2 Tables of $5/$10 Zoom NL (part 2)
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 82 Comments...
lots of good stuff - thanks :)
maybe in future videos you can talk more in detail about your process for building ranges in different spot - teach a man to fish and all that :)
ie 7c3c XC-XX-lead for over bet hand makes a lot of sense, but i am never quite sure if i am doing a good job building smart ranges after XC OOP and the turn goes XX. i rarely lead turn so most of my range breaks down into XC-XX. then i am not always sure how best to think about dividing up my river continuing range between leading, XC, XR.
Hi,
I play MSNL in smaller networks. Almost everyone in a 3bet pot uses a cbetsize 50-55% of the pot regardless of the board. What I see on the Stars videos that almost every reg use like about 2/3 of the pot cbet size in those spots(sometimes smaller in extreme dry boards). Can you please tell me what is the reason behind it? As I remember, about 2 years ago stars regs used the half pot cbets in 3bet pots as standard,at least most of them. What changed it?
Thanks
In 3bet pots with roughly 100bb, I usually cbet such that I increase the pot geometrically over 3 streets such that the river bet puts my opponent AI. This sizing ends up being around 3/4, 3/4, 3/4 in min raised 3b pots, around 2/3, 2/3, 2/3, in 2.5x pots, and around 1/2, 1/2, 1/2, in 3x pots.
I tend to take this sizing because, first and foremost, it just works really nicely. It's also the sizing to take in various flavours of the no limit nuts/air game in MoP, which may or may not be analogous to the nlhe spot, but is at least somewhat similar insofar as my overpairs are the "nuts" for this SPR.
hey Ben,
At around 9:15 you say you've "seen guys 3bet hands like KQo CO vs. UTG because they think it's not quite good enough to call with and it has blockers." What is your opinion on that? Do you think it's good to 3bet? Do you think it's strong enough to call with? Should you sometimes fold?
Don't worry too much about this. Any set of bluffing hands is OK to 3bet with as long as they're in roughly the right balance. It's really only important to note that KQ is in the 3bettor's range when the flop comes down with stuff which helps KQ, and we have to figure out how to play.
Hello Ben, Nice vid!
At ~25min the 73cc K44cc Ac 5h I have some questions regarding your bet size on the river. You said a few times that having multiple betsize is not that useful. So are you only checking or overbetting your whole range here ? I guess you could even with Ax to get him off a chop but let's just modify the board and your hand a bit and say you hold Ad5d on Kc4c2d Ac 7h, now overbetting the river doesn't looks that good because we are valuecutting ourselves against better A.
What do you think about having multiple sizing here ? 1) overbet with high and low nuts end 2) ~2/3 pot with speculatives hands
okdude,
I tend to bet out with a variety of value bets, most of them of medium strength, and then x/r the nuts, and b3b the supernuts.
The river is a good spot to make an exploitative read on 2 quantities, a) how often he checks back Ax on the turn, b) how often he bets river with Ax. If we think he rarely checks back turn with Ax, and/or rarely bets the river with it, then we'll know we won't get many x/r in. If that's the case, then (over)betting river might very well be exploitative in addition to a smaller betsize.
I'm halfway through the video and enjoying it so far :)
I have a question about the J6s blind vs blind hand where you advocate a mixed strategy w/ the Jx portion of our range. You say that we don't have many 2pair type hands in this spot that we will ch turn bet river for thin value and this comment is perplexing to me. Shouldn't we have all the T9, Q9, K9, QT, KT, KQ combos pre and play most as a flop call? You say because we don't have too many of these thin value bets to protect vs check raises on the river we should check back fewer Jx combos... but this logic is also a bit confusing to me.
Even if we do have a lot of 2pair type vbetting hands on the river and villain is aware of this isn't it hard for him to punish us in this spot? To do so he has to check a decent amount of Jx on the turn which while it does pose a threat to our river vbets also greatly benefits the other portion of our range. Because one effect counterbalances the other in a sense do we have to be too worried about protecting our 2pair vbet range? If we instead bet most of our Jx on the turn it also has the benefit of strengthening our turn betting range and thus allowing us to turn more of our weak 9x/Tx pairs (which we will have a ton of in this spot) into profitable bluffs on the turn and river.
