$5k Progressive KO: In the Beginning
Posted by Alex Theologis
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 10 Comments...
Great analyses. Looking forward to part 2 of this. Take it down!
Thank you! Sadly I did not, but it shouldn't matter much, I think it still makes for an interesting review.
Another great video. Thanks, Alex Theologis!
I have noticed that a lot of the times when you are analyzing hands, that your decisions in the hand can be very similar—if not practically identical—to what I would believe the 100bb cash-game strategy to be. I know this is not the case overall or in general, but it is interesting to me that there are so many situations where stack depth doesn't seem to play a hugely important role in the decision making process. I'm sure this is situation dependent and that there are plenty of situations where stack size is virtually the primary deciding factor, but it is interesting nonetheless.
So a question related to the above comment: At what stack-depth do you believe our overall strategies change vastly? Or is it more akin to an evenly distributed spectrum where strategies simply change more and more the smaller the stack depth gets?
Thanks, Alex!
I would say the overall idea behind the strategies remains the same - sure, the details will change a lot depending on stack sizes and range construction but the overall idea will remain the same (i.e. equity advantage, nut advantage etc) especially when playing vs the big blind. So for example, saying that "this is a turn we want to bet big on" will be true for 100bb cash, 100bb mtt, 30bb mtt etc. How big we want to bet will change based on the different parametres, but since ranges are somewhat similar among all stack sizes, the way a card interacts with the ranges will not change much.
Obviously the above isn't true for every spot.
Very, very helpful response. Thanks again, Alex!
Another great video.
Thanks Alex Theologis
@11:30 : to me on this hand JT is a hand too strong against such a small siz and we have too much equity to transform it in bluff, that being said i don't think that our opponent is going to 3bet all in us very frequently if not never so i'm curious of what PioSolver says GTOwise and against node lock of no 3bet all in for vilain. I like your bluff with J9. I'm also wondering if transforming in bluff a hand like A6s can be good, no idea if the A is a good or bad blocker. He is going to call AQ/AK as you said in the video but maybe he folds those hands river and we also blocks AT
Thanks for the vid was great ;)
30:00 - don't you think KJ may have some showdown value + some equity in that spot? SB could be betting J9, K9, maybe some Ax...
19:15- Since we know our Kh FD will not often be a good bluff on the river (most likely we will give up) and since the nature of board is such that BB has a lot of hands which are connected (gutters, worse FDs, OESD) and will start leading pretty often...maybe it is better idea to go for x/c? Or even x/r would be nice (he would be forced to call all his OESD, dominated FDs). We can call possible jam which is fine in PKO. On the river we would have such odds and because bounty we can easily x/c bluffcatch. What do you think about going for x/r line here?
I think I would rather use a hand with some relevant blocker when going for a x/r, but I believe every option is fine here. Whether we bet small, x/c or x/r the ev difference will be negligent and the optimal play will depend on how our opponent constructs his ranges on each node.
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.