$.25/$.50 Zoom PLO Live
Posted by Phil Galfond
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 36 Comments...
I don't even know what I want to write but I want to make the first comment :p
5678$ss @ 17:30 on right table: I am thinking that you where explain the hand on the left and also the player pool/types so you did not get a chance to explain the flop check and fold to delay cbet from CO.
I am curious if other players playing SSPLO would bet this hand on the flop. I normally like the approach of bet when checked to and think that I start to fire on this flop to protect my equity. I am not loving life when raised but don't think that SSPLO players are bluff raising or semi bluffing enough to punish me for having this hand in my bet when checked to.
I just hate a lot of turns that do not improve my hand. Any card T+ makes better straight draws and combo draws more likely, and diamonds and spades and board pairing cards are frustrating to play also.
Also would this hand be fine to 3b to iso raise against a CO open. I am guessing that we flat here because CO is only 50bbs deep but is this the kind of hand that we want to get HU to improve our two pair outs/ and remove some hands from the blinds that could dominate our draw?
like before watching !
Hi Phil, thanks for video. I have a question regarding stats. Could you say how helpful you think is "Won when saw flop %" and "Went to showdown %". I see WWSF ranging from 40 to 50%. Could this make a difference in your decision if you saw low wwsf or high wwsf?
I've personally never used the WTSD and WWSF stats, so I don't have a good grasp of how meaningful they are.
I've watched videos where the coach explains some decisions based on those stats, so I know that others find them very useful.
Hi Phil,
Occasionally I play in games with players similar to these. Personally, I would think that teaching more of the 'tricks' you mentioned you don't like to teach would help us more than trying to teach the same theoretical things you talk about in the elite videos.
It's tough for me, because I want for you guys what I wanted for myself: to become a stronger player, to build a roll, and to be able to massively increase hourly rate by moving up to mid-stakes and eventually high-stakes.
Teaching tricks may improve your immediate win-rate quite a bit, increasing your bankroll, but I don't think it's the best way to think about poker as you move up through the stakes.
I will work harder to throw more in when I see fit. Just promise you'll watch my elite vids once you're moving up to mid-stakes :)
The frequency of turn k/r semibluffing is pretty low at these stakes. Until you get punished for thin turn protection bets you're losing EV checking back and playing river guessing games.
That makes sense. My only "argument," if you could even call it that: even if they won't k/r bluff, their folding frequency may be low enough and/or their value k/r high enough that I'd still rather check back and avoid the risk of being blown off my equity if the upside (FE) is minimal.
You seemed to intimate that you underrate having 'initiative', and intimated you'd elaborate at some later unspecified time, I was hoping that time had come.? Also, knowing you have a philosophy background I'd wanted to ask you for some time if you're a dualist? A one word answer will suffice, I'm sure you're busy.
The time will come soon.
Re Dualism: I'm undecided, which is a boring answer, I know :(
Btw, you're definitely right about the advantage of betting a polarized range, and it's a great counter to the argument I'd make. I'll see if I can address that when I cover initiative.
Hi, let's say there is a 70/12 in the bb. He has a low fold to cbet and tends to showndown hands light. It's folded to me on the bu. My steal bet size is 2.2x. The way i adjust is to steal with a tighter range but with the same bet size. Do you think it's more + EV to 3x or even pot it?
My philosophy is, whenever someone is making a very large mistake against my strategy, I'll usually not experiment with my play.
70/12 against a btn 2.2 (at a high stl frequency) doesn't sound like he's lighting money on fire. It may even be good.
To your question though: You can't know if a different sizing will be more +EV until you know how he will react to it.
Sure, if he played the same against a 3x, tighten up and 3x it and enjoy the extra edge, but we won't know how he'll react until we try.
I'd suggest experimenting enough to get a sample that gives you SOME idea if it's worth investigating further. For example: if he starts folding 55% of the time over a sample size of 20, you can be pretty sure he's adjusting by tightening up (though then you have to decide if that's a more +EV situation for you than the previous one). Another example: if over 20 hands, he's folded 35%, you definitely want to keep investigating and get a larger sample, so that you can see if he hasn't adjusted at all (or has under adjusted, in your opinion).
I would also like to hear why initiative is overvalued. In my opinion it can be a pretty big advantage and from what i've read about poker theory the player who bets polarized range on the river into the range of bluffcatchers can make it profitable no matter how villain responds. So from theory point of view there will be spots when initiative creates +ev spots.
Even after 3 minutes of this video my mind was blown. They way he talked about having the second nut blocker, bombing the turn and expecting a raise from the nut flush. When he doesn't get a raise he expects him to not have the nut flush so its a good chance to bomb the river knowing he doesn't have the nuts. Seems so simple, but i would never have thought about it like that without him saying it.
don't try that shit on jacko or steve mate, it won't work ;)
When you fold 22 on the AJ2rTA board to a river lead, you say it is *possible* villain has KQ and doesn't know what he is doing. Folding 22 here at $50 is probably fine but I think that playing KQ like this in SB's shoes is somewhere between fine and mandatory some %. To be clear, I think you probably have more KQ yourself than AT/AJ/AA when you bet the turn, even when he has KQ. Also, you aren't going to be bluffing much on this card so check/calling isn't an attractive option. On the turn, check/calling KQ was an attractive option since your entire betting range frequently follows through on brick rivers and protection is not a great concern.
I've been playing some .25/.5 on Merge. Compared to zoom the player pool is way less TAG regs, way more loose fish. Isolating doesn't really work - you just get a multiway pot most of the time. In games like this, in BN/CO I think it makes sense to split your continuing range. Pot with really good hands that want to build a big pot, limp behind with speculative hands that can play profitably getting a good price. Does this make sense?