I'm glad "You say because we don't have too many of these thin value bets to
protect vs check raises on the river we should check back fewer Jx
combos," this logic is confusing to you, because in the video I meant to say exactly the opposite. Thin value bets don't protect against checkraises- a range full of thin value bets has the most to lose when it gets checkraised frequently by nuts and air.
You're also right that when OOP checks Jx on the turn he risks losing value from many 1pair hands on the turn, and many 2pair hands on the turn/river. In other words, the losing value from checkbacks effect counterbalances the gaining value from checkraising effect. My hunch though is that never checking back Jx would still be a mistake for IP, because OOP could wait until IP checked back the turn and then jam for a huge overbet with nuts and air on river blanks. I think this would put IP in quite a tough spot, and it would also probably make it exploitative to check back Jx on the turn. So my hunch is that the equilibrium strat involves some checking of Jx from both players at this stack depth.
Albert Einstein said if you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it enough. Awesome teaching style Ben. Love it.
Hey Ben,
I know your a nlhe coach for RIO, but I was hoping I could squeeze a thought or two from you about PLO. It has to do with a concept that you talked about in this video, which is SB play. In a mid stakes PLO, non-ante game, do you prefer playing raise/fold or limping? I feel like the games are different enough that I didn't want to assume your nlhe approach was "one-size-fits-all." I've been messing around w/ both strategies and I think I'm leaning towards tailoring my strategy to the specific player in the BB, but would love to get another opinion.
Thanks, loved the video.
lots of fun watching it
A quick fix: I think the ratio of XYs to XYo should be 1:3 sharp, just because there are 4 combos of XYs and 12 of XYo. It seems like the number 2.8 comes from some round-off error..?
u fotgot to take PPs into account
How is that relevant? PPs are not XYs, they are XXs. And we generally don't talk consider PPs as being suited or not, although technically they are not.
Yeah this is correct, and when he went into CREV and fixed his numbers it came out to roughly 23.5 and 70.5, which is exactly 3:1. I was getting confused for a sec heh
Not sure why he went round the houses to come up with this ratio, even to the extent of the absurd claim that there are 2.7 more suited combos of KQ than off suit KQ combos! There are four suits in a deck, so common sense tells you the ratio is, of course, 3:1
I guess there is still hope for us mortals when a top player like this makes such a crazy mistake.
Ben,
Great vid, and I really enjoyed watching it.
I have a question about the last K8 hand on J95 Tc K board. Given the action, you probably would have played Jx differently (i.e. bet the flop), so K8o here is pretty much bottom of your value betting range. And yes, I don't think this is a thin value bet at all.
However, given how many 2p's and Qx you can have in your range, aren't you value betting too much if you bet as weak as K8 here? And obviously, to make up for that you would need to bluff a lot more too, so wouldn't that weaken our overall range in this particular spot?
Or maybe this doesn't really matter because his range is capped and there's nothing much he can do about it? If so, would I be correct in thinking that this is one of those spots where you're better off taking an exploitative line and not worrying too much about our range balance?
Thanks a lot,
midori
I'm guessing that, bvb, I basically can't ever run out of value bets. There will just be so many hands in my range like A3o or 43o that even if I'm betting as thin as Kx, I still might not be able to follow through with all of my air. To be more specific, I should be constructing my turn betting range such that I have roughly alpha bluffs on 4 straights, and that I don't need to turn any of my pairs into bluffs in order to get to alpha bluffs.
good job! can u explain better the math in the flat with 55 against a 3bet oop? you said it was too small the 3bet, but can u put some math on it?
I will also sometimes find some +EV spots when I the PFR checks back, or when I flop gutters or open enders.
Great video thanks.
K8 analysis was really nice, and yeah, you got your figures mixed up about the offsuit/suited combos ratio :). T'was kinda fun to watch you struggle over the obvious for once though :D
Brilliant video again Ben! Already waiting for part 3!
