$25,000 PLO Final Table (part 3)
Posted by Richard Gryko
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 8 Comments...
Just started the video but please stick with the long explanations and tangents, you give very valuable insight in those that are hard to find . Reminds me of some classic James Obst videos. I like this style because it makes it easier to remember and internalize these concepts when the coach spends a lot of time and explains something in depth rather than spending 30 seconds on a spot and just saying what he would do. Anyway, I really enjoyed the explanation of what influences our button strategy and sizing decision.
Question: I kinda always raise min in Plo tournaments, because that's what I do in nlmtt and because I read Ben lamb interview where that was his recommendation. Am I leaving ev on the table by not being flexible? What are good times to deviate? Btw I limp also in spots, just saying if I do open I open min.
Thank you
Hey, firstly, "classic James Obst" is extremely high praise, so thanks very much for that :), secondly, dont worry, I'm genetically unable to avoid the tangents, no matter how much I might try - my brain just says "no, sorry, too late!" and zooms off like a bicyle down a hill and my mouth has no choice but to follow along and try to keep up.
Re your question, I'd say you're definitely leaving EV on the table - tournaments are so dynamic that its almost impossible for tthe same sizing to have the highest EV in every spot you encounter, especially in the later stages you really need to assess each situation in isolation (this is distinct from "you should play an entirely exploitative and unbalanced strategy" - you can still play a robust strategy, but that strategy should shift in response to stack distribution, proximity to bubble, payout structure, perceived edge over remaining field, just to name a few). My thing with minraising (and this is something I've kinda just thought about, not put extensive time/solver work into, so I'm not presenting this as definitively correct) is that if youre also limping, you have a multi-pronged approach where it seems like both prongs are too close together. I'd rather, personally, at this point in time, play a limp/>2x raise strat as default, if I did somehow play a minraise strat (and there are def times I think its good, for example the spot in this vid where SD minraises btn vs Caldo and JK with 13bb), I'd eliminate limping. Maybe a more precise way to think of it (again, not totally sure on this) is that tournament strategy itself, preflop in particular, is broader and holds within it a wider range of potential tactics than does cash game strategy, and preflop opens of various sizes are an example of that.
Wow thank you, that's extremely helpful.
Would love to see a no limit mtt video from you breaking down an interesting Main Event hand from one of your deep runs. thanks
I kinda think that half the trick to going deep in the Main is avoiding interesting hands :p
I'm actually pretty sure that I only played one noteworthy hand either of the last 2yrs (2006 is a complete blur), and whilst it was incredibly weird (600bb pot late d2 where 95% of the money went in on the river and neither of us had the nuts) it wouldnt lend itself well to technical analysis. Other than that, I just played pretty well - much better last year than this - ran super clean, and got 3bet literally every time I opened AA.
We played on day two of the 10k plo this year for a long time and you played exceptional... I really enjoy this content and these are my favorite PLO videos coming out of RIO atm
One point of interest to me is the preflop raise sizing throughout this FT ..i feel like the larger pot opens force your opponents to defend extremely tight and 3b more often with there stronger hands when they do decide to Vpip which strikes me as a really bad strategy overall because the SPR is so low that it really limits your maneuverability pre and post ..I believe if im understanding correctly youve been advocating smaller opens pre 2- 2.5x but id appreciate if you could elaborate on this from a theory perspective ...it seems to me that minraising is clearly optimal but i see plenty of experienced players still using the pot strategy and i cant understand why
thanks !
Thanks, thats very nice of you on both counts. Yeah that was a fun day - ppl talkative but not incessant, play thoughtful but not slow, allins frequent but not unsuccessful :p
Essentially full pot dominates most other sizings in a cash environment (regardless of stack size) bc it maximises the PFRs immediate fold equity and winnings when the pot is contested in the most common manner (BB defends with a preflop equity disadvantage and equity realisation value <1). In the later stages of an MTT, both of those things are still often but not always true in terms of direct cEV winrate (which ofc is all that exists in a nearly entirely static CG env) - when they arent true, a strategic adjustment is often optimal but the environment is less studied, since ppl havent been putting out content on and around the topic for however many years, so people have less clarity on how to proceed; and even when they are true in terms of cEV winrate, they can be untrue in terms of $EV, which is another concept people have some comprehension of but (especially if they focus on PLO) a less sophisticated understanding of.
So, to directly respond to your question - the (sub?)topic of preflop sizing has greater breadth in MTTs than CGs since the environment is far more dynamic, smaller sizings are more frequently optimal in $EV terms since the general point is to trade cEV for lower volatility with the desired outcome of keeping pots smaller for longer so that you can utilise your skill edge over more betting rounds, to the point where cEV Strat(smallersizings) < cEV Strat (potmash) but $EV (smallersizings) > $EV (potmash). Good players still open for pot for a wide range of reasons, but I'd say the most common are that the event is small to them or is still in the early stages and theyre actively increasing volatility or that they are unused to any other strategy and decide playing the potmash strat and executing it near perfectly gives up less ev than trying to play a smallersizings strat that will be foreign to them.
Scotty Nguyen - Confirmed genius
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.