Originally Posted by Fknife
Well, if he plays only 1 AK (and folds the rest) for every 1 JJ that he gets dealt, than yeah he will show up with both hands just as often but whats the point?
The point is that most ranges are weighted, and hence you cannot simply plug in hands into pokerstove and calculate your equity when most villains won't play each hand in that range with the same frequency as the combinations would suggest. http://www.thinkingpoker.net/articles/range-thinking/ sheds some light onto this.
So going back to my initial question, the point I was trying to make was that assuming ranges tend to be weighted in some way, wouldn't it be misleading to use pokerstove or add up combos to calculate a player's range?
To put this into perspective, I've played a lot of 2nl and 5nl recently and I tend to check raise bluff with a wide range of hands OTF and generally have a very narrow value range (TPTK+). Someone might mistakenly add up all my possible bluff combos in a certain position and all my value combos and conclude: "Ah, he has just as my bluffing hands in his range as value hands. Therefore I should call." When in actual fact, at these limits I tend to be value checkraising with the nuts far more often than when I'm bluffing, so calling would be -EV for them. Some of the regs who've played a lot of hands against me might instead think, "Ok well I know from showdown history that after this guy check raises OTF he shows up with a bluff 10 percent of the time and a strong value hand the other 90 percent. Therefore I should almost always fold here"
This is the approach I use when I think about ranges of my opponent's hands. I never add up all of the exact combinations for what my opponents might have and mathematically calculate a range based on this, not only does this take far too long at the table but it also misleads you to make the wrong conclusion. All i do is think back about what my opponent tends to showdown after making a certain play and evaluate from that information whether my hand is good. I mean, I'm still a winning player at these limits (12bb/100 over a large sample), so my method seems to be working to some extent.
But since people put a lot of emphasis into the importance of calculating the combos a player can have, I'd like to know if there's an approach to range evaluation and calculating combos that could improve my winrate further, and which also takes into account the unequal distributions in people's ranges.