Ben,
Interestingly (although you spoke about the concepts seperately), It seems that the concept of turning bottom pairs into bluffs goes hand in hand with betting real thin for value. This usually happens on board textures that change significantly by the river in a way that enables you to have the nuttiest hands and the villain to usually not. Thus, it makes sense to not leave money on the table and bluff with some bottom pairs that no longer have as much showdown value AND bet a little thinner with some top pair hands. HOWEVER, it is real tempting to bluff theses spots with nearly all hands that aren't too strong as well, SO I THINK IT COULD GET REAL TRICKY TO BALANCE. I say all that to say that I think it is an underutilized concept that must be backed by a pretty decent amount of work away from the tables to get right (as opposed to many spots that are easier to play correctly with intuition).
Most people will not do either enough so it is probably irrelevant (just check both their bottom pairs and top pairs), but nevertheless an area of poker that is not often explored with math or thought.
While it was a good live video, Ben's skill would be much better used
for concept/math-videos or HU footage, since those are the areas where
his approach probably differs the most from that of other good players.
And yes, offsuit to suited is exactly 3:1, the pairs do not interact with
that in any way, which was probably his reasoning for believing the
rounded numbers.
Thanks for the feedback. I've heard people go both ways on this issue. Some players who are excellent at theory have said that my skills are wasted talking about theory. I hope that my blunder figuring out the ratio of suited to offsuit combos convinces you that I'm FAR from infallible when it comes to theory.
Hi Ben
With 37cc at around the 24min mark, would you ever have a leading range on that turn considering hand strengths have changed quite a bit for both players on that card? Or would this open us up to being raise too aggressively?
Thanks!
I think that my range is still significantly less polarized than IP's, and is generally weaker. I also expect IP's range to be fairly polarized, and to have a high betting frequency. If so, leading won't accomplish much because IP will fold some of his air, call some of his middle range, and raise some of his air and some of his nut range. All I will have done with my lead is inflate the pot against the parts of his range I'd prefer he bluffed with.
edit: "All I will have done with my lead is inflate the pot against the parts of his range I'd prefer he bluffed with," should be: inflate the pot against the parts of his range which have me in bad shape.
hey,
around 33:00 , you cold 4bet Ak and advocate that its a mistake to 4bet call AQ , JJ 100bb deep.
so whats your default play with JJ,TT and AQ in that spot?
and shouldnt your get it in range change exploitative accordingly to the players or dynamics in game?
thanks
Hey Ben, lovely to have you on the site. Looking forward to some fantastic videos from you. I do however wonder about the 98hh. Firstly why are you making it 240 rather then say 180-200? Secondly I tried to do the math and its a pretty easy call given your sizing if he jams giving him a range of AA/KK AK/KQ, Am I totally off here or what?
I think my default play would be to fold JJ and TT, and 4b bluff AQ. That might be wrong though.
Yes, if you think you know how to exploit someone's range, then do it.
I'm not exactly sure what you're referencing, but if you put him on a range of AA/KK/AK/KQ to jam over my xr, then you've put him on much too wide of a jamming range. I'd guess he jams over the xr almost never here- but if he does it will be with a smaller part of his preflop range than AA/KK/AK/KQ.
Hey guys,
I'm visiting family in a (very) small town and there is only one place in town to get Internet, and even there service is intermittent. I'm going to copy and paste everyone's responses onto a document and take a look at them in the next few days and then post responses up here. I'll be available with internet more often as of Tuesday.
Ben
Does your family live in a remote tribal village in the depths of the Amazon jungle? ;)
Great video! Loved absolutely every minute of it.
The ratio offsuit:suit is exactly 3:1 (12 offsuit combos and 4 suited for every hand).
Great vid tho!
this isnt the ratio out of all possible hands dealt as it excludes PP's.
Awesome video Ben! The K8 hand was very interesting and your breakdown of his range was pretty sick. I wouldn't change a thing wrt the webcam/format/time spent on each hand. Even if you only cover a few hands per video the content is just so damn good and I wouldn't want you skipping any thoughts or possible tangents. More vids pls
With the 98s 3bet pot c/r from UTG, if the turn comes a card such that you decide to check,what do you think villain should do with KQo? KK?
I don't think villain can make too big of a mistake with KQo. Since the SPR is so small, KQo doesn't need to worry too much about giving free ones, and since IP should check back some hands, KQo is a fine hand to include for protection/trapping. KK on the other hand is either a bluff or a check behind, but I'd lean strongly towards check behind since I can't think of too many hands in OOP's range which are helped by free ones, or hands in OOP's range which were flop value xr, but turn xf.