Makes perfect sense to me. Only build big pots with big hands, and if there's a good chance pots will go multiway (which there often is), make sure you have a good multiway hand.
You could experiment with 3betting the loose/bad players with all playable hands. Playing HU pots (with reasonable hands) will allow you to better exert your skill advantage. However, when those pots start going multiway, you're throwing away money by 3betting 9875ss.
Cool. I find it's often even more extreme at live PLO. In the live games I play in, 3bets often get cold-called in multiple spots. That makes me want to 3bet a pure value range of the top x% of hands, but it does get a bit tricky because there are some players in the game who are capable of reading hands, and sometimes I'm quite deep with them, and it's pretty obvious my 3betting range is going to be quite high card-heavy. I kind of compromise by sometimes 3betting the prettiest low-mid hands, e.g. 9876ds. Have you played in these kind of live line-ups -- deep, loose, mostly fishy, with some tough opponents? Is there anything to do besides playing solid/value-oriented?
Excellent video. It's really nice to see a video which focuses on exploiting other players rather than the much more fashionable balance and GTO.
Thanks for the comments and questions, guys!
I'm traveling and on my phone, so I skipped questions that require me to watch the video for now.
When things settle down a bit, I'll get to those too.
But, but, but, but I was first, doesn't anyone respect the cue any more? Just kidding Phil, thanks for taking the time for all the replies. :)
Hi Phil. Question about postflop play: I see you do alot of checking, betting and calling. Not so much raising. It would be nice if you could talk about those spots more in the future. 100bb deep I mostly raise very strong draws or made hands because very often we are playing for stacks in a raise situation. But this makes me very 'honest'/obvious I guess. I dislike raising in marginal situations where it feels bad to give up if called after investing so much money in the pot. I feel like I should raise more, but I don't know where. Does this make sense?
47:12 co opens Btn flats you fold A783 suited to A. Even though disconnected given that it will likely go 4way and BB is prob not squeezing often is a suited A valuable enough to call in a high SPR multiway pot? In my loose deep live games I even find myself often limp/calling, and calling opens with suited A disconnected hands because action often goes 4way+. Do you think I am overvaluing the suited A?
Regarding your one day discussion of initiative, I have also felt it is heavily overrated. It isnt even an intrinsic aspect of poker. What I mean is, position, equity, skill advantage. These are all definite characteristics of a hand.
Initiative just tells you who was the aggressor last street. Assuming we are deep enough to raise, initiative is not that significant and can change on a single street infinite times unlike any of the above characteristics. By raising or leading or betting when checked to we regain the initiative.
Players feel more comfortable playing with the initiative because people often over fold to the initiator given most people don't raise bluff enough in general on the later streets.
Having the initiative can sometimes be a bad thing as well. If you are oop and have initiative once you check you are most often capping your range and/or defining your range to be draw heavy. If you don't have initiative your oop check has more slow plays, draws, strong hero calls.
I could go on more but this isn't the spot. I'd certainly like to listen and contribute to this topic once you discuss it.
I've also thought a lot about initiative lately, as a side-effect of working on playing better OOP in general. As long as the opposition underdefends against it, it's valuable to have. And since many players make mistakes like overbluffing early and struggle with capped ranges later, when they have it, it's also valuable to play against. If that makes sense to say.
Guess what I'm saying is that you can have the best of both worlds, using the concept of initiative both as a weapon against the meek, and as an attack point against players that overuse it. Reciprocity, as Tommy Angelo would say. I've begun checking more with initiative than I used to, and I've become more aware of aggressor mistakes in others, as I've worked on correcting my own mistakes.
Hi Phil think you were winning a lot small pots, but in the big ones your range were inferior, I remember the hand you 3bet Bluff the flop. This move could be useful at PL50 with reads, without I believe is to optimistic expect the villain are weak there.
Could be just variance, very nice video Btw.
I'd like to see Phil do a theory video instead of live play, love lsitening to your thinking.
As for some player types at these stakes; although it really helps to have reads as often you may get a weak tight nit or a calling station nit for instance. So stats are a bit meaningless at times. Anyway here's some of my thoughts.
Calling stations - cant fold/get it in bad - adjustments bluff less, fold to raises without nutty hands, play hands that will dominate their ranges.
Nits - tight ranges, fold alot pre - adjustments, fold pre to their opens without a speculative hand, so nice rundowns for instance. Steal their blinds always.
Weak tags - fold alot without nutty hands. - adjustments - play hands in position and use aggression. Fold without a hand to aggression.
Maniacs - quite rare players hyper aggro with wide ranges - adjustments - play hands that will dominate their range, dont call flops and fold on later streets, pick a hand and go with it, get reads to see how they player later streets, eg never triple barrel without hand? how react to raises?
Lags - aggro 3betters/aggro post flop - adjustment - dont have one on your left. Also attack them IP as they generally have a weak range. Play passively when you hit a hand, as they barrel often. Call down lighter
Really appreciate this video, especially since you played from a an exploitable perspective wich i thinks its better and low stakes. Watting fro more like this.
In a 9 handed loose PLO game, what's a good calling and 3 to 4 bet range? Also, should I still be calling as loosely on the button? What's a good calling range? 9 handed seems like a different approach.
-43:30 How is this not a clear value bet on the river, we have a 3rd nuts there ?
Hi, its very hard play and comment at same time, would be much better if u can record your session and just comment after... but twice work sure... =)
I really wish there were more at these stakes. I would really love if it it wasn;t zoom either. I want to see how you play with a history against these type players. Please Please put some more PLO small stakes out. Even your coaches! Thanks Phil!!!
-Nightly
This would be very helpful. Also to see how you get reads and use these reads to exploit opponents tendencies.
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.