4-Bet Pots: Turn + River Play, Node Locks, and Fun Drills
Posted by Alexandra Fagaras
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...
Good follow up video - the nodelocks were very useful to look at! I have done the same before for a KXX board like the one in the video, in which I nodelocked OOP calling too many mid pocket pairs like JJ-99, which causes us to basically range bet the turn on most turns. I think this is the most common situation out of all the sims you looked at - most recreational players and weaker regs will see the small bet sizing and call almost any of these mid pairs along with AQs, AJs with backdoors. All of these hands really struggle vs a turn bet, so I have had a lot of success double barrelling these boards. Same goes for similar boards in 3bet pots where most people call too many of these hand types because of the small betsize but then can't continue them on the turn unimproved.
At 31.00 I think the solver might have range bet the flop because you deleted the option to check? Looks like it was betting ~50% frequency for 25% pot and checking ~50% frequency before you removed all the options other than 25%. AQ still looks like a turn shove like you played in the trainer, but I think the rest of the analysis of this hand might be affected by this.
Yes it is indeed a simplification, as data shows people mostly range bet these textures (or at least bet more often than they are supposed to). Of course the rest of the hand will be influenced by this, but I think it's likely closer to what will happen in reality (and likely better to study this instead of a strategy that is quite unlikely) . But yes, if he does mix our xR freq. is lower and call frequency is higher. The range construction will be quite similar though (mid pairs on board, gutshots and other medium equity hands will prefer calling - which is actually the case on these boards vs range bets too), while our top pairs still prefer raising. We only see significant EV differences between calling or raising in these medium holdings, no matter what strategy we face.
On the turn what you see is that if we xR against 10% size we have some smaller bets, while if we xR vs 25% size we mostly shove when we bet. The differences are not massive
Hey Alexandra nice video. I think 4bp is pretty undercovered as a topic in RIO, so these surely bring good value! Maybe doing the BVB 4BP somewhere in the future? -- I always find it tricky since the range is supposed to be the widest among all 4-Bet Pot formations.
:)
Sure, I'll keep that in mind, I was planning to do something a bit less theoretical in my next 1 or two videos, but I'll keep bvb 4bets in mind for the future :D
17:40 is very interesting -- I do not expect the population to incorporate both actions (OOP donking turn/IP check range vs none-donking range).
Which node do you think we can exploit the pool the most? -- As in as the OOP should we go for XR more when we have decent equity since villain is not check back enough, or should we actually donk more since IP will have no clue how to play certain part of his range?
Thank you!
Good question !
I think it's quite player dependant. I'm not sure what population is actually doing here, as it's very difficult to get enough data on such a rare/ specific spot. So I'd think of what I expect my opponent to do. Against someone who's pretty aggro, I'd rather go for check-raising with my strong but more vulnerable hands, as I expect him to bet too often and also overbluff turn slightly. Against more passive guys donking more is slightly better as they will likely just x back their trash or even overpairs that we want to get value or protection against.
21:56 you mentioned the reason we call AQdd is that villain is not supposed to bluff diamonds -- however when you were browse over around 21:31 we see that all the A9-A4s region villain only give up the spades combo -- wondering why that makes the AQdd the only bluffcatching combos?
Thank you!
On the turn IP is mostly picking shove size with flushdraws, therefore by the river he has less bluff combos that contain Ad compared to other suits.
That's why! Didn't think about the exact combo count, that makes lots of sense, thank you! <3
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.