About 3c7c hand. I used to xRaise this kind of holdings ( small flushdraws, ie 84cc, 85cc) if i didn´t 3bet them pre. And xC flushdraws with bigger showdown value like AXcc KXcc. What would be your (semi)bluffing-check-raise range on this situations ? Have you ever consider play xR with your 37cc ?
I would definitely have some clubs in my XR range. I'm not sure if a weak FD, or a strong FD, or both, is the right hand to include for a flop XR.
I don't have a very clear idea of my range for a flop XR in this spot. Because I don't, I tend to take my opponent's play into account and figure out what sort of ranges work well against their strategy. I find that that makes my decisions easier.
Nice work Ben,
I like your demeanor and content. Keep the web cam.
9h 8h on TJ6r. i really don't think you'll have much of a C/R-ing range here in theory - if the flop was two tone, sure. but on a rainbow flop, what are you C/R-ing for value? 2 combos of JTs? so, you'll balance this with 2-3 combos of 89s?
You'll have to argue for the premise "I really don't think you'll have much a C/R-ing range here in theory."
my argument is if your C/R-ing range consists of so little value, then we balance this with very little bluffs (i'm guessing an equal or slightly over 1:1 ratio with SPR). great vid btw :-)
my thinking is it seems kind of taboo to C/R any sets on this texture (except possibly 66 , which i don't think is in your range - but i forget the formation and backdoor equity also needs to be taken into consideration too vs hands like KQo --- which we want to shovel chips in against) - we want to keep his range wide and bluffs intact by just ch/calling because we have the board so crippled. so, with little value combos we're C/R-ing, this logic leads to our optimal range containing little bluffs... perhaps 2-3 combos of 98s (backdoor draw) is the extent of this. just my rationale
I'd have to look at this spot in CREV to make a decision as to whether x/c, x/r, or x/mix is right with our sets here at this stack depth.
89hh hand on JTx rainbow. In order to make you the life impossible. What do you think is the best strategy for 3bettor with KQo/AA/KK/QQ. Just call and let you bluff your reamaining stack in ~15 possible turns, or ship on the flop against your raise and don´t let you materialize a 33% equity holding..?
for 98hh hand, what is the crux of the problem if we wanted to solve it in CREV? It should be relatively easy to have our UTG defend range and BTN's value range. It seems like how we sprinkle in bluffs and how villain plays his AQ AK will matter most (both pf and flop). Is this correct?
I would go about it by manipulating three quantities for IP, a) cbet freq with weak value hands (AK, AQ, KQ, 98, 87, AJ), b) cbet freq with bluffs (A5s-A2s), and c) cbet freq with value (QQ-AA).
yo ben,
sorry to bring you back in time but im new here and just started your series.
From a theory background i've been inclined to think that capping our x/c range at QQ is no biggie, since we can't be abused by large bet sizings. That being said, here's where i'm at with arguing JTs+ as a mixed strategy, and hopefully you can help me fill in the blanks without us doing the ugly math thing:
it seems like UTG wants to play a strategy on JTx where his c/c flop+turn range isn't so strong that CO would lose incentive to bet for stacks with a hand like KK.. since it's pretty devastating for JTs+ when river checks thru at a high fqcy. So UTG shifts some of his JT+ over to a CR line, which raises the EV of his JT+ in the c/c line since IP sails it in with KK+ without caring much.
On the flipside, do you think there are significant counterstrategies available to CO if MP's flop c/c range is capped at QQ? With the low SPR, the best i can come up with is that his overcards will have more equity to barrel vs a capped range, which might allow him to bet flop+turn at a high enough frequency that too many of our flop bluffcatchers don't get to free SD often enough
ty
Regarding the 55 hand where you call the 3bet; I'm trying to construct ranges that cover enough boards and flop enough strong hands, but I'm not really sure where I want to draw the line with calling PP's. The logic you used in reaction to gauss is basically saying that you will call every pair in that spot, is that true? I think they are great hands to play against a range that contains a lot of overpairs and will barrel Kxx and Axx a lot, but I'm not sure just how many pp's I want to call against a tight range that 3bets vs UTG and how that changes when I'm in the HJ or CO.
