I was thinking something similar. Is it possible to remove the 6d4d cards from opponents range to see how the strategy changes? More of a hand vs range than Range vs Range... Don't learn as much but I think something cool to look at.

There are more value combos than bluff combos in a betting range though!

The little things matter when making decisions to satisfy frequencies

Right but proportionately do they not get affected in the same way. If you have say QJ for a straight and then have some hands w/Qx and some w/Jx as bluffs if I hold the Jd I reduce both the Qx Jx and QJ hands in the same proportion (in the unpaired case)? if the opponent is betting Qx, Jx and then some random cards the blockers now work effectively - but in a case where they only bluff blockers and nuts I think this applies?

Suppose you have X value combos, and Y bluff combos. You're betting 2x pot. So for each value bet you get 2/3 of a bluff. If we block one of the cards in the betting range, then we block 1/3 more value than bluff, making it a positive blocking effect for call.

To use your explicit example imagine the value is QcJc QdJd QsJs QhJh and the bluff hand is 66% {Qd2d Qs2s Qh2h Qc2c} 4 value combos (8/3) bluff combos. So a ratio of 1:2/3.

If we block Qd say this changes to 3 value combos 2 bluffs. Still in the 1:2/3 ratio. I think it's the proportion that matters not the absolute number of combos. It does block more value than bluffs in count terms but what matters in terms of indifference is the proportion of values to bluffs. after the block calculation we still have the same ratio. Also I think you block 50% more value than bluff (2/3 -> 1), 33% less bluff than value

I am less confident in what I say than I sound! This is obviously a stylised example and applies particularly when the only bluffs also contain the blocker.

An example above where having the blocker is a bad thing. IP range is QJs and QQ

Holonomy, you're correct, it's the proportion that matters, not the absolute number of combos (as you put it).

Totally agree, but it's a tough one to find imo.

The issue is that if there are insufficient pocket pairs in the OOP range and we float a bunch of random offsuit cards then we'll make a lot of highly -EV peels. So it's a spot where we need to be very sharp on memorization to find the peels in the spots they work and avoid them in the spots they're punts.

Ben Sulsky haha yeah not gonna lie and say that i am able to find these AQ calls either, bar the AQdd bdfd combo and of course the FD ones. though it is tempting to play these in a vacuum in game and raise/stack off otf as we have 50% equity vs basically anything+ our fold equity.

exactly, we have to figure out the spots where our range is extremely condensed towards pocket pairs (like call 4bet oop) before we make these loose peels. when a much larger % of our range is unpaired, then we can be a lot more selective about continuing our unpaired combos.

I would really love if you made a video Demondoink ! Your comments to a lot of elite videos help the community learn a ton and is not too sophisticated where we don't understand. Hopefully RIO reaches out where you can make videos. A true 500z grinder is much needed! Not sure how much you want to give away about your strategy against the pool though. Just making video on a couple of hand examples and understanding of the game would be great!

RunItTw1ce cheers mate, really appreciate the kind words! i have always been open to making training videos tbh, but for whatever reason, have never been approached by the site. at this point i am unsure whether or not i would do so (as some things i do during live play can be very exploitative of the player/pool/situation) but i will never say never. :)

I saw some exploits you used vs DrLuck3. Some times I feel coaches know they are being exploited but they still stick to GTO bluff catchers or bluffing vs certain players because Pio says its a good bluff. I much more prefer exploit style of play. Hell even if you were essential and just made some $200z videos would love to see these exploits.

RunItTw1ce don't get me wrong, the vast majority of my play is structured around GTO play (i always try to find the optimal sizings, find the appropriate number of bluffs etc) but there are certain situations where i will deviate because i either think my opponent is over calling, or is over folding etc. imo if you wanna achieve the highest WR possible you have to be good at both GTO and exploitative poker.

i don't think i was using many exploits vs Dr Luck tbh. basically what happened was at the beginning i kept bluffing off stacks vs him, and basically could never win a pot. then towards the end of our time playing together i kept making hands, and subsequently got paid often cos i balance out the appropriate number of bluffs. this can look like one player is adjusting, but in reality i just kept making hands and it was as simple as that. when someone bluffs a lot and starts to actually make hands, then they get paid much more often. i can see how this would look on the video though, as i kept having value bets haha. but if he recorded the vids 6 months before, you would have seen a completely different story :P

tbh there is no way i would be an essential coach. no disrespect to those coaches, as there are some excellent ones, but if im playing 500z-2k in some of the toughest games with a good WR then i woudn't be taking peanuts for making content. but this is all pie in the sky anyways cos nobody has ever asked me haha.

