Dynamic Full Ring Poker

by James Sweeney

  So lets change the situation a little bit and say it folds to us in the CO with Qd8d with $50 at 50NL. We have been playing pretty tight for the last couple orbits due to being card dead. The button is a 7/5 over 700 hands with a $12 stack, the SB is a 12/10 over 480 with $45, and the BB is a 30/8 over 120 hands with $50. At first glance everything seems to be great, except for the BB, who is a little looser. But, say the SB has a Resteal of 6%, and the BB has a 3-bet% (with such a small sample we have to use 3-bet% over Resteal) of 1% and a FoldvFlopCB of 90%. Now all of a sudden this steal looks very profitable. We expect the button and SB will fold preflop pretty much always because they are so tight, but expect the BB to call a fair amount and fold to the CB very often. Making this is a very solid spot for us.

  The traditional steal positions are the CO, button, and SB. However, we can also use positions like the HJ and the BB as well. Say it folds around to the SB who completes, and we are in the BB with 73o. If we think the SB is just trying to take a cheap glance at the flop, we should steal his limp and attack him. If he calls, well, he will probably fold to the continuation bet often due to him being out of position. This again gives us multiple ways of winning this pot. We can pick it up preflop, or hit him with a continuation bet on the flop if he calls our preflop raise. And sometimes, though rarely, we might actually hit a hand and get some value. We can also use the HJ as a steal position. If it folds to us, and the players behind us fold a lot, there is no reason not to pick up the dead money. Of course, the further away we are from the button, the more aware we need to be of our position if we get called. So if we are in the HJ and the button is a looser player, we might not want to steal with a weak hand due to having to play the hand out of position if called.

  Although steals are great ways to pad our winrate, just make sure that we are not forcing steals. If a good spot arises, then by all means take it, but do not just try to steal with any two cards in all situations. Especially if you don’t feel very confident in your postflop game, you don’t want to be playing more hands with things like J4o or K2s. Stealing is all about taking a high probability setup. We take the spot if we think we can get it through enough of the time, but if we think we are going to get action, we want to have a strong hand. Remember, preflop play is all about setting ourselves up for good situations postflop. So make sure we are taking advantage of good spots within reason and with hands we feel we can play well in the event we see a flop.

  The Sizing

  Sizing our preflop raises is very important. However, again, there is no optimal static strategy. If we take basic bet theory into consideration, we know that bigger bets tend to get less action (but action from stronger hands) and smaller bets tend to get more action (and from a wider range of hands). Does this mean we want to open-raise to 6bb with AK to get more folds? Not really. Ideally, we would size the bets for all of our hands the same way to ensure that our bet sizing doesn’t give off tells to our opponents. If we always used a “big bets equal big hands”, and “small bets equal weaker hands” approach in our sizing, it would be very obvious for anybody paying attention.

  There are two major approaches to preflop open-raise sizing:

  Raise 3x from every position

  Raise 4x from EP/MP, and raise 3x from LP

  Notice that both use smaller sizes from late position. The idea is to give our steals a good price, since because we are playing more hands from LP v EP, we will have a weaker range and need to have a good parlay between value and risk. There is another minor school which suggests a slight variation: raising 3x from EP, and 2.5x from LP, and there exist other minority opinions as well.

  So which major school is correct? Both are, but both fit into different styles. For instance, if we are playing a very TAG 13/11 game, with a very tight EP open-raising range, we might use 4x from EP. Our range is stronger from EP, so we should create the biggest pots possible when our hand is not only strongest, but will maintain strong hands postflop. But if we were playing a very LAG 19/15 style, we might choose a smaller 3x EP/MP open-raise size due to our range being a bit wider, and thus weaker both preflop and postflop. That would ensure that we don’t risk too much when we steal, and also would ensure that we don’t turn our hands face up for aware opponents to see.

  There are some specific situations where we might consider a different open-raise size:

  Stealing against tight players

  Say it folds to us on the button with J8o. The SB is a TAG 14/10 with a 3-bet of 2% (2% being the low side of average). The BB is a nit 1/₅ with a 3-bet of 1% (1% being very tight). Stealing for 3x is decent, but these players are just going to play straight forward regardless. They will fold if their hand is weak (which it will be a very large percentage of the time on average) and they will call or 3-bet if their hands are strong. Our size won’t really lean them one way or another. If that be the case, we can consider stealing for 2.5x, or even 2x. There is no reason to risk more if we don’t need to. Whenever bluffing, risk all that is necessary to get the job done, nothing more and nothing less.

  Big hands versus bad players

  If a player cannot hand read well, plays very poorly, and has an inelastic calling range; we can consider sizing our bets according to our hand strength. For instance, say it folds to us in the SB with KK. The BB is a fishy 61/6 over 80 hands, with a 3-bet of 0%. He is a massive calling station preflop and tends to give action postflop as well. If the size of our raise won’t create more folds against him, they we can use a larger size like 5x or even 6x. If he would call any raise size, we could go up to 10x. A player this willing to give action should be punished, and bigger sizing with monster hands is a great way to do this.

