Quote Originally Posted by angrystoc
some stuff i cut out because this post is already long as shit
This is immensely better. This is closer to the type of analysis you should be doing every street of every hand. From that point, the major way you'll improve is by improving your analytical skills, including the speed and accuracy that you make your evaluations of different aspects of the hand. First a few comments about your process of analysis, and then a few comments about the analysis itself.

You probably wouldn't consider folding at the table because you have the option of checking so don't mistake this as me saying you shouldn't consider folding rah rah rah just because you typed it. But instead, this is a good spot to mention what a dominated strategic option is because it can come in handy in other spots and help make your analysis faster. A strategic option (any betting decision) is dominated when there is another option that is always better than or equal to it. Here, checking dominates folding because it's always better than or equal to it (for obvious reasons). Anytime you find a dominated option you should disregard it from your analysis because the dominating option is always a better choice and doing so will keep you from wasting time (which is important because we have a limited time to make decisions).

The second thing about your actual process of analysis is that you didn't do much along the lines of quantifying or estimating the value of each possible choice. Obviously you shouldn't be expected to do a whole lot of complicated math at the table, but these estimations are like the one step you really really really need to work on to make your analysis effective. Like I can't even stress the importance enough.

(Note: Keep in mind I'm just trying to illustrate how to add a simple calculation to your analysis -- don't take the rest of this paragraph as advice on the hand because that starts in the next paragraph. This paragraph is just to show a sample calculation!!) Here's what I mean. When considering a check, you noted that it was close to 0 EV on the turn with a small amount of value on the river. You could reword that just a little to include how much you think you would get on the river on average. Let's pull something out of our asses as what you expect to get on the river if you check just so we have an example: let's say you get a $0.30 bet out of him 2/3 of the time for an average value of about $0.20. Now, when you consider betting, you say that you expect a call with ~30% of his range and about 1/6 of that (~5%) beats you. Well you suspect you'll be stacking off on the river, so roughly five times you'll win about $1.10 total (since that's what he's got left in his stack and you have him covered) and one time you'll lose $1.10 for a value of about $4.40/6 which is like $0.70 or something but is obviously higher than $0.20. So if we used those calculations with our analysis we decide that we think betting is better.

Okay now to address the analysis itself.

The first thing is how you've quantified his range. On the board of J77Q there are only 3 combinations of JJ and 3 combinations of QQ (if you have trouble with this then read this thread sometime). There is 1 combo of 77, and 6 combos each of J7 and Q7, so about 19 combos that have us crushed. You noted that there are about 50 possible FD combos that hit as well, but this might be off depending on which ones you considered - if you were talking about all possible combinations of two clubs then it's closer and probably a decent enough estimation for our purposes. Next you say there are other trips/PPs/overs(?) that are less likely to continue. You said you guessed 300 or so possible combos, but again it depends on which hands you put in that range. Each possible non-boat 7 is about 8 combos each and each PP is 6 each, then there are some one-pair Jx type hands as well that are 12 combos each, so I'm thinking this is closer to 150-160 than 300, but this is something you get better at with practice. Not all of these fold to a turn bet, so in your analysis of betting when you think of his calling range you should estimate how much of that range calls a bet as well.

As it turns out, betting gets in your opponent's stack with you as a huge favorite very often. For estimation purposes, let's say that quads/boats' 20 combos have you crushed, 50 flush combos you have crushed, about 60 combos worth of trips come along and the other 100 or so combos of one-pair hands and stuff fold. That's around 230 combos, about 130 or so of which call, and about 15-20% of that time he has you beat. With his trips he's drawing to some outs, so we'll kick that up to say about 20% total of the time he'll have you beat on the river, and otherwise you're getting his entire stack of $1.20 or whatever it was. Summary of betting analysis: you get value from over half his range in the form of his entire stack by the river.

For a quick consideration of checking, note in comparison that you get no value on the turn, and minimal value on the river after you've given him a free card to a possible 10 outs or giving him a chance to get away from a smaller flush with another club coming on the river. Betting gets tons more value, and gives no chances for him to suck out for free or get away from a worse hand for free, and that's why betting is better than checking.

Overall it was like 10x better than what you've done so far in this thread. If you practice this in your study time and do this consistently at the tables then you will be making a shitload of money in a relatively short period of time. I seriously wish other people would pick this up because it would make them sooo much money.