$25/$50 HUNL + $500 Zoom: Regulars Abound
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 18 Comments...
Sauce playing HUNL = Like in the dark :P
16:13 Do you think it would be a mistake to play 4bet/fold vs this large 3bet on table 1 w A4s? I've seen some preflop simulations in higher rake environment where against larger 3bet sizes OOP playing close to 4bet or fold.
These are SS's I have from preflop solver, HJ play vs BTN 3bet, approximately 200NL rake, sizing scheme: HJ RFI 2.5bb, BTN 3bet 8.5bb. Lowest PP's and bunch of suited connectors are opening w low freq. 5-10%, so I guess EV of call improves, so you see them calling quite a bit. It does seem quite crazy to fold nearly 70% to 3bet, but I guess solver compensating that with very high reraise freq? Do you think these ranges are reasonable?
BTN 3bet range
It's hard for me to evaluate without knowing all the technical details, but it seems likely that as rake increases and 3b sizing increases, it becomes closer to 4b/fold as these outputs indicate. It's important to take rakeback into account as well.
15min 2nd table T8cc on QQ5JJ; What rand you want to get x/c from on the river? Feels too thin especially not knowing what type of range he is bet/calling flop with.
Pretty sure his checking % on this river should be fairly high.
I'm confused by this comment. His range is just his PF range modified by BC flop and X river, so it contains many pocket pairs and some A his. It's possible this isn't value bet but there are certainly many hands he might XC with that I beat.
Poker 2020 - play a couple hundred thousand hands and then see how you got on.
Really liked this comment :)
cool vid as always
Yeah look like it should be a check, but it dosent lose much EV, what is more suprising for me is the fact that after raising a flop, we literrly check almost entire range on the turn in that spot
Range check happen's on most turn beside's the clubs but even then its fairly high like 70%, of course I might be off with my sim - I'm just guessing that happen's because we are raising flop with a lot of hand's weaker then Qx (mid pairs ) and a lot of flush draws, so when non club turn hit we should just take equity with flush draw,and SD with mid pairs + and protect that with our strongest hands, since most of medium Qx won't get 3 streets of value anyways, its just my guess. I'm probably wrong with my assumptions .would be cool to hear what Ben think's about that.
Attached image is showing IP strat after flop raise
PS
I re-run the sim, because in previous one the OOP player, was not allowed to re-raise flop unless it's all in, now it looks a lot diffrent and we dont do much raises OTF, as far as river goes T8s is still mostly checking and bet's like 15% of the time ( pure check turn with that combo )
Libera, there are probably some issues with the sim. It won't be a strong equilibrium if turn gets checked through as previous aggressor with high freq. That would mean OOP needs some leads on turn, or perhaps other parts of tree are off, reaching back to preflop.
Having done a bit of science myself due to the discussion, there are imo a few salient points about this hand:
(1) OOP is only like 15-30% B on flop, mostly for quarter pot and very occasional half pot
(2) IP raise freq varies inversely at a high rate with OOP flop cb size, 12% ish raise vs quarter pot versus 5% ish raise vs half
(3) Turn definitely gets bet for IP, small amount of OOP leads
(4) OOP leads river 25% or so of the time
(5) IP mostly bets J> on river, mostly uses half pot or full pot sizing. Some flushes get bet, but not all of them. My hand probably mixed
(6) Vs IP half pot, OOP is calling with nearly all A high and a lot of K high, some T high and 9 high, and hilariously even a bit of 87cc (which is ~5% of range at this node so not trivial).
(7) Given 6, it's probably best exploitatively to X behind flushes as IP, and to start valuebetting at J>. It's probably also best exploitatively to overbluff this node.
Thanks, Im playing with that sim again, and trying to get similar result's I think we are using diffrent preflop range's Im assuming that have to do something with IP cold call range, could you tell me what range procentege does IP have in your inputs.
Im using those:
Yep, using different PF ranges. Similar hands but different weighting
Hi Sauce, very nice video, I really enjoy this type of content.
I have a question on 1 specific spot: left table at 7min . Kc6d Board Jc4s2c Ac 6c . we check back the flop, turn he probes 2/3 we call, river he bets and we do raise with the nuts.
I find it pretty hard to follow PIO advices here with random low freq% bluff-raise combos because blocker effect doesn't play a huge role on this 4 flush spot, where any flush blocker is actually a flush! Therefore I don't see what bluff candidates makes most sense. I also think that blocking pairs of the board wouldn't help us since our opponent won't bluff catch with any set or 2 pairs.
My question: any tip about how to find good bluffs candidates/ratio + good sizing to use in this specific spot. thank you so much!
So to find blocker effects the shortcut is to first solve for the highest freq value regions from each player, from OOP his betsize indicates ST>, concentration of low flushes, and for me my raise size indicates big flush. Our OOP opponent will also slowplay some bigger flushes into the small probe size and these will constitute a large part of continue freq vs IP's large raise size. Going back to preflop, the highest concentration of kickers going with big flush combinations for OOP will be [2-9] due to all those Kx/Qx offsuit combos being pure VPIPs vs the IP MR and never being 3b, many of the ones containing gutters will bluff turn a fairly high percentage. So if I'm IP I'm mostly bluffraising with 3, 5, 7 in my hand as well as a pair to unblock bluffs. A downside of this is that OOP is often bluffing river with those same kickers if they're playing well, so there may be an effect where it's preferred to raise bluff with pair+big card in order to unblock more bluffs, but I think as raise size increases for IP blocking value becomes more important. It's also possible a small club is preferred and mix because it does a nice job blocking value and unblocks bluffs.
Great video Ben! Lots of useful takeaways.
I'm seeing a lot of short stacks in the pool, and I've noticed you don't auto-top up yourself. For me as a lower stakes player, I'm still in the habit of quickly marking every shortie as a suspected fish. Is there a strategical advantage that I'm missing?
I of course know there's a big advantage to playing short in omaha but I wasn't under the impression that translated to holdem due to the equities running further apart.
Yep, there's a big structural advantage to being short when other players are deep. You can get all in more easily and they still threaten each other.
Hi Sauce, nice video!
At 8:43 you mention that the K3cc plays ok as part of a betting range in the turn probe spot. I was wondering if you could elaborate on why this is? I feel like these type of unintuitive bets with low equity hands that don't seem to make too much sense on the surface are ones that I so easily miss and result in me playing too passively. Thanks
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.