  While a lot of players will overlook sizing as an unimportant detail, sizing is a huge determinant in our long run win rate. It isn’t always easily visible in our database, but it is certainly buried in the value of our plays. If we are risking too much when bluffing or stealing, it will show up when we are wrong and are maximizing our loss. If we are betting too small and not making the most on our winners, it will show up when we are minimizing value. Always make sure we take the full parlay into consideration when sizing our open-raises preflop, and over time, we will see our results shine exponentially brighter than if we used a bad sizing strategy.

  The Min Raise

  Min raising is always a very taboo topic. Some players will use it a lot, others use it sometimes, and others scoff at the very idea of using it in any situation. The min raise, for those unaware, is just open raising to 2x. It is a very small raise, and many players hate the idea of giving opponents great odds on a preflop raise. But let’s talk about the pros and cons of this raise size.

  Pros:

  Given the size, it doesn’t need to work very often to show a profit, especially in steal situations.

  When players 3-bet it, they tend to keep their 3x or 4x mentalities. This means the 3-bet size is smaller, giving us better odds to continue. So rather than raising to 3x and facing a 10x 3-bet, we can raise to 2x and face a 7x 3-bet. This gives us better odds, a deeper SPR, all while retaining a 3-bet mentality from our opponent

  When called, it gives us an amazing depth of SPR which allows for maximum maneuverability

  Cons:

  It keeps the pot very small when called, which can lead to a smaller pot size with regards to pot geometry. This means we set ourselves up to make less value on our big hands than we would like.

  It gives opponents great odds, especially from the blinds.

  Overall, it is a play I would not suggest using as your standard in a full stacked game. Most games have so many players that play terribly postflop, and we don’t want to miss value from them by slimming the pot geometry2. However, do not hesitate to use it as a steal against tight players, or in special situations which warrant it.

  2 Pot geometry is effectively considering what each bet put, or not put, into the pot does to the final pot size. This is discussed in more detail in chapter 9.

  3. Cal
ling Raises

  Calling raises can often times be one of the more confusing things in a poker strategy. Lots of people have the leak of calling too many raises and getting themselves into trouble postflop. We have to remember our goal with preflop is either to win the pot outright, or set ourselves up for profitable spots postflop. Having a solid cold calling strategy is imperative to winning in all games, so let’s talk about what we need to know.

  First, stack size is incredibly important when considering a cold call. When we are cold calling preflop we are often times doing so because our hand isn’t quite strong enough to 3-bet, but too strong to fold. This means we are usually dealing with mediocre strength hands, like 55 or 98s. As such, we want to call in spots where the effective stacks have more depth and there are greater implied odds. Implied odds are what we expect we can make if and when we hit our hand.

  We cold call preflop for two reasons: either because we have a plan to call and take it away postflop, or because we think we can get paid in the event that we hit. Many people forget these simple reasons and get themselves into situations where they call weak hands without a plan. The hands we call with intentions of getting paid are usually small pairs and suited connectors.

  The Pair Range

  With small pairs we are usually calling because we are set mining. Our goal is to catch a set or better and try to get paid by our opponent. Many players make mistakes in set mining which can severely hinder their win rate. It is important to make sure that stacks are deep enough to make calling these pairs a profitable play. And we want some extra buffer on the math to ensure that the call will make us enough money in the long run.

  In full ring we usually want something like 20x or better in the effective stack. Say at a 100NL game, a player with $90 raises 3x from early position, it folds to us in the big blind, and we have 66 and $100. In the effective stack, to make this a profitable setmine, we would each need to have at least $40 ($2 x 20). If our opponent only had $30 in his stack, we could not call here in an effort to catch a set because the effective stacks are not deep enough.

  We should always make sure that we are getting enough in implied odds to make up for the times that we miss our sets, and the times we hit but do not get paid. Implied odds can be estimated with more clarity when we consider our opponent’s range and frequencies. Certain player types tend to offer lots in implied odds, and other players tend to offer very little, so always be on the look out for lucrative situations when they arise.

  Let’s take a situation where a nit 10/8 raises 3x from UTG with $140 at 100NL. It folds around to us in the CO with 44 and $100. We are getting plenty more than 20x here ($3x20 = $60) so we can consider calling to setmine. If we take a deeper look at UTG’s stats we see he has an EPPFR of 5%, which looks like 77+/AK. This is the perfect kind of range for us to setmine against because his range will catch or maintain strong pairs often postflop. If we run it through Flopzilla, we see that 77+/AK will hit top pair or better almost 45% of the time, hitting top pair almost 7% and an overpair almost 28% of the time. A range that hits that strong postflop offers a lot in implied odds, and thus we should setmine here.

  Notice that the big attraction is the strong ability to get paid postflop. Say we take an example where a 19/16 LAG opens for$2.50 from MP1 and it folds us in the SB with 33. We both have $100 stacks at 100NL and the 19/16 has an MPPFR of 14%. Now, we are getting much better than 20x again so we could consider calling here ($2.5x20 = $50) based on the math. But, if we take a peek at the MP1’s range, we see 14% of hands looks like 22+/AT+/KJ+/QJ. If we see how this range hits flops, we see it hits top pair or better about 32% of the time, with 14% top pairs and 9.5% overpairs.

