3 Table $2.5/$5 6-Max Zoom NLHE Live Session (part 1)
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 47 Comments...
Perfect timing.
you seem to have gone to a whole new level with your NL game in the last couple of months. felt like you had maybe not been in the lab as much as your main focus has been PLO for the past while, and perhaps some regs had caught up with you, or almost had. WRONG.
some really cool lines in this video, the A2o hand for example at 30:00 i probably check raise 100% of the time on the flop, but you just calling there strengthens your check/call range a ton and allows you to do some cool stuff on later streets like check raise for value when villain thinks his 1.5x pot bet almost never gets raised, and is wanting you to turn your 5x in to a bluff so he can snap you off.
on that A9dd @34:00 do we jam our boats and raise to less than all in with our A high and perhaps Q high flushes? because you seemed surprised that villain didn't jam K2, but i thought it looked like we were repping TT ourselves so jamming there seems pointless. but if, as i said, we raise to less than all in with flushes and raise to all in with boats then he presumably just jams any boat he has when we raise to smaller sizing.
i kinda feel like just now a lot of players at 1/2, and presumably 2.5/5 are playing pretty similarly because of the introduction of PIO, but this video clearly shows just how wonky and cool it is possible to play post-flop. nice vid, can't wait for the next one!
Great compliment Demon, thank you much. I have been playing more NLHE lately both at 2/5 and at high stakes which has hopefully increased the quality of my videos.
I want to be clear that xc the Ad2c @ 30 is going to be a mixed strategy and you correctly point out that xr this combo 100% of the time is much better than xr it 0%.
@34 on review I agree with your comment. It's a close decision (and likely a mixed strategy) with K2 on this action because I have so much TTT in my range. Keep in mind that I have a ton of incentive to jam TTT myself, so when I fail to jam OOP might be playing too weakly if he gives me credit for such a TTT heavy range that K2 isn't a value jam for $100 more or w/e. That's a difficult read to make in game however, I'm not even sure what size I would have chosen with TTT in that spot other than that I know I would sometimes jam.
hello, Ben. 21:00 top left table with A10o. What was your reason for calling flop raise if you gonna fold on almost every turn expect A or 10 ? Seems like even if he is bluffing he would continue on turn ?
Villain is risking around $25:$31, so we want to not fold >55% here especially given the relatively dynamic board and our flop continue region being very call heavy and the fact we begin the flop with a big EV advantage. Is AxTd a continue? Not sure, someone Pio it for me. I feel pretty confident it's close to 0EV, but would likely be a fold CO vs BB, and certainly HJ vs BB....
Roughly speaking it's FH>trips>big OP> FD> PP > purr> big Bfd diamonds and/or backdoor ST > big Bfd spades and/or backdoor ST > As > two overs to 9 with BFD and/or SD value, e.g., AxTs > any kind of BFD with ST potential > some kinda decent high cards w/out BFD blocker > some kinda decent high cards with BFD blocker = some kinda crappy BFD combos.
I know that's a long paragraph but I think we're on like a bottom 60% or so hand vs XR and it should be kind of close. Maybe I'm off here though.
Here's a quick Pio I ran. Game tree is pretty skeletal, mostly one B66 size on each street and then I approximated the flop sizings used in the hand. OOP XR 29% in this sim and IP defends 68%, with AxTd being a mix but mostly call. Threshold here ends up being like AT-A8 hi, KxTs, Q7dd, that sort of thing, so I think I was pretty close with my guess.
Why do you think IP should be defending over 1-A in this sim?
Jd- Cause all the OOP hands benefit from protection (IP folds) and have EV against continues (which are mostly calls).
17:24 do you ever have nuts in this spot? Or just using this blocking bet in 3b pot always as a block? Also not worried using these blocking bets against better regulars, that they can start raising those as a bluff? Or do you think people tendencies are that they just aren't raising rivers as a bluff?
Yes, on flushing rivers in this spot we do a lot of block betting with range. It's very exploitable to be capped at 1PR if we block, as IP can raise all 2PR+ and many bluffs.
Hey Ben
21:00 AT why is having the Ten of diamonds good? Aren't you blocking some T8,JT types that would x/r with the bdf against your small bet?
23:40 AK isn't your sizing on the turn going to leave an awkward spr otr? Or does it not matter that you'll be shoving like 35% pot?
34:25 9T you say he should be betting this board almost every time, so like 1/3 pot size?
@21: I agree with you, Td is bad
@23:40: The computer seems to like this betsize even if you give it the option to shove, but I agree it feels awkward.
@34:25: I suspect it's a mix of ~1/3 and occasional bigger sizes.
Yo,
Min22, AdJc on 4 flush, You say we block the J, why is that important, do we block Jhigh flush? Does leading the river doesnt weaken our checking range too much?
