Exploits 101 : A Showdown is worth a thousand words
Posted by Krzysztof Slaski
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 11 Comments...
Great video!
5:11. Why was I under the impression that the 575r board was better for the BB's range than the cutoff's range? Can you help me here?!
30:50. I also like semi-bluffing with equity against these players when my hand isn't strong enough to insert into a check/call range.
5:11; haha not sure I can help you unless you can figure out why you thought so. Paired boards are almost always going to favor the pfr. He will have all the big pairs and a lot of combos of big cards (which have a lot of equity on a board like 755r), and even if we find some offsuit combos of the trips in the callers range they will very rarely compensate for the offsuit combos which bricked. The boards that would really favor the bb in this case would be the lower connected boards like 765, 543, 432. However the IP still likely gets more than 50% pot share on these, hard to recoup the pot share big pairs steal otf.
30:50; Yep, throwing a bunch of the semi-bluffs in there will be a sound adjustment ;)
Loved the video, certainly a lot to think about when exploiting different kinds of opponents. My question is how do we adjust our strategy vs a larger lead on the flop? For example, let's say villain leads $35, of course we are still going to want to have floats however I would imagine that a lot of them will now play better as raises or folds given that our price to continue is worse. This is a hand in particular that I'm interested in as it has very strong backdoor equity and is an ideal float, however I can't imagine it being profitable to float vs a $35 lead (maybe I'm wrong) and I don't see myself raising vs that size very liberally for value, so do these hands just have to start hitting the muck in this case? I only ask as I play a lot live and often find myself having to respond to ridiculous sizes with relatively strong backdoor hands in spots like these.
The adjustment vs a larger bet would be pretty similar, only difference being that we of course defend a little tighter. In general we would want to raise more aggressively vs a small bet (since it's costing our value bets when less money goes in on the flop, plus the bigger he goes the more he's polarizing his range which in turn leads us to raise less). I do not play a lot of live poker but I would generally assume the larger leads in spots like this are just greatly skewed towards strong hands, especially since live players tend do 3bet very tight.
Just discovering your videos, which are great, with a really good content and a lot to learn. Thanks !
super video
Terrific video
Of course It s been more than a year ;),
But I Re-watched the video, and something looks strange :
Why not took an option D , like « Vilain know that an incorrect theoric line, but he knows that Population tends to play poorly against this size, or play poorly OTR their x/c range, because they x/r too much of OVP, TP etc.. » ? Of course maybe anyone has the abstract level to do that in a lot of spot (exception of Top Top world players)
I watched all your videos and I know you are an excellent coach, but it seems a bit rigid, in term of open-minded to new strat/exploitation.
Cheers.
Hey, thanks for the feedback.
Can you give me a time tag on what you're referencing? Been a while since this video came out so I am a little hazy.
Here it is
Thanks,
Yeah that can definitely be an option, I just didn't consider it while making a video. At the same time, if our opponent is making population adjustments against us, then we might as well consider it as option 2, or as some kind of range error in general. His reasoning doesn't matter too much to us, what matters is being able to determine how he is constructing his range. Of course against a thinking player it will just be that much more difficult and require more attention.
Good point though, Cheers ;)
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.