Is Villain Over or Under Bluffing River?
How often do you raise turn?
Hand History driven straight to this forum with DriveHUD 2 Poker Tracking Software
NL Holdem 0.5(BB)
HERO (163.8BBs)
CO (100BBs) [VPIP: 100% | PFR: 0% | AGG: 20% | Hands: 4]
BTN (118.7BBs) [VPIP: 87.5% | PFR: 41.7% | AGG: 46.9% | Hands: 24]
SB (100BBs) [VPIP: 33.3% | PFR: 8.3% | AGG: 11.1% | Hands: 24]
BB (167BBs) [VPIP: 50% | PFR: 25% | AGG: 47.4% | Hands: 24]
Dealt to Hero: A♥ Q♥
HERO Raises To 2.5BBs, CO Calls 2.5BBs, BTN Folds, SB Folds, BB Calls 1.5BBs
Hero SPR on Flop: [12.19 effective]
Flop (8BBs): 3♣ 5♠ Q♣
BB Checks, HERO Bets 3.8BBs (Rem. Stack: 157.5BBs), CO Folds, BB Calls 3.8BBs (Rem. Stack: 160.7BBs)
Turn (15.6BBs): 3♣ 5♠ Q♣ T♣
BB Bets 8.2BBs (Rem. Stack: 152.5BBs), HERO Calls 8.2BBs (Rem. Stack: 149.3BBs)
River (32BBs): 3♣ 5♠ Q♣ T♣ 8♥
BB Bets 30.4BBs (Rem. Stack: 122.1BBs)
Hey there, some input:
Fish Donks OTT MW Total:
Fish Donks OTT HU Total:
Fish XC-D50-B Total
Fish XC-D50-B (Turn card complete flush)
You are correct that texture matters but only certain textures, and turn flush complete isn't one of them. The filters/textures that show massive deviations from the aggregate are 4 to flush/4 to straight 1 gap and no gap. Every other texture is only slightly over bluffed/underbluffed relative to overall.
I have XC30-Donk75-Bet Ranges. For B100 the fish are 50 weak.
You are saying that the turn to flush filter goes from 50 weak to below 33 weak? Based on everything I've studied in MDA there's ju
My data for XC30-B70-B is very similar. What's weird is that B50-B100 (37) and B100-B100 (34) are WAY less bluffed than B70-B100 (51) for 20-40% flop. I genuinely have no idea why that could be, curious what people think.
B100 turn seems special when it comes to river texture
B50 turn (B70 very similar)
As for the original hand, B50 flop is probably bad, multiway must be bad (no clue by how much), flush turn is actually neutral when river doesn't 4-flush, and pot river after B50 turn is pretty bad. Line is very over bluffed though and there's a chance of beating worse Qx or chopping AQ.
I do wonder what % of the bluffs here come from fish that are spewy enough you'd have a note after 24 hands. If there was a previous hand where villain gave up a reasonable bluff I'd fold here.
How did you make the stats for MW? I can try and get a larger sample.
When the turn is flush completing river will 4-flush a large % of the time. Was a 3.5% difference in weak for me which made it basically the same as aggregate.
My data for XC30-B70-B is very similar. What's weird is that B50-B100 (37) and B100-B100 (34) are WAY less bluffed than B70-B100 (51) for 20-40% flop. I genuinely have no idea why that could be, curious what people think.
My guess would be B50 is a draw and then B100 is their draw completing, B50- give up I assume happens a ton, and we overbluff them in that node.
B70 to generate more FE than B50, and then B100 overbluffing when called bluffing turn
This seems reckless. There are so many different kinds of non-reg players, and a lot of them are complete nits.
It’s very easy to see what people are with a HUD and stats.
Really doesn’t take long to see who isn’t a reg when you pay attention to pre flop, sizings, timing etc
This seems reckless. There are so many different kinds of non-reg players, and a lot of them are complete nits.
I was typing in a hurry and should have been more clear. What I meant to say was that the data I am looking at has specific definition's of what a fish is, so if someone's definition is not similar then the data will be off.
Definition of a fish:
Okay now that that is out of the way, are you still advocating a fold OTR or has the data changed your mind yet?
What kind of hud you guys use for H2N? I my range research dose not look anything like that
Also what stake and site is this data from?
My data for XC30-B70-B is very similar. What's weird is that B50-B100 (37) and B100-B100 (34) are WAY less bluffed than B70-B100 (51) for 20-40% flop. I genuinely have no idea why that could be, curious what people think.
It's probably a sample size issue. If you post the exact data I'll use Tombos calculator to see confidence levels.
I was typing in a hurry and should have been more clear. What I meant to say was that the data I am looking at has specific definition's of what a fish is, so if someone's definition is not similar then the data will be off.
Definition of a fish:
Okay now that that is out of the way, are you still advocating a fold OTR or has the data changed your mind yet?
I think this is a fold in my pool against most fish who take weird lines like this, regardless of the MDA stuff. I would guess it's pretty close to being a call though, so maybe the MDA and randomness of your pool swings it to always a call.
It's probably a sample size issue. If you post the exact data I'll use Tombos calculator to see confidence levels.
I thought so too and checked everything since it didn’t make sense at all. The B50-B100 and B100-B100 samples were quite large. I plugged in B70-B100 and it was within a few percent at most, plus your data for that spot being so similar.
Not a common spot but maybe there’s other lines with a similar pattern.
I think this is a fold in my pool against most fish who take weird lines like this, regardless of the MDA stuff. I would guess it's pretty close to being a call though, so maybe the MDA and randomness of your pool swings it to always a call.
FWIW my data is all from Stars reg tables
More samples from ZK:
48% ...kerching
Hi, I started using Smart Research (MDA) and wanted to know how to calculate the probability that the pool is under or overbluff from a given sample of x occurrences. What mathematical formula or software should be used?
I asked chatGPT for hours but all the python codes he gave me led to unsatisfactory or false results. I also tried a binomial calculator but the confidence intervals do not give the exact probability... I do not know what to do.
I'm actually quite surprised at the results of this. I feel that I've been overfolding these spots in the past.
