So many bets, so little reads.

Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey

You do not have enough info to fold AKs PRE.

You will never have that info on Bovada.

The main reason to fold AKs PRE is when you know for a fact that villain would never have QQ- or AK-. Their range has to be exactly KK or AA in order for you to fold AKs.

The anonymous player pool on Bovada means you will never have the tens of thousands of hands you'd need to have seen to be convinced that they ONLY have KK+.

While your equity looks ok to call the QQ+,AK range, a fair chunk of that equity won't arrive on the flop when villain will (probably) be putting the rest of the chips in: 5:4 are not attractive odds for even a ~40% call (including AKo).
..and it's not 40% if you are folding many flops. Do you know what portion of your 40% hand equity you make on the flop?

Perhaps you could explain your reasoning a bit MMM?



Also it might be possible to categorise the player from his other play and have enough data on players of that type to reach a fairly high level of confidence about his range (you'd still need to have seen a fair few hands that session and it certainly wouldn't work for everyone but 80% confidence of his range would have a substantial impact on your decisions)
In this case you might even be more than 80% confident just from knowing he's playing at this table (not saying it is so, but it's certainly possible that over 80% of Bovada 10c players would never make that move with less than KK -most of those who 4Bet lighter choosing the shove).


EDIT: oh yes I was going to read Spoon's threads, perhaps I'll find enlightenment there
EDIT2: 5:4 not 6:5

Originally Posted by Timlagor

While your equity looks ok to call the QQ+,AK range, a fair chunk of that equity won't arrive on the flop when villain will (probably) be putting the rest of the chips in: 6:5 are not attractive odds for even a ~40% call (including AKo).
..and it's not 40% if you are folding many flops. Do you know what portion of your 40% hand equity you make on the flop?

Perhaps you could explain your reasoning a bit MMM?

Treat AA,KK,AKs as the same thing PRE. Keep raising. Don't call PRE with these holdings. These are the top of your range, and you play the top of your range aggressively.

If you're facing a call OTF where you need 40% equity to call, then you should pretty much KNOW whether to call or fold. Villain is either bluffing, which means his range is much wider than your proposed KK+... or you're right and it's an easy fold 'cause you're beat dead to rights.

The point is to set yourself up for easy choices and FAT value.

Originally Posted by Timlagor

Also it might be possible to categorise the player from his other play and have enough data on players of that type to reach a fairly high level of confidence about his range (you'd still need to have seen a fair few hands that session and it certainly wouldn't work for everyone but 80% confidence of his range would have a substantial impact on your decisions)
In this case you might even be more than 80% confident just from knowing he's playing at this table (not saying it is so, but it's certainly possible that over 80% of Bovada 10c players would never make that move with less than KK -most of those who 4Bet lighter choosing the shove).

I have a degree in physics and there are plenty of other posters and moderators here on FTR who have extensive mathematical training. We'll all tell you the same thing.

You're trying to distinguish a rate of 0.9% { KK+ } to a rate of ~1.3% { QQ+ } or { KK+,AKs }.

The number of hands you'd need to distinguish those rates is not in the hundreds or thousands. You need tens or hundreds of thousands of results to make that kind of distinction. Randomness and variance are going to play hell with you trying to pin those frequencies down to not include each other in your error bars.

Bottom line:
You do not know within a statistically significant margin that folding AKs PRE is a good move, and when you're wrong, you're throwing away one of the toppest of top tier hands.
(Nothing personal... it's not that you don't know.. it's that it is not to be known within the parameters we are given.)

Originally Posted by Timlagor

EDIT: oh yes I was going to read Spoon's threads, perhaps I'll find enlightenment there

Let us know what you learn.