I think calling pocket pairs depends mostly on our pot odds. At 3:1, I'll call against any range. At 2:1, I think I have to be more selective, especially against a range with both overpairs and overcards which bets flops frequently.
fwiw, I very much enjoy the webcam. I find getting all the non-verbal cues helps make your commentary better.
Are you going to make HUNL?
About 33 hand on 29:15 min
As you said he has a lot of hands he has to c/f with and your range consists of some Ax, why then bet big 4/5 of the pot instead of let's say 2/3, 3/5 or smaller (he still can't call with same range)
Thanks!
Smile,
Betting bigger will get more folds from Kx and Jx type hands, while betting smaller will get more folds from Jx and smaller type hands. Maybe one betsize is better than the other (I think 2/3 or even smaller is completely fine), but it isn't as simple as paying too big of a price for the same folding range.
Hi Ben,
thank you for the awesome videos!
I have a few questions regarding the 98s hand:
1. You mentioned it was a loose open UTG. How wide and what hands do you think it's correct to open in that spot? I've always thought that we need hands like T9s-76s since they hit good bluff randomizers to balance our valuebets postflop.
2. When you analyzed villain's 3betting range, you said he could have 98s/87s/76s himself. Do you think it's better to 3bet those hands or flat in BTN vs UTG spot?
3. You said we can't always raise sets on the flop since if we do so, our range is capped at QQ/AJs. I see how being capped on a lot of turns is bad in single-raised-pots (Villain can overbet with his strong hands which gives us incentive to slowplay our strong hands on the flop), but what's the problem of having a capped range in 3betpot (when villain cant make big bets since the spr is low)?
Thanks!
Thanks for the good questions.
1. I'll usually open something like Axs+, 22+, JTs+, KQo+, AJo+, 76s+ UTG in 6max games. I think that range is probably somewhat exploitable against aggressive players though, so I'll tighten up some in a lot of tough games I play to something like A5s, suited bways, 55+, KQo+, AJo+, 98s+.
2. Doesn't matter. All options should be close to 0EV if we're considering 3betting. I'd usually fold rather than call, I think hands like 76s gain more than any other hand class when played as part of a very polarized and high card heavy range postflop.
3. Good question. It's always a tightrope walk finding the right balance of slowplays and fastplays on the flop at various stack depths. As SPR gets low, villain can't punish our medium hands as much by betting big with a polarized range. On the other hand, if we slowplay we can still be assured we'll get all the money in if villain bets all three streets for a medium sizing. The answer is to just look at the game tree and try to maximize our strategy EV vs the nemesis, but doing so is very difficult.
I think an excellent place to start in this spot is just calling our whole range. It probably doesn't cost very much relative to X/Ring, and it makes our strategy a lot easier to define for ourselves. I chose to x/r 98hh in this spot because in the moment I was thinking "Oh, wow, this is an interesting hand to x/r," rather than "I'm burning money not X/Ring 98hh in this spot," or "98hh is certainly part of my optimal X/Ring range along with x y z."
Hi Ben its really delightful watching your videos. My question is about 8h9h hand. Do you have a check / shove range on this spot? And whats your opinion about check / shove instead of x/r ?
Nice idea to show yourself commentating in the background. This would be a pretty cool idea for online poker sites maybe in high stakes games.I don't think you need to do that all the time though.
Looking at your graph, it looks like you have been pretty much break even at NLH the past couple of years (actually down a bit).
I think it's great you are teaching at run it once - You Seem to have a unique way of analyzing the game which is great to learn from.
Not exactly relevant to the video but how many times have you read MOP because I have read it once and once does not seem like enough to be able to retain and apply it. You seem to refrence it a lot so just wondering.
great vid!
Just a spot on the 98s-hand:
You said, you gace to fold if you face a shove,
but given you need only 30% eq to call a shove off, you would be comitted vs. any reasonable range (played a ltitle arounn with stove) - vs. most ranges you would have something in the area of 33-35% eq...
