1rst spot

Interesting that most of the Kx ovb turn after big bet flop. That not something I do in practice, and most vilain too I think.

Facing x r here and barrel on blank blank, that a spot where a ton of vilain would only call AK+ here, I loved to x r with 3x combos to block A3s 33. Even if I really prefere to do it on rainbow board
It s a spot where pop is gonna massively overfold facing aggression, because it’s a very under bluff spot , they have a big advantage etc..
If they fold all Ax facing turn and river aggression, node lock this spot and damn look the xr frec) we need to keep our sizing not to big to not isolate us against 2p + and to let vilain fold his Ax on the smaller size we can use).
Also, in n-100/200 pool, when Vilains start to be competent, they will recognize that AQ AJ AT block bluffs, so they fold that, and they are not calling with bluffcatcher like A7o because it’s not the top of their range.
It might be something to exploite here ;)

Spot 2

Same, I really believe that is an under call river spot on mostly runouts.
But problem is : we don’t know what people fold on the turn , so they might be not overfolding river because they fold a ton OTT!

Turn this 77call and 87s fold seems perplex to me. I think it’s because 87 has only 2 outs, (7 is a useless card vs 3 ba, and the 8 is a card where vilain should decrease his betting frecs a lot, (not 3ba ovp) Pio prefers to call with 77, 2 outs, but on a 7 OTR vilain should bet all’ of his OVP. So 77> 87,86s
So hard to see those things IG haha

Cheers.

(my English is still improving)

really like your opening ranges Peter can u show HJ and CO unopened also?

Very good stuff. Learned a lot.

good stuff

like this format alot please do more in the future learning alot thanks again

Great video! What about making a video of your rake-included opening ranges?

Hi Peter, outstanding video, as usual! No idea if you still read new comments about months old videos... This is just a nit-pick regarding the interpretation of the EVs of various options in a solver output. (41:40) You may have already known this but have kind of forgotten: GTO strategies only are mixed when the EVs of all the options with non-zero frequency are strictly identical. (Hence, it is never GTO to take an action with any finite (non-zero) frequency at all when there exists another action that has an higher EV at this exact node). It's only because we're looking at solutions that are solved with limited accuracy (and hence are still exploitable) that different options in a mixed strategy have slightly different EVs.

When we proceed to solve with an ever higher accuracy, either one of two things is guaranteed to happen: (1) The frequency of the options with lower EV converges towards zero, or (2) the different options remain mixed but their EV-differences tend towards zero. Hence the EV difference visualization tool in Pio must mainly be used to spot the hands with pure strategies (or that are just missing some of the allowable actions) that would lose the most to a simplification for the whole range that would force them to take an option not actually taken in the more complex mixed GTO strategy. The smallish EV differences of the truly mixed options, by contrast, merely testify to the lack of accuracy of the solve.