Leading Flops
Posted by Daniel Dvoress
Video Player is loading.
This is a modal window.
The media could not be loaded, either because the server or network failed or because the format is not supported.
Resume Video
Start from Beginning
Watch Video
10
Loading 16 Comments...
+1 for a part 2, good content. Leading the 2nd texture wouldn't have crossed my mind especially with our given hand. If we think Villain will be over-folding those type of hands we node locked then they'll more often than not (thought not necessarily) be playing a bit more passive post flop as well. Which would allow us to showdown this hand strength or get a fair bit of x/r's through.
Hey Hunter,
@PF, why do we prefer 85o>29s as weaker suited hands were 50% mix but we are calling twogappers at one of the hands ?
@31 I think a rec is not folding 50%+ 88/99d to a XR and also is def not folding QQ/JJ no diamond !
Also I tend to disagree with your conclusion that OOP leading range is merged and because of that IP is raising more vs the donk and overall IP equity is lower after OOP checks (OOP having more nuts compared to mergy <70% equity Kx hands)
Bringing up range explorer to compare the two exploitative locks for OOP donk would be cool. (as range distribution)
1st one was around 8% having a range covering all parts of the spectrum, having twopairs as well.
2nd one which is 70%+ is more polar, betting 60-70% of twopairs and X most of Tx,7x hands.
My point here is that IP range is weaker after OOP X, because OOP donking range is exploitatively tilted towards less equity hands (bluffs) because of IP overfolding vs the donk.
Cheers
Hey,
85o vs 92s: we would always call 92s before 85o, but I took out some of the worst suited hands to account for random 3bets. I don't think removing a couple of the worst suited combos affects the sim much one way or another, and sometimes I just leave everything that is mostly flatted in. This time I decided not to.
31 min mark: He's not exactly a rec, I see him around pretty often and he plays reasonably, but someone I consider to be on the weaker side (at least in the past). So he is definitely thinking about blocking my bluffs, having poor EQR, etc. Still, it's possible I was a little optimistic about what he is folding.
I get what you mean, but I don't think that the case here for two reasons:
I've seen this sort of patterns before without doing node locking, so there isn't a clear overfolding tendency to exploit.
Following the logic of simply exploiting the overfold, shouldn't be be gravitated towards just bluffing very bad/nonsense hands, and trying to realize our equity in other ways with made hands?
+1 for a part two. the X/R with 57o I love it <3
Thanks!
Really great vid this, thanks for making it. Part 2!
Thank you! Part 2 is up.
fantastic video, thanks.
Thank you!
wow, fantastic! Part 2, please.
In the works!
Hi, the hand 86o, which you speak at 20:00, I don't understand why PIO prefer bluffing blocking the BDFD. I understand BDFD are often preferred for cbetting, but they are mostly bluffs so I would be tempted to unblock them.
We increase our immediate FE a little bit when we block the BDFDs. For example on that Tc7h5d board, villain might peel A8hh or A6dd, but not A9ss or A6ss to a x/r. It's a tiny difference, but in spots where you are "allowed" to x/r a total of 1-2 out of 12 combos, a swing of unblocking a couple of combos out of villain's range will make a change in our x/r preferences.
Excellent video.
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.