Check Raising the Flop From the BB w/ PIO
Posted by Paul Atwal
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 17 Comments...
solid video
Hey man, nice video,
Got some questions/observations I had using PIO, specially at the hands you didn't look at the video:
16:55 - On the river spot with the K4, PIO mostly folds to the river bet. One thing I realized is that it's usually calling with 4x and 6x that doesn't block spades nor diamonds and with weaker kickers, like for example it mostly folds K4 but calls 54. Probably because of blocker effects to the backdoor draws IP calls on the flop, right? Do you think that's something to keep in mind in most situations like this? Also worth noting is that IP doesn't bet that much with the weaker Qx on the river.
49:03 - You said the J turn was pretty bad for us, but looking at the spot I found that we actually bet the turn with more frequency on the J than most runouts, prefering an overbet sizing against a 50% sizing. Observing the flop strategy from both players, I found OOP check raises a decent amount of Jx and IP is supposed to 3-bet a lot of QQ and some KK. Do you think we keep barreling because the J turn decreases the amount of Jx villain has and therefore his calling range or it has to do with something else?
54:21 - PIO suggests a lot of checking for the IP player on the flop instead of c-betting a ton, even with the 33% sizing. Do you think we should use a 100% c-betting strategy or go with the PIO strategy, and if we go with the 100% strategy, does it have any relation to the fact people probably wouldn't raise 40+% of the time?
As far as the format I think that's great, specially since you look in depth at the details of the spots and therefore brings a lot of value.
Cheers!
Hey YM,
awesome questions. The screenshots and analysis are appreciated and make for a fun discussion.
H1:
Yeah, I think so. If we for ex have 4cXc, it's difficult/impossible to block bluffs (unlike with 4d or 4s).
interesting question. Realizing something this nuanced in-game seems unlikely. Tbh, I'm just happy to see that my exact hand is actually calling a non-negligible frequency -- this is around the level of precision I can realistically hope for most of the time. Don't spend too much time sweating these type of details, especially since they're all going to be razor thin close in EV. Having data on an opponent will be more helpful than knowing the exact mix for the call/fold ratio of a combo like this.
I'll come back soon when I can to discuss the other two hands
H2:
I guess I just misunderstood how this turn card functions.
I'm not sure about this tbh.
H3:
The important thing here is to find out what the actual EV difference between using this mix or always betting. Even with a 40% raise frequency, it's possible that the difference is small (perhaps even more so if you use a smaller cb for pure). Always betting will of course recapture some of the (possibly negligible) EV loss from opponents that don't xr enough.
It's great to see that people are enjoying this type of review format. I know a lot of people enjoy live play videos, but I'll continue mixing it up with something different from time to time.
I really enjoyed this vid. Keep 'em coming!
About the KQ on 56QK9 board: If you think Villain is good enough (which I assume), then there are actually very few straights in his range. Almost no competent player openraises 78o from the CO and some will even not openraise TJo with aggro regs in the blinds. That leaves only the 78s combos and maybe a random TJs combo that will call a flop check/raise. GTO is all nice and well but in Villains shoes, unless hes capable of playing a hand like a set this way to merge his bluffrange with a wider valuerange (unlikely except for 99, I'd say), he should realize he cannot credibly rep a straight often enough. Likewise, this makes it quite an easy rivercall with the KQ, actually, his range is simply containing too few valuehands.
I don't think anything about my play or what I said would suggest otherwise.
I didn't say that either :). You just talked entirely about his bluffing range and never mentioned that his valuerange is actually very small, regardless of the fact that his bluffing range is quite big. Just wanted to point that out, that's all.
Yeah, fair enough. I did talk about how some IP players will be prone to betting too many draws ott. This would consequently result in fewer value bets otr. It could have been made more explicit, though.
This is great! A series of these where say you maybe concentrate on a specific flop texture for the video and come up with some specific rules of thumb for c/r range construction on each - something along those lines.
What was your setup of PIO tree?
That was a great video, il like to see the same format SB vs BB. Enjoy ur work
Nice format, and nice hands to study. Ty
Hey Paul,
At 8:47 you compare what OOP strategy should be on various turn cards. Can you explain why we should be checking so much on the off suit Q, It looks like we are checking close to 100% on this card where as on the offsuit J( card that favors IP) we are still betting around 1/4 of the time? It seems like most of our C/R "bluffs" improve on this card, yet our betting range drops significantly from the card that seems to be the worst in the deck for us(offsuit J).
Thanks.
Fantastic videos bro. Big fan
Great video! Thanks for the breakdown.
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.