Demondoink I do not know how many peanuts elite coaches make compared to essential coaches. I just mentioned 200z videos for more exploit reasons and maybe not wanting to share your exploits you have against your own 500z pool. Henry for example also plays much higher 500-2k from what I know, but makes the 200NL videos. I do think there is a "problem" with Elite content being the only qualification seems to be playing $500NL+. There are plenty of essential coaches that can make some high level content. I look at some Elite videos and think of Elusive Mark, new coaches such as imjamba and Luke Johnson, Nuno, and Krab for Elite level content. Not just record a video and talk about thought process. I think the details and in-depth dives into PIO these guys do is what makes Elite content. Doing something like this even on 100NL I would still consider Elite. Wish RIO found a way to reward coaches that make high quality videos like these.

on the other topic of exploiting drLuck I agree you have been making hands, but maybe it was just a bet size thing that stood out to me and I know it's probably PIO approved. There was a hand I believe you were BB, maybe SB... vs Drluck button. You ended up having AQ vs AJ on a AQXXX run out and I want to say $700 deep? Where on the flop you went with a large cbet size which I found strange at the time being you block so many calling hands. Felt like this large size was an exploit as PIO likes to call down a lot of AXS hands. Feels like Drluck can call/call/fold the river with AJ.... but idk maybe you do have enough bluffs in this spot. Hard to say. Not sure if you remember this hand or not. I think you guys briefly discussed it in the comments as well in his video.

RunItTw1ce yeah that makes sense, but the thing is that i wouldn't have any reads on the 200z pool so i would not really be able to make very accurate adjustments in game, bar what my intuition/experience is telling me. i dunno what Henry plays tbh as i have basically never played a hand with him, but i'm sure he could easily be playing higher stakes on other sites. i don't watch his videos but have heard good things about him too.

of course some Essential content can actually be better than their Elite counterparts, but imo there has to be some kind of cut off, and the way that you are able to differentiate between the two is basically from the stakes that you are playing. in general, but for sure not always, the better player will be the better coach. as there is no way of measuring coaching abilities, we can only really judge a coach on how much benefit we get from his content, and by the stakes that they are playing (and beating). i'm sure there are 200z breakeven players who would be better coaches than high stakes crushers, so it's not always the case, but these are the anomalies as opposed to the rule of thumb.

like i said though, i have never been approached by RIO to make any content before, and at this point, it seems like i never will. tbh i do find it a little strange that they seek to select other random coaches who play the same stakes but have never commented once on this site, as opposed to an extremely active user who has used the site for years. not exactly sure what the rationale behind that is.

haha thats funny, i actually do recall that hand very well. the reason that i used a larger flop cbet sizing on that board is because from the BB we 3bet a much more polarised range, one that contains many less Ax compared to the sb. so you are actually supposed to decrease frequency and check more often, but when you do cbet you use a larger sizing as your betting range is now very polarised and basically just AK/AQ/QQ. so that wasn't exploitative, that was just what i have discovered from using PIO. with regards to the bluffs, i always try to find bluffs in every spot, so i will 100% be bluffing here. usually you want to be using hands like 3rd pairs that block sets, or low pocket pairs here to balance out our AK/AQ. straight draws do not make good bluffing candidates iirc, such as KJ/KT. could be wrong though, been a while since i checked this board out.

I worked on mixed games and PLO with some other top players who have strenuously objected to me making videos using insights that are partially theirs. I've chosen to respect their wishes and the folks at RunItOnce (both the bosses and viewers) seem to still enjoy my NLHE and theory content enough to keep me around.

For PLO, I highly recommend imbajimba's videos, they're fantastic. For mixed games, Ilteopepe and Christoper George both make excellent vids.

Ceegee is not making vids for the site anymore. Iteopepe makes great mixed content but he is the only one makimg mixed content. Maybe you could do some essential level mixed vids Ben Sulsky

I'm glad you liked the powerpoint video.

I don't currently have others planned but I'll take your view into consideration.

When thinking what videos to make I mostly try and respond to the things I'm seeing at the tables, comments, and what I think will be interesting. I'm not very systematic and mostly just try and make videos I'm personally enthusiastic about. For example in this most recent video, following the live session I was frustrated about how the hands went down and felt motivated to dive into PioSolver to see if I was thinking about the hands right. I preferred to do this in real time so that hopefully a bit of the urgency I felt comes across in the video and makes the sometimes boring theory content a bit more interesting and personal. I also try and keep things fairly fresh in terms of rotating live play, concept videos, Pio videos, AI training videos, mental game and so on.

I also like when Sauce power points ideas.