Nice video, I definitely enjoy your way of looking at hands.
One thing I am curious about: You keep saying that you think, that due to 4bet pots being so uncommon, there would not be enough meta to incentivice villain to try and exploit you with overbluffing. But then on the same note, you keep saying that you think they underbluff and end up making a bunch of HUGE folds, that you do seem to derive from some sort of meta.
Don't get me wrong, intuitively I get most of your folds, but I am having a hard time justifying them inteIlectually. I guess what I am asking is where you are taking the certainty from that people are not bluffing you a ton.
Dont you think that the one who called the 4bet is kind of expected to not defend enough post? And that the 4bettor is incentivized to be agro?

I guess what I am asking is where you are taking the certainty from
that people are not bluffing you a ton.

pretty much by lighting tens of thousands of dollars on fire over large samples. then doing it all over again when i thought people had adjusted to me, and realizing that i was still lighting money on fire.

but also, i'm not just blindly over-folding across all scenarios. in almost all of the cases i show, it's bc i have some sort of strong read on how villain's range naturally functions at a certain decision point. there are spots where it's just harder for villain to force balance than others, and i try to gear my over-folding toward those instances.

Hey Nick, nice video.
In the JJ hand around 15min vs the 1/3 pot bet you don't mention him having TT/99 for thin value/protection as a possibility. Do you discount this heavily? If he has some value that we beat that is checking back river it would make the fold pretty disastrous, no?

Hey Nick, nice video.
In the JJ hand around 15min vs the 1/3 pot bet you don't mention him having TT/99 for thin value/protection as a possibility. Do you discount this heavily? If he has some value that we beat that is checking back river it would make the fold pretty disastrous, no?

thanks Stephen,
I dont put him on TT-99 b/c i think it's a big reach to say that those hands
a) 4bet to begin with when deep, as opposed to just flatting
b) reopen the turn for protection in a spot where i can make his life miserable by expanding value with XRs if i find out he's that merged.

edit*: also the range i'm required to defend ott might naturally just be too strong to make 99-TT want to bet .. even without XR counterstrategies (like Xjamming QQ/KK), i haven't modeled it, but i think 99 is a huge favorite to be a turn XB tho, and TT still a big favorite

QQ at 39minutes...Since AJo is included in a alot of players 4b range in these positions dont you think we can make the thin valuejam?

yea, it's a really good point

ty Nick

22:00 im by far an elite pro but i think the KJo is a bet/call with TP on the river. Is he really checking a better hand back on the turn with so many draws or did the 3 improve him? Unlikely. Your hand is face up on the river too a mediocre value hand and never a bluff. So I think such a small blockbet induces alot of players to bluff jam and therefor its a call.

26:00 its kinda hard for me to understand that bet/folding TT on 974dd is the best play here. You expect to be way behind or in a coinflip situation against draws? Is checking back the flop an option?

i don't even know if you are still active on here any longer but i started watching your vids from the start and found one of the hands in this review interesting so thought i'd comment anyways.

@17:00 i believe that is Charlie Carrell, or however you spell it, who definitely loves to barrel off. so straight off the bat i would say he for sure edges on to the side of over-bluffing post flop in spots like these as opposed to under-bluffing. he also has a 5x starting stack, so that would also kinda indicate that he is on the more aggressive side.

with regards to the hand, however. lets say he cold 4 bets and barrels off QQ, KK, AA for value- thats 18 combos. if we call turn and he jams river, which i also agree that he's going to jam the vast majority of the time, he is jamming $600 in to a pot of $1k, so needs to have 73% value hands to 27% bluffs. so of course he always has AKo and AKs in his range, probably always has AQs and perhaps at least half of the AQo combos. then he'll have AJs and ATs at least 50% or so of the time. he may even have the off KQs or KJs or even A5s. that's just soooo many combos of hands you beat.

even if he didn't have a bunch of these hands and just had QQ-AA and AK. he is looking at our range thinking, we are 'capped,' rather than, i can only bluff x% of my AK combos other wise i am way over bluffing.

so if he's jamming QQ-AA and putting us on a hand exactly like what we have then that is 18 combos, so he only gets to bluff with just under 7 combos- less than half of his AK combos! i would bet my roll that he is way over-bluffing this spot and that, even with JJ and arguably with any pair here, we are just kinda printing vs him when we call him down on non A/K/Q rivers.

as you said a bunch of players don't bet turn knowing they can bluff turn but can't bluff the river with that particular hand, they are more like, villain is capped, i can just triple super wide here and he's gonna have to fold cos we are 200 bigs deep, so i am gonna jam basically every river.

this used to be way more of a thing a couple years ago in zoom, just barrelling off vs 'capped' ranges having no idea about correct bluffing frequencies, unfortunately people aren't just tripling off their range now in 3 bet pots on low boards :( but it probably printed back then, as i definitely over-folded too haha.

really enjoying your vids so far, btw :)

I know it's a very basic question but when do you prefer having a linear vs polarized 3bet range ? I understand if opponent calls a lot 3bet you prefer linear and if he folds/raise a lot you prefer polarized. But this is more exploitative. In reality what would be the best positions for the best strategies ?