$2k 6-Max PLO SCOOP Live Session (part 5)
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 20 Comments...
Just think it's unwatchable on a lot of screens (like my macbook air), I have to concentrate too hard to see it (all). Trying to help ur business. I might be the only 1 elite with that low of an attention span, or maybe i just want to watch videos in a relaxed way since concentrating on my poker job is tough enough. so yeah. Think 100 dollars is overpriced in my mind, i have complaints about lots of pro's. I always enjoyed watching Galfonds video's he helped me learn PLO, thanks for that.
Good luck with any future edeavafkejkvnakkrae endauvors.
But seriously Galfond 100 dollars was too much for me in terms of EV and thanks for ur plo vids, you are the best teacher around here. More than 4 tables in too much for me personally and I can't watch this particular series on my macbook.
Hope this all helps you. Thanks
We get it. There is plenty of videos on here that are 1-4 tables. I actually really like this format so you can see what kind of reads and thought processes he's using in real time. These videos are better than any other site in the business and are well worth $100 a month. What you learn here pays for the membership, if not more.
could you provide us with a video player where i can pop up the video?and resize it as i desire?
i agree with this, we really need something like that.
Phil, your time bank sweats in this video are absurd! It makes me nervous to even watch.
Im quite sure that whole video was designed to target you in some inception/mk ultra type fashion. First traumatize you with the constant last second timebank actions. Then implant the thought into you "Im checking marginal to you". Pretty advanced
Watching him made me feel less of a failure for my attempt at a live video. albeit mine was even more a disaster given I had no table ninja auto bank.
35:00 The KJ96sss hand. On river, I think its best to c/f. As you said you have so few bluffs and you block most of everything but NFD. I dont think he has enough bluffs to x/c either. It owuld have to be AsA!ss and that hand may fold turn and also may just check river.
40:30 Ive asked this question before but how do you approach a leading range in spots like this on turn? with 67, QJ, bluffs etc. Do you have any leading range at all? Lets assume SPR is large and ranges are fairly wide given I think that as ranges get narrower and SPR is lower leading becomes almost mandatory often.
Seems like the range that gets it in on flop at SPR 5 will have us on the 38-45% side a good amount(had villain 3bet 12% and GII with AA+gutter>,OP+FD,NFD,PR+2NFD>,WR+FD,FD+OE+PR). I did run that on PPT on OR so I may be slightly off on the equities since the pre flop ranges might be constructed differently.
Are the folds we're getting from villain bet/fold range that significant (in terms of equity) and frequent enough that it makes up for the small amount we're losing when called?
Like, we have good equity vs his range, and it seems like the jam is +EV and guarantee's that we realize 100% of our hands equity, but I'm curious how you think that compares to EV(check/call) when we have cards like the J,2,4,6,7 to potentially mess around on.
Agree that raising flop seems like good option. Phil mentioned that it sucks to get it in vs AAss but it seems that flatting doesn't fix that issue. We aren't folding when we make a flush so the times he has AAss and we flat we get $ in better on flop but $ in dead when we hit flush; overall still a dog. Whereas if we get it in vs that hand on flop we just compartmentalize our equity differently as all our $ in as a ~30% dog in one lump. Basically we just are coolered when he has AAss Imo and we shouldn't formulate our line around that scenario but instead around the portions of his range that don't play themselves.
If we had bluffing opportunities on other cards or were able to call call fold unimproved that would change things. However against AAss he isnt folding any turn and I'd have to re check stacks but I doubt SPR is high enough to xc xc bluff. Last thing worth mentioning is that it would be a disaster to xc xc xf unimproved if our Jx is best hand.
I'm actually swinging somewhat back towards calling camp. I think all the above is still valid except there are some turns that go check check and or we can bluff certain non spade runouts which are all big pluses for calling. A lesson to myself to not just post running thoughts.
I still think river is xf though as played.
The way I see it, we have 43.5% equity against a range of WR,
2PR>, NFD, 3NFD>+TP>, OP+FD, 2NFD+(MP>, OE), which is
around the top 28.5% of villain's flopped hands. And if he's
betting some more stuff with equity/blockers, for instance (As, Bs,
dryOE, dryGD+*s, dryMP+*s, dryBP+*s, dryTP+(Bs, Ms))-(WR, 2PR>,
NFD, 3NFD>+TP>, OP+FD, 2NFD+(MP>, OE)), then there's an
additional 21% bluffs which have 35% equity against our hand but
which fold vs our raise. I don't really like the idea of giving
that part of his range a free one and letting him play great on
spades etc.
Spose he bet .65 pot and SPR is 4.5.
Shove, EV=
1.65pots*.42+.58(5.5pots*.435)-.58(4.5pots*.565)=.693pots+1.34-1.47pots=+.56pots
CallEV(100%checkdown)=.535(1.65pots)-.465(-.65pots)=.883-.30=+.58pots
So, our indifference is when .58R=.56, or when R=~96.6%
I don't think we'll realize that much equity by calling here
I think I start calling around SPR5.5-6.5 and definitely call at 7+.though, because our range is capped and more than half the deck gives
us between 30 and 50% equity (and no card gives us less than 30%
equity so we can safely fold), and many of our highest equity cards
are not big bluffing cards for villain.
Note: for completeness my model has us shoving around (2PR>, OP+FD, TP>+(3NFD>, WR), MP>+(NFD, 4NFD>+SD), PR>+(NFD, 3NFD>+NGD), WR+(PR>, FD), PR+OE+FD), or ~23% at this SPR, which makes villain's flop play reasonable.
Awesome breakdown Ben.
This really puts some numbers to the ballpark trade offs I was laying out. Very cool way of analyzing this spot. What notation or software is that? Omaha ranger? Odds Oracle?
Ben,
Is there a mistake in your formula ? 1.65pots*.42+.58(5.5pots*.435)-.58(4.5pots*.565)
Should be 5.5 pots in the last brackets as well, no?
Hi, thanks for the analysis. Is there somewhere where I can look up all the abbreviations you use and where each part of the equation/model is explained? Thanks.
omaha ranger
I can assure you I wasn't slowrolling you, Phil
...As in I was masstabling and stacking tables---->other tables required action first
Lol, accussing Johan for slowrolling, he is not that kinda reg, should rather focus on cleaning up the cheats multiaccounters making videos for RunItOnce.
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.