Bet Sizing: $.25/$.50 6-Max Zoom Live Session

Posted by

You’re watching:

Bet Sizing: $.25/$.50 6-Max Zoom Live Session

user avatar

Salternator

Essential Pro

Video Player is loading.
Current Time 0:00
Loaded: 0%
Duration -:-
Remaining Time 0:00
  • descriptions off, selected

Resume Video

Start from Beginning

Watch Video

Replay Video

10

You’re watching:

Bet Sizing: $.25/$.50 6-Max Zoom Live Session

user avatar

Salternator

POSTED Mar 06, 2017

Iain focuses on the concept of bet sizing while playing a 2 table session of low stakes Zoom NLHE.

26 Comments

Loading 26 Comments...

Taunto_88 7 years, 10 months ago

Another Amazing Video Ian. Really Enjoyed the content and the Theme.

At the @23:00min mark.. the 87s, we make the small 1/3rdish bet.. How do we continue if we get Check raised to say 18-20bb in this spot? are we folding?
I find more often than not when making a smaller Cbet on flops im getting raise and or Check raised and have a hard time continuing on in these spots.
Would you continue with a lot of your Top pair type hands on a dry flop? I understand that it can come down to villain tendencies as well but i've been noticing alot of raise Cbet and Check raising Cbets when using smaller sizing compared to a half pot-2/3rds bet.
It could very well be something in my game that villains have found, idk, im just asking/speaking from my experience so far thats all.

Really Enjoyed the PIO breakdown at the end as well. It's one thing to say that we need to defend more against the smaller sizing, but it's another to actually see how much to give a good generalization of the range your speaking of.

Keep up the great Content. Look forward to your next video,

Salternator 7 years, 10 months ago

Hey - 87s hand. I would continue here vs a check raise of that size with this hand as well as all Flush draws and strong pocket pairs with backdoors(with a spade) as well as strong top pair type hands. The reason you get raised more when you use the smaller sizing is that the smaller sizing allows you to bet a wider less polarised range, meaning more hands in villains range want to raise for value/protections. Because of this we need to make sure we are defending enough against the c/r.

Glad you enjoyed the video!

Taiga 7 years, 10 months ago

Hey Iain
8:40 QT no call against a limper?
14:35 66 we can't call this vs utg with a fish behind us?
16:25 Q8 do you think villain has enough bluffs for us to call on this turn? Unless he is bluff raising Ace of diamonds combos it seems like most villains wouldn't have many bluffs here.
29:10 JJ do you think we can bet any king on the river?
thanks

Salternator 7 years, 10 months ago

Hey, QTO I think I should have played vs the recreational limper. Against a strong limping strategy it would still be a fold I expect.

66 definately a fold for me. The CO is 3betting aggressivly and the Button is a nitty fish so there isnt going to be alot of value in entering the pot. With 4 uncapped ranges behind I like my fold.

Q8 - Definately. Villain is only folding preflop 33% of the time here so there are many many gutshots and one diamond hands that can be bluffing. Also you can see from my HUD this player is aggressive and doing alot of raising.

JJ - Kx is definately a valuebet here in a 5bb pot.

nittyoldman 7 years, 10 months ago

Iain,
You are obviously familiar with piosolver, I've been asking some friends and nobody seems to know the answer to this for sure: If you ask pio to solve a flop situation, is it making the assumption that both players played exactly GTO on further streets? meaning, does pio assume that there is no future profitable situation that might otherwise sway the output of the bet/call/fold/raise frequencies? I guess I am having trouble wrapping my head around how pio's results are decided on (and thus its validity as a strategy solver).

For instance, if we are on this 874hh board, oop is recommended to x/r vs the smaller sizing at a higher freq than vs the larger sizing, and pio recommends that we are to start including weaker 8x and some 7x into the x/r that would have been calls vs the 66% cbet strat, but lets say that this player is especially spazzy and somehow we know he is likely to 3b shove the flop light vs our widened x/r strat, then that would be a scenario we would like to avoid with our middling strength showdownable hands. And in that case the increased x/r strat that pio told us to do is just lighting $$ on fire. So, it seems to me that PIO must make some kind of assumptions for future balanced play from both players about future actions in the hand in order to be able to mathematically solve for the proper play.

As another example, if we knew that our opponent was very weak/passive and we have a hand that wants to get to showdown cheaply, if pio tells us to bet it at any frequency it has to be wrong I think because we would want to check down at 100% freq knowing that we will not be bluffed off our equity or sd value.

Can you shed some light?

sauloCosta10 7 years, 10 months ago

What you are talking about is exploitative play. Pio is a GTO solver. GTO means nash equillibrium, unexploitable. When you have reads on your opponents (like in your examples - villain 3bet shoves vs XR, villain is too passive) you should deviate from GTO to make more money.

Pio doesnt make assumptions when iterating to equillibrium strategy, it simply tries to exploit itself as best as it can until there is nothing else to do and equillibrium is reached.

You can use a Pio feature called node lock to move either player's strategy from equillibrium. Its specially useful when you want to test assumptions and see what changes in your strategy. In your example, if you lock IP's strat on the flop to 3bet more vs check/raise, OOP player will XR more polarized

Salternator 7 years, 10 months ago

What Saulo said is correct and let me shed some further light. My reccomendation is to use PIOsolver to understand how to exploit players better. By getting an understanding first of how a GTO solver generally apporaches the game in a variety of situations you can then learn how best to exploit opponents that have certain statistics indicating they are approaching the game in a very very different way.

w00tz 7 years, 9 months ago

@30:00 We are behind of 3 combos AJs (assuming AJdd bets flop), 1 combo of KQs and 3 combos of KK. We are ahead of 6 AA, 6 JJ, 8 AQ and 12 AK, all of those which call one more bet on turn, so 32:7 ahead/behind I think we have a clear value bet and our range is well protected against a check raise for having all those nutty hands on flop you said. Thoguhts?

Salternator 7 years, 9 months ago

hey - a 3Bet range BB vs BTN can definately contain combos of AJo , KQo as well as some KTs that we are behind. I still think this is a check back as we arent high enough in our range and we want to be mostly betting sets , straigths and some KQ here on the turn for our value range.

Stanners 7 years, 9 months ago

Really getting a lot of great in game advice from all of these.

Would like to see you review stats/leakfind after sessions?

More please!

Taunto_88 7 years, 8 months ago

Watched this video for the 3rd time now :D
Whats your take on Over betting? how often and what sort of spots do u look to do it in?
When the Villain's range is capped? when you have a Strong hand like 2 pair on a Straight/flush heavy board? Dry boards? Would you consider over bet bluffing at 50nl-100nl?
Seeing more and more over bets these days, more so at 100nl but happens time to time at 50nl, and i usually dont know how to continue when i have a decent hand and villains repping a very narrow range..if that makes sense.

Salternator 7 years, 2 months ago

Hey , overbetting is a very common/correct bet size to use in situations where there is an unbalanced of nutted combos between two ranges. Essentially when one range is capped the other range will use an overbet sizing often! This occurs quite regularly on blank turns for example

24kMagic 7 years, 2 months ago

Thanks for a great video Iain,
7:30: w JTs vs a loose passive player I think you can easily bet the turn for value and get called by draws, runner draws that picked up equity or a pair, weaker pairs, even hands like A3, A4 will call imo. It's obviously fine to check back and look to bet some rivers as well. But getting the value with a 2nd barrel seems like an optimal exploitable play to me vs someone who tends to call too wide. Any thoughts on this?

Be the first to add a comment

You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.

Runitonce.com uses cookies to give you the best experience. Learn more about our Cookie Policy