Hey,
When running preflop sims in CREV, how do you estimate how much equity certain hands in your range are going to realize in various situations ? How did you get those numbers ? Or is this something you will just pick off the top of your head based on experience ? Do you have any minimum/maximum numbers to fall back on, for example "OK, HU I will always be able to realize at least 60% with 72o vs x opponent and maybe/hopefully more" or anything like that. A lot of the decisions seem somewhat close and seem to depend on whether we are realizing 80% or 85% or what exactly ..
Thanks !
hey ben - thx for another good video!
1) K8 hand riverspot @ 44:50
i think it´s pretty expected positive attitude having a + EV valuebet on the river facing pure facts.
i think villain has to call lot`s of bluffcatchers to even reach the 50% mark:
Jh9s5cTcKd Equity Win Tie
MP2 43.90% 43.90% 0.00% { Kh8c }
MP3 56.10% 56.10% 0.00% { ATs-A9s, K9s, Q9s, Q5s, J6s-J2s, K9o, Q9o }
rly not convinced villain is calling lots of weak 1pairs on the river but even if he does it`s still possible he`s taking this line with hands like AK,AQ or even sometimes QJ right? i mean sure we could see this vice-versa and expect him to sometimes show up with hands like AT/77 but i think getting + 50% vs a calling range is too optimstic.
Do you think even if say we know we have ~ 45% against a callingrange it`s worth it since we can add more bluffs and are maybe "tougher to play against" ?
2) 89 hh @ 11:20
if villain shoves we would need roughly 35% for the call. now it`s pretty hard to establish his shoving range, but i`d think it would look like
JdTh6c Equity Win TieMP2 35.13% 29.38% 5.75% { 9d8h }
MP3 64.87% 59.12% 5.75% { AdAh, KdKh, QdQh, AQs+, KQs, 98s }
actually pretting interesting we got the same 35% equity no matther if he shoves AK or AA.
vs AQ our equity is even as high as 44% but if he shoves QQ (less likely imo) we drop to 27%.
would u see this different?
Don`t wanna be nitpicky just wanted to find out if it`s really an easy fold when getting shoved on.
Thanks for the interesting post. I think I know what you're saying here, but if you have time, it would help me out a ton if you can present your argument more clearly. Specifically, I'd prefer if you can count villain's range starting from preflop, and show how he plays various hands up until this decision point. Then say what frequency and handrange you put him on for the decision in question.
For example, I'd like to see something like "I think villain plays AQ and AK preflop. On the flop, I have him betting AQ, and x/c with AK, so I think he'll continue with 100% of his flop checking range."
If you can post in an extremely clear way like the above^, you'll make it a lot easier for me to give reasonable answers to 20+ comments per video.
Much appreciated,
-Ben
starting off with the first hand : K8 hand riverspot @ 44:50
we`re taking our actual holding (K8) for the analysis,
-> no range vs range analysis
Preflop: Villain:
pre opening range 50%:
(adding hands like Q8o to villains opening range doesn`t remarkably change the analysis)
Flop: villain`s flop betting range: any TPTK+, 3rd pair(5x), all OSD, overcard+GS
villain`s checking range = rest
Turn: -> no bets on the flop
-> villain`s flop checkingrange = villain´s turn range
villain`s turn betting range: 2pair+, OSD(without pair), FD(without pair), TP+GS
villain`s checking range = rest
villain`s turn check/callingrange: 3rdpair+, overcards+SD
River: villain`s rivercheckingrange = 100%
villain`s rivercallingrange: middlepair+,3rd pair - T7+
-> this callingrange for villain makes up for 61,5% of villain`s river checking range
villain hast to defend 61% against our 9BB into 14BB riverbet to be unexploitable
Hero`s equity against that callingrange = 37%
for Hero check back river wins 1.5BB more than bet river
-> betting river will only have more EV if villain is calling too wide (9x etc.)
That analysis shows even worse equity for betting river than i suspected myself.
Are there points you disagree with?
P.S made this analysis together with BigFiszh who first off thought it`s a clear valuebet
Thanks for the great post! It helps me an unbelievable amount in my response when people take the time to post at this level of clarity.
I think you've generally set reasonable ranges for villain in this situation, but I disagree with a few points in the analysis which I think might matter. Or they might not, and regardless of these changes, the river might be a check.
