4 Table $10/$20 6-Max 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 45 Comments...
gonna go ahead and throw this a like in the dark
Also slamming of probirs is amusing
Hi Ben, great video as usual!
Saw you flatting A7s and 87s in SB against a 2.5x or from the CO; would you call those hands too against an early open? Do you also include KQo/AJo against CO in your cc range?
Thank you!
No/yes :)
@25 mins .. slight laugh ... "well we got GOT".
Not that you need more compliments, but I think a lot of player pool who takes a beat like this are more likely to feel it a bit more. You can shrug it off like it aint no thang, just as you ideally should. Worth noting for many of us.
@27 mins
Your play with Q8o on 4c-8c-Qs-7h-Kd
Just wanted to say nice hand! A lot of semi-bluffing hands, in your spot, I'd have just bet the turn with. So its a play where I would feel pretty value heavy getting to the river. Since you are sauce, I know that is not case and you are appropriately balanced. My question is do any hands stand out as good semi-bluffs on turn, for check-raising turn and following up on the river? (..I was thinking something like 5x4x, which you may not always bet this flop with)
I assume you are only going for the turn cr for value with your strongest hands (44,88,QQ, Q8, 6x5x = 22 combos). Given river sizing, you can have ~15 bluff combos. But you are not always check-raising these ott, so if this turn cr is only happening 25% of time, we only need ~4 bluff combos.
In general, I'd expect a lot of player pool, in your spot, to just bet turn themselves, with their semi bluffs, and be very value heavy once they cr turn and shove the river, especially this specific river, in which no potential straight or clubs came in. Think the call with Q5o is pretty meh, and it definitely has to be meh given what you showed up with. You do not have to give me your exact strategy, and you can feel free to ignore any of my questions or this whole thing if you feel I am asking for to much. However, I am a live donkey dabbling in online so appreciate the time. Thanks sauce for the good videos.
I don't think the math posted here is descriptive of this spot. In multi-street games, you'll want to use bluff-stacking. In situations with dynamic hand values the 0-1 multistreet math obv isn't appropriate, but some amount of bluff-stacking still occurs.
(not sure if there's a vid on this on RIO, but just look at the multistreet games section in MoP... steve paul might have a vid? I'll eventually do a vid on this topic since I see people unfamiliar with it and it's really important)
What do you mean by "bluff-stacking" ?
Yes please a video on how you approach multi street planning would be great
Would definitely want to see a video on bluff-stacking pls~
Ok cool, I will. The bluffstacking one was prob going to be toygaming pt 5 anyways. I kind of left off of that series for awhile because Pio made it seem less important. But I think it's still a useful topic of study to better understand what's going on in AI outputs.
By bluff-stacking, do you just mean working back from the river? i.e. calculating turn bluffs assuming all river bets are considered value.
Hi Ben, in the q8 vs q5 hand, if we were in Bit2easy spot, how can we bluffcatch aprropietrly blocking top pair and blocking the straight, what would you do in his shoes, and how do we proceed in spots like this blocking the straight and top pair situations?
Blocking more valuebet combos is better for bluffcatching. Most of my value/bluff hands will share cards to prevent properties like blocking 5/6 from being too valuable. Generally, blocking Q/5 is going to be very good, so you can't really knock his bluffcatch unless I took some next-level strategy and showed up with like KK for value. Obv issues with playing KK like this are that we get owned if our opponent just calls with good hands and folds bad ones!
sounds great! TG5 please :)
Thanks for the video, it was very interesting.
why are you 3betting so big oop ? the sizings went from 5x to even 6x ! Even in spots where your range was (probably) linear.
Also, I dont really understand your flop sizing strategy sometimes.
why are you betting flop 25% in spots where protection is less relevant ? Twice with TT on KQxhh (with Th) at 25:31 and at 37:39 on KJxr.
Then suddenly you 70% pot with 98o on 632 BTN vs BB Eccentric at 37:03 when i suppose you have many hands that would benefit from protection.
Thanks !
Yes, exactly. So here you bet TT twice to make him fold A8 type of hands which have <20% equity vs your overall value range. I dont get it. I'd rather 70%+ Kx+.
Really enjoyed this video...looking forward to part 2. I also like when you follow up this type of vid with a crev/pio analysis of 1 or 2 of the most interesting hands.
General question wrt calling out of the sb...my limited study of these spots suggests leading is a thing on certain board textures but it seems like you are auto-checking them. I'm curious if this is because you design your preflop range to be less condensed, stack depths are different to the spots I've been modelling, the population overcbets vs 100% check, the difference in ev is very minimal and you just decide not to, or some other reason.
Thanks!
I've found that superficially similar SB vs RFI spots' outputs can change dramatically based on both subtle changes in board textures and changes in preflop assumptions. I've definitely found spots where leading was a thing, and also spots where I thought leading would be a thing and then it wasn't.
In general I try and make my SB call range less condensed than the population, which seems to make leading less important because my EV is distributed across more flops.
hey Ben, question, min 13, the KJ hand from the SB in the second table,i saw you flatted there instead of 3betting, and i was wondering what make you choose that strategy in this specific situation? because a few min before that i saw you 3betting 66 from the same positions so i couldn't find a logical explanation to it, i did however thought about all the negative aspects of flatting a reg open with another happy squeeze reg in the BB... i guess we can justify it by saying is a mix strategy, but if there is another explanation to it i will be happy to read it, thanks in advance, excellent video as usual and happy grind.
I think a lot of medium strength are near indifferent vs RFI in the SB.
hey me again, also min 39:15 table 2, is there a particular reason to double barrel the AJ off hand in that board texture?
