$1/$2 WSOP.com Live Play (part 2)
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 14 Comments...
Where is part 1?
Here's a link to it!
Hi, Phil. Thanks for the vid. I think your exploration of bigger bet sizing and full potting has been very valuable. As a player returning to online poker after being away for years because of BF, reconfiguring this aspect of my game has often been challenging and confusing in terms of what's optimal.
I'm hoping that you can make another HH video soon where you bring up more situations in which a full pot bet is more the optimal sizing. Maybe something similar to the vid where you discussed varying bet sizes in 3bp's IP/OOP, but for more run of the mill and smaller (single-raised) pots?
A question also!:
The 8456ds hand at around 49:30 - We decline to bet the turn, I believe because villain had just slow-played a hand on the more passive side. So betting turn opens us up to getting raised off our hand, which we want to avoid: is that correct?
My question is: isn't there value in us betting to protect our 2p against hands like QJ9K, AQTx, etc. to try and prevent them from drawing to better 2p OTR?
Thanks!
Thanks nhx!
While we can get protection with our hand, I think the risk isn't worth the benefit. By betting, we're hoping to avoid him hitting a ~20% equity hand, and putting a large bet into the pot in order to prevent that just isn't thrilling.
If we take a step back and think about our range and how we want to play this spot, we would rather make him fold those hands when we have a weaker holding or a strong draw that isn't currently best, so we should bet a range that includes some weaker hands/draws and then our strong hands that want to put more money into the pot. Middling hands like 8654 here play better as checks.
Hey Phil, please excuse me for the wall of text, I just feel that I have such a massive opportunity being able to communicate with the world's most famous successful PLO player, so I have to take it while I can.
I've recently gotten into PLO after having small success at NLHE over the past 6 years (able to beat 100nl). I've really enjoyed PLO after only having played it for the past few days after noticing my passion for hold'em dwindle slightly, and I feel like I'm picking up PLO super quick as the complexity of the game really satisfies my mind more and I'm able to play much more engaged, in turn bringing already a decent winrate (I'm already beating 25nl over 3 thousand hands). I'm slightly torn as although enjoy PLO, I'm unsure of whether I should focus on what I THINK (please correct me) makes more money in the long-run: NLHE MTTS > NLHE CASH > PLO CASH. My thought process is that MTTS is the most popular and arguably softest form of poker. However, I don't enjoy 25bb poker. I can however say that my enjoyment is in the order of: PLO CASH > NLHE CASH > MTTS.
Basically, which game should I be playing based on my concerns (not necessarily my current beliefs)?
In PLO and poker in general, what is your general approach to success, in terms of when I should play, how my mental approach to learning should be, how much I should play.
Also, if you could please make a summary of which main resources my learning should come from, and a loose time ratio for each. I would GREATLY appreciate it. I'm currently unaware of which solvers or resources (apart from RIO of course :)) I should be using to improve at a rapid pace. How important is it that I have a few friends to run hands past that I'm unsure about?
Thank you very much for your attention to these video comments.
And great video, I thoroughly enjoyed it and would love if you kept up this fast-paced practical format.
James
Hi, James. I'm glad you liked the video!
As far as approaches to success, to improving and studying, to choosing what games to play, the answer is going to vary greatly from person to person. We all learn differently and are all driven by different things.
Personally, I have always done best playing and studying what I'm most passionate about, with the quality of the games/opportunities coming second.
I think you'd do well to pose some of these larger questions in our forums. Everyone has their own beliefs and approaches, and maybe you can find one which resonates most with you.
GL!
@ 27 mins... am I missing something or does this min raise explanation not make sense ...???
I think Phil meant that if he minraises to 58 and somebody else behind calls then original bettor can go all in. Then Phil can't repot, which is obviously very bad for us. This wouldn't be the case if op had 58 or more chips
What Justis said :)
Thanks, Phil Galfond! That actually clears up quite a bit on a topic I've always wondered about: how you're able to so clearly differentiate between what hands need protection and when to check or bet them.
Like if we had a set here it's worth betting for the pure strength of the hand. Or if we had say bot pair/gs, betting to remove him from his perch in equity is also worthwhile. But betting a middling hand here when we're already doing well equity-wise can create for difficult turn/river spots - or create pots that are bigger than this hand really wants to play. Is that about right?
Exactly right, but it's not as easy and clear for me as you make it sound. I've been working recently on trying to put less stock into protection, as I think it's something I have weighted a bit too heavily in my in-game decision-making process. Protection sounds nice in the moment for hands like this, but if we're using weaker made hands to balance out the strong portions of our range (and giving up with some draws or relative air that we could profitably put in their place), we're wasting the value of these hands.
Very nice again and this tutorial video format with 2 tables on switch is perfect! PER-FECT!:)
Was wondering if you could do a video on tells, that might be worth more money though;)
Phil Galfond I wanna to tell you Thank you ! So much for your explanation and so brutally honest For example when you a play you make the play but you are also say. It might not be correct or you say I’m not sure even if the play work this 1 time only in these video for a newbie who starting out. When I see a teacher / coach do a play I alway think it 100 percent correct but I like the fact that you alway left. “ Maybe “.” It depends “. Answers on the Table not every play is 100% Thanks again,,,
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.