Great vid, but you could improve the sound quality a bit. ^^

Come on man, a new mic shouldnt be that expensive!

Nice video, I think seeing actual hands that you played would be a much more helpful than the toy game stuff though. I find that kind of difficult to wrap my head around. Hand histories would be really useful.
thanks

Great video but highly agree with Taiga; - it's a great starter but it is much more valuable imo to see a confirmed good winning player apply this in game and in which spots this plays out exactly.

OVERALL I feel that most often taking in blockerconsiderations usually is kind of the "tip the scales" data point in close spots..
In most spots against usual fields I usually assume that looking at these concepts and looking for blockers can very quickly lead to over(bluffing/calling/folding) if u become blind for the more obvious exploitable tells and signs the situations gives you.

For me this is kind of being torn apart between "okay Ima be GTO here" and Nicks (Howard) approach of just confronting the 'reality of the frequencies of the pool'...
Always interesting to think about it; the practical application in my very humble opinion is limited often.

Great Vid Tyler! Thank you much! Looking forward to a HH review applying this concept.

hey Tyler can't understand which video you're recommending about 1-Alpha subject at the start of this video. ty

great vid.
do the bluffs that are bluff catchers make more cuz opponent will overfold due to us not having enuf bluffs? therefore, they do yield some of the pot instead of being 0ev?

Great vid. In the second example, why isnt the bettor betting all his AA and KK but checking some frequency?

Would love to see another video that expands on your last and imo most important part of his video. tailoring our best sizing to 2x to make a bad bluff into a good bluff.

Hey Tyler - great video! Regarding the second example (too few bluffs), two questions: (1) why does the bettor only bet 90% of his value hands? (2) it looks like he bets 40% of his medium-strength hand (88) - is there a way to calculate that by hand (the way you can calculate alpha or optimal bluff frequency as the pot odds offered, in a nuts vs. air toy game)?

Re: #1, I suppose this illustrates another difference between this example and the pure nuts vs. air toy game. In the latter, position is irrelevant yes? But here it looks like because OOP doesn't have a purely polarized range, he now has to protect his checkback range (because in a pure nuts/air game IP would never bet JJ-99 because he's only called by worse). Is that the right way to think about it?

24:50. What makes the K, Q, and 8 the best bluffs besides it's paired with the Ad. What makes them superior the AdJo?? Is it just an arbitrary genesis into the bluffing range to have the proper ratio? What calling range are you ascribing to "him?"

That's what I initially thought, but is an 8 not blocking the folding pocket pairs, too?

You know what? That makes a ton of sense. I was watching you all night and drinking -- which I rarely do (drinking) -- while my girlfriend was showing me pictures of turkeys in Casper, Wyoming. She thought, you were from Alabama, too? I was like this dude is way too smart to be from here.

I was one rewind and one less beer away from saving you a question in this thread.

Hi Tyler, at 34:26, how is our calling frequency influenced when villain villian holds a blocker to our calling and folding range, at 34:26. Can you elaborate on how have you come to the number 92.5, and the thought process behind.

Also do solvers these days take into account how might villains bluffing hands influence their own range, and adjust the calling frequency accordingly?
Thanks for this exceptional video.