2 Table $2.5/$5 6-max Zoom NLHE Live Session (part 2)
Posted by Sauce123
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 28 Comments...
27:15 Table 2 JTo on KQ3ss
Could you go into how one would approach designing multiple bet sizings on flops and balancing them? From my understanding, the main ideas are equity retention as ranges are narrowed and card removal effects. The larger you bet the more OOP can fold, thus making his continuing range stronger. As a result we want the hands in our large betting range to be the types of hands that retain robust equity against that continuing range.
Also, is it ever correct to play a very large bet sizing (possibly even overbet range) on flops where we might be at a nut disadvantage? I can think of some instances where we might be at a disadvantage range v range but a very large bet sizing might be nice because of how polarized our betting range will be on that texture. Take for example SB open Hero calls BB. Flop A74r, SB checks. This might be a spot where we could probably afford to use only one large bet sizing (pot-ish) for our range.
Interesting question. Is it really worth splitting your range on the flop as a non exploitative strategy? Complicating the game tree on all future streets for a tiny bit of EV gain on the flop (if all subsequent streets are being played correctly with all of our ranges) seems like overdoing things at this point in time.
I think this would be a video+ length discussion.
Briefly, flop sizing is just a result of the range v range interaction with the board (obviously). The point being that the same texture, say KQ4s, might play very differently given different preflop assumptions. A good example of this point is KQ4s in a RFI vs CC spot versus KQ4s in an UTG vs BB spot. In the former there will be little betting for OOP and a lot of mixing for IP, in the latter there will be lots of small bets for IP.
Hey Ben, I know it's not strictly related to the video but I was wondering what is your thought about the zoom 500 pool. For example what do you think would happen if a player having a winrate at nl5k in today's games would drop down to 500 zoom: do you think he would crush it for 5bb+ or would it take him some time and lots of adjustments to have great results?
Also do you think some the guys playing the highest stakes in mixed games at the moment are also able to somewhat compete with the NLHE best players or do you think there's a gap in thought process, balance and bet sizings?
I think all of the 5knl regs can beat 500 zoom. I don't think most of them would be winning 5bb+ though.
33:15 67s 4 way on 642dd
Could you go into why you chose to bet small multi way? It sounded like you were going to then got bombarded with other spots.
My hand is extremely vulnerable 4way but fairly likely to be the best hand now, blocks top set, and has some equity against calling ranges.
I see that you are playing polarized 3bet strategy from SB. Is there some reason you have decided to or just a personal prefference?
15th minute UTG/BU you CC'ed w 54s is this a play that you would do 100bb's effective too or you are just widening your CC range because of how deep you are with UTG?
19:45 CO/BB you called 3bet with 22. Is it standard to defend all pocket pairs in position vs 3bet in CO? Could you elaborate more on this, please? 22 have more equity vs my hybrid 9% 3bet range compared to hands like 76s/K9s but it really cant be a reason to defend 22-55 and fold hands such as 76s. Sheer preflop equity of a hand vs range should not be enough of an argument to do so imo. Also board coverage for boards with 2-5 should not really be a concern. Or am I missing something?
hi, what did he 3bet from SB that let you think he's polarized ?
It's what he didn't 3-bet that is making him ask the question. ie flat with AJo and QTs
I play a mixed strat from the small blind with most of my continuing range.
I think 54s is probably a fold vs UTG 100bb deep, but maybe a call deeper.
I think it's standard to defend most sized 3bets with pairs. I agree that ranking hands by equity isn't a good measure of their EV vs 3b.
Great video Ben, I think you can make 100 more zoom 500 videos and they still won't go out of fashion. I'm not really convinced on the big 3bet strategy though. Larger sizings -> narrower range -> more often stack-off preflop -> less edge to realize crushing players postflop.
If I had to give one advice to a bad player who for some reason has to play tough games that he is not beating, the advice number one to at least decrease his lose-rate would be: Play less hands, but use larger sizings preflop. 4x open, 5x 3bets, larger 4bets too... Minimalize the postflop game. So it looks kinda counterproductive when you employ this strategy.
I think it would depend on the EV of the different strategy choices compared with the size of opponents' mistakes vs each. My general approach is to try and play the strongest strategy possible while minimizing my own mistakes.
Hey Ben, perhaps it would be easier for you to get HUNL action with the zoom changes. 6max videos are always really good and i wouldn't mind an infinite number of those, but a HUNL vid once in a while would be fun too.
Hi Ben,
Every time you make a video at 500z you single handedly make a really big impact on the current meta. I loaded up some tables last week after a short hiatus, and every other hand I was getting 3bet to like 13x after a 2.7x open. 'Have I missed a Sauce video?', I thought to myself. And low and behold, I had.
Fun content as usual, keep it up.
Nice video as always.
29:00 with 95s, it appears in the video you are deciding on the river between allin and check but clearly you will have at least 1 non-allin betsize on this runout and this hand seems like as good of a bluff candidate as any so I'm surprised every combo of it doesn't get allocated to one of the betting ranges. I'm curious which combos you are bluffing with for a smaller sizing?
I think 2 sizes is fine here, AI and something like pot. AI is something like 66+, and pot is something like AA+.
We should expect more 2PR, more hands blocking 7/6/8/5/3/J in the AI calling range on average I think. In the pot calling range we should prob expect more Kx hands. So, I think the natural idea is to include more AQ/T9/98/QT/AT in the pot range and more 54/59/34 type stuff in the AI range. That's generally a good strategy, though I think there's likely some more mixing involved to avoid counterexploitation. It's also likely too much bluffing to bet all these combos 100%, so randomizing makes sense.
But OOP should be mostly calling turn with QT right? Giving AQ/AT/QT nonzero showdown and slightly improving the EV of bluffing 59 since we unblock it. Especially given KQ=K5 for bb and in fact the worse his kicker the higher its EV for bluffcatching probably?
great vid
Hi Ben, I really wanna know your opinion about our hand (the 68o bwar bord 44K68).
Was a sick jam for me. After make some math (i am not the best on it), and assuming you could change in to a bluff some hands, I think my call was ok. What do you think? I know guys dont use much this line as you said, but this is why I like to use it.
Nice video btw.
time stamp?
11:41 right table
Your call seems fine.
My play doesn't seem particularly good. I should just fold turn, and then fold river.
@49:00 with 77 on 5d7hKd 6s do you think it's important to develop a c/r and c/c range on this board ?
I kind of want to do everything with 77 here. I can see reasoning for betting,c/c & c/r. But I can't really decide on what's more important. I think it´s nice to have some really strong hands in our checking range on the turn, but maybe it´s better to c/r a hand like 89?
In spots like this I sometimes c/r with a crappy flushdraw and tell myself "I would play 77 this way". But then when I have 77 on this board I just wanna bet because I think it's the highest EV play. And then I just end up with a very weak checking range (except the days I´ve watched a video about protecting your checkback range and I end up checking all my nuts), what's your thoughts on this spot ?
Thanks for a nice video
Great video as always, but really came here to say that it's MMA _ sherdog, not MM _ Asherdog btw ;-D
Damn right!
Hi Ben, 5:31 about raising the river with the A9. Do you think he is calling with enough with weaker hands?
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.