First, I'd consider a 60% steal freq preflop a tight range, and 50% I'd consider a pretty big mistake (thought people might only steal 50% or less in these games, I don't know). Something like 65-70% is what I'd expect.
As for the flop, it looks to me like villain's cbetting range is very strong and fairly linear (his "bluffs" all have at least a gutter or a pair, and his value range starts at TPTK). Again, that might be realistic for these games, but I'd expect something quite a bit wider. Fwiw, I doubt the flop play effects the analysis too much in this spot, so we don't need to focus too much on that here. This is because if his flop "value" range gets wider, then hands like Jx and AT and AQ and AK will be less well represented in his turn/river x/c range, and these hands tend to fall in both the bluffcatcher and nuts categories by the river.
On the turn, I'd generally expect AK/AQ to bet, at least sometimes. I'm also curious how often this strategy has villain x/folding on the turn, especially if his preflop range is increased to something like 70% of hands. The main variable which should effect the river analysis is how many 2pair+ hands are in villain's range. Having AQ played 100% to villain's turn x/c range adds quite a few combos of the nuts to his river calling range on the K, which in turn makes vbetting K8 look much worse. All combos of AK are also played to the turn x/c range, so that K8 value cuts itself more often when betting.
So, I think we might have different ideas about how villains are likely to play weak hand classes preflop, and, more importantly, how villains are likely to play AQ and AK on the turn. I'd generally weight AK/AQ as turn x/c a low %, something in the 15%-50% range, where in this analysis they're weighted 100% as checks.
Thanks again for the excellent post, this sort of conversation makes my job a whole lot more fun that it already is :)
however we view things, in the end i think we can agree that it`s a very close spot and won`t change winrates dramatically ;-)
thx for the interesting discussion and all the best for your next HU sessions vs WCG!
Nice post From02Hero !
I have a couple of questions regarding some of the preflop peels (and they are related to my previous question a few posts above) :
1) 98s call of the 3bet UTGvsCO, when I assigned villain the range of AKo+ QQ+ A5s-A2s and a 50% weight for KQo AJo and A3s it looks like we have to realize 90% of our equity to make it a marginally profitable call pre. With us being OOP, vs a relatively strong (and the assigned range is on the looser side I think) range, going to face a c-bet upwards of 60% of the time I just don´t see how we could call this profitably
2) Q9o flat from BB vs CO 2.85x open, when assigned a roughly 30% opening range for villain (again, probably on the looser side but not by much probably), we have to realize 80% of our equity to make it a marginal call. Again, I am pretty skeptical about our chances of doing so, I think even hands like K5o will have a hard time realizing 80% in BVB situations, although there we are in a more favourable situation and can still call, but just as a equity realizing example I don´t think some of the situations you called in were too good for us. I must admit I was surprised by 55 being a somewhat realistic call (only have to realize 65%). Hope you can spare a comment on these thoughts and if the realizing equity issue can be done as simply as I did (assigning ranges and betsizes in CREV and using the checkdown feature for the flop)
I'm not sure I disagree with anything in your post except your conclusion. I'd expect a hand like 98s to realize quite a bit of equity in a spot like this, and I'd definitely expect Q9o to realize 80%. Of the two calls, I think 98s is definitely more marginal though.
Isn't that value bet on the river a bit thin considering most of the hands we hope he calls with have 8x in them which needs to be discounted since we are holding an 8. We are hoping 89, 8T, A9, AT, and T7 call. Do you really think we can value bet this thinly and show a profit? What percent of the time do you think we actually get called by worse hands here vs. called by better?
lololol i love the ending hahahaha
hey about the K8off hand the one with the thin value bet on the river, i generally think that only a jack would call the river bet, and if there is a jack in his range then he would've probably bet the flop. But on another hand the combos of Qs and two pairs are really little and you block some of the ks, maybe in such spots I would choose to bet 1/2 the pot or even slightly lesser? so that he can make a hero call with lone pair or even in case he has a Q.
your breakdown on these hands is amazing. you must have been near your peak at NL back then in terms of thought process' etc.
it'd be really cool if you could bring back the pausing of the hands in the video to discuss about range vs range, I think it is a far superior way of learning than watching someone get in 500 hands an hour 4 tabling zoom.
nice one.
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.