how to calculate how weak is my AK as easily as you did?
1. I think that's an unsafe assumption as a pure default - especially in aggressive games.
2. If you want to do that in Equilab, use the suit selection button in Equilab and choose just some of the combos and apply.
I think he means that some people flat a certain percentage with AK... although people flat with queens as well
Well, I have a question as I don't fully understand this topic: do we calculate the EV for the money we put in for the shove and miss the money we already lose by going the way before, or does the equation take all the money into account, even my previous bets/raises?
The money you put into the pot BEFORE your committing action does not belong to you, it belongs to the pot. So this equation puts into account the value of shoving + missing AND shoving + hitting.
Is there any way you can actually show the math equations used to solve problem 4 and/or 5? I keep getting a negative expectation value even though I know the shove is profitable from your excel sheet.
Hey Matheus. Just download the sheet, click on the EV cell, and you'll see the equation in the formula area =)
James you are amazing thankyou for all your vids, hope to get on your level and crush this game
Over playing ak is a massive leak for me im pretty sure i lose morw chips with it then any other hand i actually hate the hand lol
Then this will be the best investment you make this week =) www.splitsuit.com/ace-king-poker-book
Not nerdy enough. No sarcasm here
Q10 s is ace king killer lol
hey Split!i have a question. why on flopzilla when you put the same range TT,Ak,Aqs,QQ,KK,AA gives you 2,94% instead on pokerstategy 3,7%? and could you explain why when we have equity 38% to 60%sh it gives us +EV if we are under dog 22% preflop?tnx
Hey Andy, could you give timestamps for the Flopzilla vs Equilab comparison?
And the simple reason for your second question is the overlay. You can be behind equity-wise, but with overlay & pot odds it can still be +EV given the added value in the win% part of the EV equation.
i think i got after second time watching the video)))
woot!
Wow... watching these videos made me realize what nit I am. I can't seem to break out of nit habits and have to muster some courage to play better. I much prefer the tournament style of play overall as I have an easy math to calculate when to be nitty or when to be ultra aggressive, which in no way translates to cash games. Any videos you'd recommend?
I don't make much MTT content, but there is tons of MTT content in the PRO Membership over on Red Chip Poker that would be right up your alley.
Why is AK considered to be the 3rd or 4th best hand by a ton of people if it is behind every pocket pair? Not arguing with equilab but that is a huge belief.
Totally fair question Matt. Simply put, ranking hands strictly by their hot/cold equity when the hand is rarely getting all-in preflop, is not a great model for estimating hand profitability. We actually touch on this (along with a million other concepts!) in my new book: www.splitsuit.com/ace-king-poker-book (pay special attention in Chapter 3)
@@AvatarBowler Makes sense Good explanation. I think it makes sense in an all in situation mostly due to being able to see all 5 cards
I would like to know how to fight full houses against a set... and how to recognize that moments
just pay them off
With AK it's very simple. Analyze your opponents shoving range, do the math and if you're priced in call. If you're not, fold. If you don't have any information on said opponent it's up to you
Pretty fair synopsis =) Although that same logic can be applied in pretty much any spot where you are facing a shove =)
James (SplitSuit) Haha, exactly! I don't think your logic needs to change with AK opposed to any other situation facing a shove. Aces Kings, sometimes Queens play themselves. 27 off suit plays itself the rest is up to you. (Also love your videos keep them up man!) :)
Cheers =)
One thing you didn't mention in the final scenario regarding a nitty opponent is that if he 3b out of position his range is already nitty. The shove is teed up, a no brainer. His 3b is what gives us his range.
If the AK is my hand, I have 20 percent equity - if it's my opponents hand, they are 90 percent against me lol
Split , I don't agree with the last question... Or maybe I'm missing something.... But it's an opponent that you have no info on, and we showed lots of strength by 4 betting, yet he still shoved... Unless the guy is tilting like crazy , we're likely to be a slight underdog in a coin flip at best...Our range is pretty polarized, we raise, he re raises, and instead of flatting in position we 4 bet, and he still shoves. The average player at these stakes isn't hoping for folds when they Jam over a 4 bet. With no fold equity and no other info I think this is a clear fold. If there's ever a time to lay down AK pre, I think this is it....
So you are making the assumption that he's only shoving KK+? And just because a player isn't shoving for FE, doesn't mean they wouldn't shove TT because they don't know what else to do with it =)
James (SplitSuit) I've been playing online alot for the last few months on a us site that is really soft (global). Altho the competition is super soft, I rarely see people 4 bet shoving less than QQ (unless they are super tilted or being an uber fish)
Experiences will certainly shape assumptions. Just keep an eye on the data as time goes on and look to either confirm or deny this assumption.
@James (SpiltSuit) At 1/2 live the average player (which is what we have to treat unknown as) isn't 3 betting TT to 35, let alone 5 bet shoving it. They are most likely P-fish who are flatting TT or A-fish who are going to raise from 10 to something like 60 rather than 35, meaning that your 4-bet will pretty much be a shove and there is no 5 bet option for them just fold or call.
Additionally, the preponderance of responses that most people gave you here shows how much the average player undervalues AK and these are the same type of players you would be playing AGAINST at 1/2 live. From that, you should be able to glean that the average 1/2 player is also unlikely to be 5 bet shoving with AK when they place that type of value on the hand.
For an unknown 1/2 player (meaning not a TAG or LAG) I would put the 5 bet shove range as QQ+ and possibly a couple combos of JJ. I haven't run the numbers, but on your video KK+ was waaaay negative EV and QQ+/AK was only slightly positive, so I would assume QQ+ is still definitely a fold and possibly even still if you throw 2 JJs in.
great Video
Thanks Panda!
Love this video
Awesome part is 15 minutes thru 17 minutes.Very helpful!
Thanks!
AK is called Anna Kournikova. Strong, but never wins.
my equilab says AKo vs QQ+,AKs, AKo = 38.8% equity
Proof is for bread.
I hate nits
Hey! I was wondering if you should factor in the tie % for the EV calculations in question 3.
According to Equilab we only win the hand 23% of the time, even though we have 42% equity. Can someone explain me what the thought process is of ignoring the tie % in the EV calculation?
Ties are factored into the overall equity as far as I understand it.
Thank you for your answer!
I think the question is if Equilab or similar programs count the ties as a "win" or how else they are factored in.
I was wondering if the EV calculation shouldn't look like this:
$238 x 0.23 - $165 x 0.39 = - $9.61
This way we could cancel out the Tie equity which is 0.3857. (not sure about my calculation here)
In this special exercise the number of ties is substantial, influencing the calculation a lot.
Btw my comment is not meant to find a mistake in your video, really like your content!
I was just thinking about it when i did the exercise with Equilab myself..
If you plug in AK vs AK, Equilab shows equities of 50%, but you dont really win money 50% of the time (only 0.75 Big blinds), in about 3% of all cases you get the full pot. Isnt there a similar problematic in the discussed exercise?
You are totally fair to raise the question. If you are proficient with Excel you could easily setup a formula and proof this...if you do, please let me know and I'd love to check out the results.
What kind of formula would you have in mind? I'm not really sure how to get started on this, but I have a feeling we are on to something here.
Does 42% vs 48% really matter in live low stakes games? At this point against these types of players player dependent reads def factor into equity
Tells help indicate ranges, and ranges help us estimate our equity. All of these things are important =)