J in general seems to make his river range bet a bit more often because it blocks JJ which X behind (though it blocks JxJd which often bets turn). Overall I think my hand should mostly X, but can occasionally B.
a2 v kqo hand....
Yes agree with above comments Pio is playing a mixed strategy on flop with a2o. Looking at aggregates reports, the 9 turn is a pretty neutral card for both players ranges. Pio however doesn't agree with your analysis on IPs turn betting range. Im not sure how to interpret some of my results...for example Pio seems to have no concern for protecting its x back range almost pure betting made hands down to TT, and continues to push its flop EV advantage on turn. Why do we think this is?... The conclusion I have come to is that on board as dynamic as this we will still have nutted hands on a bunch of rivers, by mixing in a solid proportion of fd and overcard type hands into x back range. Bricks like the 3c are so uncommon that it doesn't matter that our EV drop to rough 1/3 pot share. Does this logic hold?
The above turn strategy therefore implies your suggestion that "strong players will have a small but reasonable proportion of qq 99 55, therefore a large raise but not shove is best" is not correct.
Here are my sim results for river where Ip does and does not have boat slowplays:
vs capped range:
vs 20% qq 99 55 slowplay:
So your strategies vs various villains seem pretty spot on. Which turn strategy do you think is consistent with what you see from the different pools?
Did you give OOP big river overbets after turn XX| ?
okay yeah, you myth busted that one pretty quickly haha
Also quick question about some stuff I use in game with regards to OB size:
If we didn't have the luxury of pio and had to construct a theory based approach to solving what our thinnest OB value bets should be/which size we should use (I guess these two things are pretty interchangeable) , would this mechanism be sound:
Iterate through: X seems like a reasonable ob size >>> at this size villains mdf would be y >>> against mdf range y our thinnest value bets have z% equity . If z<50% reduce size until thinnest value bet has z=50% and vise versa.
Does this seem like a sound approach for producing a reasonably solid strategy? Or if we don't know closely what Pio would do in a given spot should we be taking a by eye approach along the lines of "meh villain seems pretty capped to roughly this combo, but may have some slow plays so il size down a bit to roughly this size which seems okay, and it doesn't really matter because EVs of the strategies will run kinda close"
Sorry if that's an earful. Thanks
Don't think this works because if a value bet has =50% equity against a calling range then in most cases a smaller sizing would have been better.
In general we want to maximize the size of the volume of money being put in by worse hands with any value bet V. So say we have 90% equity (and villain never raises), if we half pot we get called 2/3 and have best hand 85% of the time when called, so we win (2/3 call freq)(.5 pots)(.85 win % when call)-(2/3 call freq)(-.5 pots)(15% they beat us)= ~.235 pots/hand. You want to try to maximize this expression, so maybe next step is to compare to full pot which would be (.5 call freq)(1 pot)(80% win % when call)-(.5 call freq)(1pot)(.2 lose freq)=.3 pots/hand. You can see that we could go too big if we overbet, so (.33 call freq)(2 pots)(.7 we win)-(.33 call freq)(-2 pots)(.3 we lose)=.462-.198=.264. So supposing no blockers and no raises and 1-A defense, we maximize somewhere a bit over full pot with 90% equity, looks like maybe 1.3x pot or w/e (not familiar with these numbers because people always raise in practice which changes things etc).
There is a formula in Janda's book and somewhere in MoP where you can maximize this expression using calculus, but I am too fish for that.
Anyways, in practice it's more complicated and less amenable to formalization because we're talking non symmetric distributions which are far down the game tree, with blocker effects and various bet/raise sizes etc. Which is why the "theory" perspective I advocate is to try and maximize the volume of money going in vs worse hands (trying to do this will engage your hand reading skills and you'll find yourself making good bets). Also, GTO often has value bets of various strengths mixing all down the possible sizings that are good for the range because otherwise a clairvoyant villain can find raise sizes/regions that counterexploit too straightforward sizing compositions. So usually at GTO you can bet any size S that you would use with your range at a given node up to a maximum size that is loosely defined as "the largest sizing that co-maximizes the volume of money put in by worse hands," which should be around 1.2x pot for a 90% equity hand or w/e as I described above.
There is probably a useful table or spreadsheet kicking around the internet somewhere that maps equity to "maximum sizing" in the formal way I demonstrated above. Looking at a table like that will give you a feel for the magnitudes involved and then you can work on adjusting them when you play. (or if someone like Steve Paul or Tyler or Diego is reading this thread plz set us straight).
Thanks a lot for the detailed response. Makes a lot of sense.
I remember that chapter in applications I think it was, and I think it's a somewhat interesting chart to have with you and to keep in mind, like the 1-a, bluffing equity charts, etc.
