FMAE,

I don't really have a strong opinion about checking behind hands with a lot of nut potential. I think my river bet does much better against strategies which never or rarely check back QJ, KQ, QT, QQ etc. 4ST runouts to the Q/K are very rare here, so I don't think it's obviously a mistake for villain to arrive at these runouts with a range low in 1cd straights.

In Btn vs BB situations we can get more out of line here with overbetting non nut hearts because BB has a lot of hands like J7o or Qh9c in his own range. I'd sometimes overbet bluff any 9h-Kh combo, and occasionally some gutters/OEs.

I wouldn't overbet too often in this spot though, in general we want to target the weak 1cd heart hands and/or flopped pairs, and we still get value betting smaller for value because a lot of flushes wait till the turn to XR.

Rubinho,

On the river we'll want to value bet 2PR+ against almost all opponents, and often KT+ on brick rivers supposing villain XR fairly often on earlier streets. We'll be bluffing with a variety of unpaired hands Ax through 9x, including stuff like QJo, 98o, etc. We'll also X behind flop some percent with these hand classes. In general, the Ac7x combo is bad to triple barrel bluff because Axcc or A+pair is a large part of villain's XC XC XF range.

When the 4FL arrives we can bluff with hands like A4o, A5o, and Qxs/XYs that turned a gutter and decided to cb. We can also consider triple barreling QJo through T9o against some opponents some %.

Ben, your reply to Rubinho is very confusing. I think you may have remembered the board incorrectly, unless I am missunderstanding your post. In A7 hand the board was 23Q6, so I'm not sure how you can be value betting KT+ or bluffing QJ? Apologies if I'm being dumb.

Yea you're right, I get Kx and Qx mixed up a lot. The same ideas still work though.

Hey Ben, thanks for this video..

Im intrested on this hand too. Personally i would tend to bluff the river with the Ac blocker, but its true what you say that a big part of his xc xc xf range are hands with Ac. But if i dont use the Ac, ill be affraid to get rebluffed by any Ac.

Could be this a good reason to not overbet the turn, and wait to the river for make the overbet with this bluff ?

Juan,

I wouldn't worry too much about the Ac. Villain's XR bluffing region is much smaller than his XF or XC region, so any hand that blocks both XR and XF regions is likely not good to bluff with since the XF happens so much more often.

I really appreciate your responses, I think it's insanely valuable that we get to ask questions to a player of your caliber. Thanks Ben.

Ben at 11:50, if u dont c/r here, since board isn't great for overall range, do you ever c/c with Jhi? i tend to struggle with this spot because if we miss its hard to win the pot unless he gives up river and has hand worse then Jhi.

Good question Raphael.

Ac1d's play seems to favor the CB/X/Call line more than most other regulars, which I think is a good thing. We saw this on the paired A hi board, where he checked behind AJ on something like AQ3r3x, vs btn vs BB. This supports the idea that he's cbetting a fairly strong 64%, then polarizing further on his turn 45%, while leaving some TPish type hands in his CB/X range to bluffcatch rivers or value bet when checked to.

JdTx is going to end up being J hi quite often on rivers, and the times it remains J hi I'm going to fire a +EV bluff with it after turn X/X. Acid's strategy of calling river more often will still usually give me a +EV river bluff, but the combination of the flop call, followed by the lowered EV on the river bluff, might not sum to a +EV flop float. I think against a good player like Acid I should generally keep my flop floating frequency fairly in line, especially when I'm in the big blind with a loose calling range. After seeing his play throughout the entirety of the video, I'd say my float is likely -EV, or very near neutral EV, and that Acid's SRP play is quite nice against a player on the floaty side like me.

You can model the relationship between IP's CB/X/Call frequency versus barrel frequency to look at how it effects the EV of floats. For example, suppose he cb full pot, and db turn 2/3 for full pot, but when he gives up he always folds to a riverbet. In this case, JT is basically neutral EV, supposing it's indifferent on the turn cards that improve it and it's barreled, and the IP player's cumulative "continue" (i.e., whether he barrels or calls) is 2/3. But if we split the continue frequency down to 1/3 barrel, and add a 1/3 river call, things quickly get worse for OOP's JT. Suppose (for simplicity) we bluff river for pot when turn goes X/X. Also, let's suppose we improve 25% of the time and don't have to bluff, and our EV is full pot. Now, our EV is 1/3(he bets and we lose one PSB)+2/3(.25 we improve and win one PSB)+2/3(.75 we bet river)(2/3 he folds)+2/3(.75 we bet river)(1/3 he calls we lose 2 PSB), summing to -.33+.1675+.34-.33, or -.15 PSB on our flop call, given the same continue frequency for villain. Though this toy model doesn't delve into specifics, I think it adds some clarity to the idea that villain's CB/X/Call frequency varies negatively with the EV of floating flop for OOP.

I should add that CB/X/Call frequency for IP varies positively with the EV of calling medium strength hands like weak pairs for OOP, so it isn't like Acid's line is the most important aspect of IP play.

I use default PT4

When we've put in one 40% bet postflop it's not really a reasonable line to fold turned mid pair in 90% of cases.

I think he just chose to bluffcatch because he chops with another A.

In the antes format we get much better pot odds on anything we do, so we have to play a lot looser. It seems like limping is better with antes because often we're getting 5:1 on a limp, so if we deny our opponent the ability to raise 70+% of the time, we can probably play a lot of hands profitably for a limp.

@33:33, We can float more weak hands because the EV of calling our stronger hands like TP is much higher than on a board like 973ss. Villain's barrel frequency falls and play gets more passive, so we can showdown more easily and occasionally make the backdoor nuts or bluff river after X/X. Don't get me wrong though, this hand is probably a neutral EV X/C or very close to it, and could be slightly -EV.

A simpler way to think about it is just that we require a weaker absolute hand strength hand to call on a dry board because there are less hands out there. It's the same sort of concept that we can call weaker hands on the flop when preflop ranges are wider.