  We can see that the tight guy was hitting strong hands almost half the time, while this guy is only hitting strong about one third of the time. Not only that, but the top pairs that the tight guy hit would only be AK on an A or K high board. His looser range can hit top pairs, but it could just be QJ on a J high board, or AT on a T high board. This means more overcards that could hit the turn/river and lower implied odds later in the hand. It also means they are less definitive in value, and that he might fold more often, again reducing our implied value.

  This very simple planning and evaluation lets us see which player is more callable. Tighter ranges that have more hands that hit strong will offer more implied odds. Wider ranges tend to offer much less in implied value from competent players. Now, if MP1 were a fishy 42/13 with that same 14% range, then setmining value goes up because the fish is more likely to take one pair hands too far, giving us more value when we hit. But solid players will not usually get involved in larger pots with single pair hands. So calling strictly for implied odds against them is much less valuable.

  The other piece of the puzzle is the plan postflop. There are times when we call preflop with pairs and our goal is to set mine. There are other times when we call with pairs with intentions to call flops occasionally, or even to run a well-timed bluff. Let’s take a hand where UTG+1 open raises, it folds to us in the CO with 9d9s, and we both have $50 stacks at 50NL. UTG+1 is a TAG player running 14/11 over 450 hands. He has an EPPFR of 9% which looks like 22+/AQ+/KQ. We call here, but not exactly with the same intentions as the smaller pairs.

  If we look at how his range hits boards, he will hit strong about 34% of the time, with 14.5% over pairs and 10% top pairs. However, we have added benefit in this hand. For one, we are in position. This means we will get to see how he reacts to board textures, and we can take more informed lines postflop. We also have a bigger pair, compared to a small pair like 22-66, which will beat more of his range postflop, and will retain more showdown value. Having both position and a bigger pair means we can not only try to hit our set, but also react well to our opponent’s actions and possibly peel certain flops.

  We end up seeing a heads up flop of Jd 8d 4s. He bets $2.25. If we look at how he hits this board we see he hits overpairs 16% of the time, sets 8%, and the rest of his range is mostly weak pairs and ace high...stuff that 99 beats. If we know that this opponent is likely to just CB and then give up without a big hand, calling here to get to showdown is a great play. This gives an added benefit to calling pairs preflop and will make us difficult to play against. Always make sure we check our opponent’s ranges and tendencies to see if we can utilize set mining and pair calling preflop.

  The Other Range

  We can also consider calling raises with hands like suited connectors, suited aces, or even suited gappers. These hands can hit powerful hands in numerous hidden ways. However, many players forget when calling with these hands to consider the range of their opponent. Every play we should make will be based off our opponent’s range and frequencies.

  Say a player at 50NL raises UTG with $50 and it folds to us on the button with 64s and $50. The players in the blinds are both tight players that play very straight forward. UTG is a tight player, 11/8 over 400 hands. He has a CB of 79%, a Foldv3B of 58%, and an EPPFR of 4%. If we take a peek at PokerStove, we see 4% of hands looks like 99+/AK, a very tight and powerful range.

  We always want to look at all of our options here. Do we want to fold, call, or raise? Well, a raise isn’t going to be a great play because we don’t expect a lot of folds if we 3-bet. Of the hands he would call with if we 3-bet, they are unlikely to fold to a continuation bet, which makes 3-betting here a pretty ugly play. We could consider folding, but if calling were a profitable play, then we would do that.

  So why might calling be a good play? Well, look at our opponent’s range. It is very strong, and if we think about how his range hits boards, he should maintain a strong hand a large percentage of the time. Look at how we might hit a flop with a hand like 64s. We hit on boards like 64x, 44x, 66x, 753, etc. These are boards where over pairs feel very comfortable. Of course, it doesn’t hit the AK part of his range, but it allows almost 60% of the range to maintain an over pair. This is a great situation, and something we should always consider if we are going to call a hand preflop.r />
  Again, the major things we checked were our opponent’s range, and how it would react depending on whether we 3-bet or flat call. We also checked the players behind us as flat calling here loses lots of value with aggressive squeezers behind us. We also took a look at how we hit our big hands and how our opponent will hit on those boards. When everything looks good, we can flat call and take advantage of the implied odds he is laying us.

  The Multi Way Call (With Evil Intentions)

  So what if the pot goes multi way? Say MP1 open raises, the CO calls, and we are on the button with 98s. The blinds are tight players with no aggressive squeezers and everyone has 100bb stacks. MP1 is a TAG 16/12 with an ATS of 34%, a CB of 72%, and a Foldv3B of 60%. The CO is a weak-loose 30/7 over 40 hands with a Foldv3B of 50%.

  If we run through our options here, we could either 3-bet, call, or fold. A 3-bet isn’t looking like a great option given the weak-loose caller who most likely isn’t going to fold if we 3-bet. Also, if MP1 is paying any sort of attention, he isn’t going to be opening a wide range of hands with the weak-loose player in position on him, which should make MP1’s range a little stronger than average.