However, in real life there are more variables in play: there are removal effects, we do face raises, so not see much the point, especially when we have Pio working for us and guessing the best sizing for each scenario :) in my latest simulations I'm including more overbets in turn and river.
I just think it's more important to sort of figure out the range interactions and group our sizings by relative strength to our opponents range and (also mixing all them up). That way we identify which parts in our opponents range do we want to attack with which sizing and get also better at hand reading.
Tyler has a video with Tipton's formula for optimal bet size based on hand vs range equity. It must be what you are looking for.
Great video Ben, you explain you applying concepts in game very well. Learned a lot more about blockers, and river play. Look forward to part 2.
Will we get the highly anticipated part 2 to your small stakes video? A lot of us can't wait for it :D
23:12 with AK, you mentioned that you think 2 sizes are good on the AK8r board. What types of hands in our 3-betting range are we bluffing with to balance with the larger bet size? Are we always sizing larger with AK on the flop or will it be a mix?
Usually AK is weighted fairly heavily towards bigger bet but gets X/small B occasionally as well.
good content...good analysis...very well presented.
Hey. Im a poker player who is living in Korea right now and try to become pro.
I lived in America for few years so I understand most of the English.
right now im trying to study from beginning since i played poker in korea and
i think i have built my playing style awful because i always played live cash game.
so right now i need a advice on how to start and go on studying
Assuming you're starting out at like nl10-200 online I'd go and watch all of Cameron Couch's videos. He's a nit but what he does works
@11:38 w the set of 6s. You say we have 9Tss in our bluffing range. Are you playing a mix of 9T bfd on the flop or calling all of them.
@16:07 A2 in 4b pot vs deano. What % do you check AK on the turn Q? About 15%? Do we really improve that much on the river to make it a fold. AA and KK are only 6 combos. I do understand it's not a spot population will bluff very often and it's not easy for him to have many bluffs on this river. Just wondering about how quickly you changed your view from saying you would not often be folding this hand at any point when you checked the turn. Was this factoring in that you did not expect him to bet a lot of rivers? If the river was a low card are you more likely to call? I don't see how any river changes much. Depending on how often we check AK on the turn, 9x seems like a good combo to start bluffing. As soon as he bet the turn i was expecting we were gonna end up folding a lot on the riv.
@17:45 We iso a regs HJ limp from the sb and get 3b in the bb. No clue how to deal w a balanced limp range. I would raise 99+,AJs+,AQo+,KQs from the sb. The bb 3b range has to worry about the limper. I would guess the bb range is TT+, AQs+. Does BB want to always 3b Aqo in this spot and fold to any 4b? If we do not think the BB has AQo in his 3b range is it ok to fold the flop? How off are my ranges?
Thanks for the great video, one of my favorite and learned a lot.
Good and specific questions.
@11:38- I think you're calling all or nearly all BFD for 1/3 pot. This raises the question "what are we folding?", and the answer is all of AQo, suited cards w/out a BFD, some of our very weakest suited hands.
@16:07- This was a very weird spot. My most likely hands on turn to XC are AA/KK/QQ/suited Ax wheel, KQs type of stuff. The result is that I absolutely mash the Ko river and Pio wants me to lead AI 71% of the time (gasp!). The suited aces all mix lead bluff and X/decide, with IP mixing fold up to AQ. That doesn't sound much like the metagame I play in though, haha. So anyways, supposing our friend IP isn't mixing fold with AQ vs jam (and is perhaps underbluffing turn because the turn play calls for a bunch of mixing with bottom of range), then we end up wanting to X this hand and fold it. I correctly identified OOP's EV goes up a ton on the K river specifically, and I figured out I was folding my hand, but I would have probably missed a bunch of the jams I'm supposed to make.
@17:45- I think in both cases there will be some A4s-A5s and 65s-T9s in the aggressive ranges for board coverage (though certainly not anywhere close to pure aggression from any of these combos). I think AQo is probably mostly calling against the sb Iso, but can do some 3betting as well. Roughly speaking here, we might imagine the HJ on something like 27% of hands, the sb on something like 9%, and the bb on something like 5%. The reason for the discrepancy between the 27-->9 is that calling from sb getting 5:1 is an extremely attractive play, and so sb needs to play a range with very high EV to iso OOP. Anyways, that leaves BB with something like AKo+, ATs+ (mostly), QQ+, 99-JJ (occasionally), 65s-T9s, A4s-A5s, suited bways (all of these occasionally).