Not really. We block some stuff, don't have a ton of EV to X down, so it should be a "bluff sometimes" kind of spot. I have other (much longer) explanations that might be more helpful but are more of a video+ length type of thing. Like, why bluff anywhere? No, I don't think you should only bet turn with semibluffs and strong value combos though.
Hey Ben, Question about the KQ c/r in the 4th minute - I guess villain is betting 1/3 pot with his range on this board texture, so are you c/r hands with BD FD here like Tc9c? And if so, is the KQ c/r to balance this? Also interested as to the bigger bet with 98off on 6 3 2 rb in minute 37
Questions in the form of "I don't understand that play, explain it to me plz" aren't my fav.
c/r KQ is going to get called by worse, but isn't going to get called by worse for 4 bets, so I'll end up checking a street UI. It's mostly a defense against B/X/ lines from IP.
Hey Ben. Wondering why we are betting the TT on KJx board? bit confused about this......
A video about why to bluff would be great.
Very interesting that the idea of meta game is starting to be a thing to watch out for in poker. I feel that 3.5x open from sb, big 3 bets, are clearly gaining popularity, so it's nice we get to peek a bit of what's going on in the best player's head.
Watching you folding aq pre vs eccentric made me think that balanced limping strat is something I want to learn, but I really don't know lots of good regs doing it.
Is this because it's a suboptimal strategy, or something difficult with little gain? What's your opinion on this one?
Here's some thoughts I currently have.
1.Since we are playing no limit games, and the fact that massive over bet And balancing multiple sizing is vialble, starting with a small pot shouldn't be that much of a problem.
Getting to decide (fold/raise/call) after other player's action is a massive advantage. This is why sb is a tough position to play from.
Hands like A9o can easily fold when multiple players are calling someone's iso-raise.
Calling Iso-raise caps your range, but It is usually difficult to apply pressure from oop Anyway. When ip you can over bet turn and get a free showdown with tpgk type of hands, but you either need to x/call or follow through on the river, which is hard to balance well. playing like you are in the blinds doesn't feel bad, at least for me.
Not sure if I can master this one, but it is always fun and refreshing to think about new strategy.
I think opening pots for a limp is likely significantly worse than raising. But people play badly against it because it's uncommon and not as figured out. There are analogies here to lots of games where great players sometimes take slightly worse than optimal strategies they're comfortable with in order to push a knowledge advantage rather than a pure strategic advantage. Think of, for example, wonky openers in high level Chess.
In general, you should play looser for a limp because you're "risking" 1bb to win 1.5bb instead of say 2.5bb to win 1.5bb. Tend to favor suited junk because there will be more multiway pots.
Entertaining vid Ben! Which hands at 37:40 would you have preferred to bluff with on 3624?
In the KK hand - what are "napkins" ? :D
I think we want to block [A-Q] in order to proximity block his highest freq 5x peels.
awesomesauce
KK on 844hh - thoughts on not having a raising range on flop? Seems like having no raising range shouldn't impact our EV too much and seems unlikely he'll be making mistakes vs. raises.
I haven't looked at any particularly analogous spot closely so I'm not sure. I think there are more flop raises at equilibrium here than most humans use though, so my guess is cutting the raising range is moderately costly vs clairvoyant.
I made a sim for this spot in that scenario are IP supposed to raise like 0.3% (in my sim at least), i was quite surprised.
Hello Ben,
If any decision you made have 2 ways "I can bluff here but check", "I can call but fold" what the sense of these decision or you have GTO PioSolver percentage model for each decision you made like 6% call now is 94% to fold, we all knows it's not possible for human. I don't understand sense of these talks. How to construct your game properly? Please sort this situation
It's definitely possible, just use an RNG while you play.
but what do you use, there is no RNG in your video? I see nowdays many decisions looks like randomly constructed on feelings, but these feelings has no math depths of mind, it's just RNG of our creativity. You are 1 of the best players in the world, I just wanna understand how it works in your mind or just tell me your opinion on these, because seems like PioSolver doesnt work for human, it makes game more complicated with infinite information.
Yes, GTO strategies tend to be complicated. No, that isn't a good reason to ignore them.
There have been (at least) 3 great videos on this subject recently from other RIO coaches, 'A new training model' nick howard, 'building realistic strategies for strong ranges on poor flops' zach freeman, 'hand review using piosolver' dan dvoress
One thing that is perhaps worth mentioning in this context is that against mortal opponents, best strategies are often going to be pure. They tend to have tendencies or asymmetries that skew things clearly, although in one spot it may be that they overfold and in another they overcall. If we don't know these asymmetries, using a middle of the road strategy may be useful, but I think this is exactly where great players excel. Often they pick up some indication that skews the best strategy in a particular direction, and make better decisions as a result. You can call it feeling, intuition, non-linear thinking or whatever, but this is what's going on.
great video!
At 39min with AJ, why did you choose to bluff AJ on Q93dd7? It seems we have a lot of bluffs already.
Hi Sauce. Excellent video as always. In past videos you've made the case for the >3x sb open. Why the switch to 2.3x?
Hi Ben great video!
Im quite new to 6max. What is the reason that you are making the smaller Cbets around 25-30% pot against the BB? I see many regs do this on NL200 zoom i'm curious what the strategy is. My betsize is much larger, suspecting I'm having a leak here.
Thanks!
solid as usual.
At minute 8:35 with Td8d bottom left, you mention that a large part of your range benefits from having strong hands also in that range. If you were to look closely at this spot and come to the conclusion that the highest EV size for this hand would be one that differs from the size you currently used, would you deviate from your original sizing and pick the higher EV size? I'm trying to reconcile two competing thoughts when picking a size here-- the first being the size you choose, which offers protection to other parts of range, and the second being the theoretical, highest EV size.
great vid, but if i were playing i would be tilting face at that eccentric bg dude lol
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.