Where's the Money: Multiway Flops
Posted by Cory Mikesell
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 16 Comments...
Best explanation in the world I have ever seen.
Tremendous explanation of cbetting in a spot I see all the time but for which I had no framework. Thanks!
Really solid video and I like the way you zoned in on a common spot for us to apply.
I'm so glad you guys are enjoying it. Do you feel like the vision + theory brings things home more effectively than just one or the other?
Cory Mikesell I thought the combination was great
Cory Mikesell yes!
Okay, then I'll definitely do more like that.
In the video you talk about how using small sizings for the oop players is the way to go when donking or cbetting on these boards with no clear equity advantage. But in the Vision sim you have the btn stabbing 75% pot. Is there a reason for the discrepancy? If so what are the advantages for the ip player sizing up?
So I didn't choose the sizes that were in vision. The sizes in vision were also from a time before the update to monker, which reducing the sim size, allowing us to actually run multiway deep stack sims. That's not to say that the sims were necessarily bad, but that there were just sizing limitations. For instance, now on my home pc with 128g of ram, I can run large 3 way SRP sims. Before the monker update, we were struggling to do that on servers with 5 times as much ram.
I see ty for the clarification. So a 1/3-1/2 pot sizing is optimal for all players in this scenario? I think I have a tendency to over complicate flop sizings in srp. Trying to make adjustments for small changes in flop texture. For example sizing up to 2/3-3/4 pot on K78tt but using 1/2 pot on say K72tt. I also take into consideration wether I’m ip or oop. Sizing up in general oop, betting more polar and less frequently. The same can be said for MW pots, betting more polar and choosing larger sizes when deciding to bet. Would it be a bad strategy to just default to a 1/2 pot sizing regardless of position and amount of players in the pot on most flop textures we decide to bet in srp 100+bb deep? Only sizing down on very static textures like monotone and paired boards? Then worry about splitting sizings on later streets? Or am I trying to over simplify. Thanks!
If anything, I'd rather use the small sizes OOP to increase my betting volume, but generally I agree. The one thing we really should take away from the solvers is that in scenarios with relatively wide ranges (meaning the flop before betting action), any reasonable size is okay and is so close in value that it's irrelevant in human play. The only reasons to pick one sizing over another is to either make it easier for you to play your range, or harder for your opponent to play against your range. For this reason, I've often used cbets like 40% pot even when 66% was 0.5% better. To me, the difference was irrelevant. What matters is that my opponents trained against 66% and often called/raised as if they were facing that size.
A deeper point is that the only way to win in games is when your opponent makes mistakes. People get caught up in trying to play "the best sizing" when they should try to get really good at a weird sizing instead. There are plenty of examples of this in other games too such as Magnus Carlsen playing some pretty funky openings in chess because he knows, objectively, they all lead to equality anyway, so why not play something weird and try to take your opponent into a "deep, dark forest" when he has a better flashlight.
Just a quick question: what sim are the given preflop ranges taken from (8:20 into the video)? They do not line up with anything I've seen (15% BB overcall, 9% btn call vs co).
For simplicity if we compare them to RIOs sims we have a 28% overcall and 13% BTN cold call, and this is with 500z level rake. I know it's not the most important part of the video, but I've never seen numbers that low and I'm curious where they are from.
Hey it was 200z rake. 15% was a typo sorry, it should be 25%. BTN was a bit tighter due to higher rake
Cory Mikesell Ah that makes sense, thanks! It was so far off my own sim numbers that I got a bit concerned haha
Yeah no worries. I'm going to do the next video with 500z rake to maximize the relevance for everyone
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.