Could you please detail why villain's sizings seem weak at 8:00? pio seems to strongly favour the half pot when given the chance to choose between that and 30% on the flop, and on the turn it would choose 50% pot, pot and 150% pot in almost equal percentages, just with different array of hands, with AJo really strongly favouring the pot sizing that you define as inferior to the overbet. What's missing in my way of seeing this board? Thanks! :D
P.S. Pretty sure he missed a river valuebet though
My commentary was pretty ambiguous on this hand but I can clarify what I meant.
I was trying to make two claims, (1) that with specifically AJo the line of B50/B50 was likely to be low or no reach (note: from your post it seems like low reach was the answer and villain's line was perfectly fine), and (2) that many players who I don't see in the games often whose strategies include tons of B50/B50 as standard sizings end up being exploitably straightforward, and so I suspected villain might belong to that category of player. The snap X on the river with AJ provided some more evidence for that read.
In terms of how to play the board, I think a bunch of flop overbets look good. It's also probably losing quite little to play all kinds of different strategies on this texture, which is why I hesitate to criticize villain's play.
Although I didn't say this explicitly, I think I gave the impression that overbet was the correct turn size here. I think on a lot of turns it's good, but thank you for pointing out that a ~pot sizing is used very often as well, particularly on a high straightening turn like the Jo.
At 16 minutes when you four bet the A2s, bet flop, x/c turn on a49QK, you talk about donk shoving JJ as a bluff. What hands would you pick to value shove there? I feel like I would prefer to shove all of them. I guess Ace King that doesnt bet turn is the best candidate?
edit: sorry, I didn't see you discussed this in an earlier comment. 71% donk lead allin, I would of course played this spot dark check. LOL computer poker.
At 17:30 minutes you 3bet KQs, check flop, bet turn, bet 1/3 on river on QJ2T3, 3 hearts on river. Versus 1/3 pot do you think he can raise his sets? I would think so much of your AK has sized up by that point, that he can get greedy and raise?
36 minutes: i would never use the allin size after 3betting on 842. I suppose exactly 56s is tempting :) You said it’s reasonable with AK, do you balance that with a small amount of overpairs?
Very good vid, thanks!
@17:30 min i tried answering in below post but also wondering about this spot.
@17:00 w KQs in 3b pot. What flush combos would you check on the flop for balance on the riv block bet. AKhh, AThh, 89hh, 9Thh seem like candidates to XR or XC. A lot of these seem like they would be mixed, with 89hh and 9Thh looking like they would be better as a cb than x. On the riv we can discount opp having some flushs because he did not bet the flop. Our KQ is played as a mix on the flop so we have some kq(6 combos) as our bottom of val block bet range on riv. We have a lot of AK but this also will be played as a mix on the flop so maybe 10 combos of that. Q,J,T sets for 9 combos. QJs for 3 combos, and maybe a couple of JTss QTss combos. So like 30 combos and a couple flush combos.
If our OPP has TT. Raising vs our 1/3 pot bet doesnt seem to accomplish too much because we still have 18 of about 32 combos on the river that beat him. Is my thinking out of line? Is kq the bottom of our 1/3 val block bet range here?
If he raises to 360 he only needs to get a little more than 50% folds for it to be +EV(not necessarily the highest EV). While hed have to turn some Jx or Tx into a bluff, is our so few flush combos enough to balance this spot, or is it really our AK that is helping us balance this spot since he checekd back flop(less chance of him having flush). Since there are so few flush combos for us, I would think we would almost always call our AK hands to a river raise, even without a heart blocker. How is pio playing AK to a river raise here?
Sorry if my questions are too long paragraphed. I dont have pio and I feel bad just asking a question without showing that I tried thinking about the situation. Thanks again.
I learn to play my own strategy stronger everytime I watch your videos so thank you for that ! , Something that crops in the comments frequently is your freq of blocks , Asking for myself times I can feel in hand where we struggle to get the right bluff combos on earlier streets il block my whole range including the top of my value range like 38% pot , to induce more calls where we are perceived value heavy and also to throw people of trying to exploit our blocks in the future , is this a fair thought in game ?? Thanks ahead.
For very very many situations in the video/in your play you say "mixing it up here" or "sometimes betting sometimes checking " or "we should have X sizes here, im gonna go with the big one for now" etc... is there any merit to how exactly you mix in those kinda situations? are you using an RNG offscreen? or are you just this perfectly familiar with it that you just believe you are close to correct freqs with random decisions made in your head?
13:23 Did he say "demibluffs"? What is that?
I was hoping you would drop down to two tables and at 36:00 you went up to four.... lol
I just think it's more important to sort of figure out the range interactions and group our sizings by relative strength to our opponents range and (also mixing all them up). That way we identify which parts in our opponents range do we want to attack with which sizing and get also better at hand reading.
get-mobdro.com
I dont line it
Thanks for the great video, one of my favorite and learned a lot.
Thanks for the great video
Candy Crush
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.