Nice quick efficient video. I was surprised by the AK call but you touched up on that at the end. The 4 flush board that ran out a board pair was a pretty cool spot to think about as villain and the threshold to try and make for shoving river
Great review vid. You tackled a node that can be difficult to figure out. So many of these hands we are looking to call with are pushed nearly to indiffernece and it's hard to know what to do.
10:45 I am glad you covered the topic of being able to bluff backdoor draws on the river more often than front door draws. That has always confused me.
You also mentioned briefly at the end that you would be more likely to make deviations/exploits at 200nl or 100nl. Could you explain what deviations you would mostly be making there as compared to 500nl?
Great question. In general, pool deviates more from “GTO” the lower the stake which of course makes sense. Exploits become more of a slam dunk. So far at 500NL, there are exploits but some aren’t as robust, meaning not as far of a deviation from theory expectation. I think the key with MDA, IMO, is to truly highlight and understand the “M” in MDA. It’s mass data, taking from the aggregate. There are so many other idiosyncratic variables at play to arrive at a decision. Type of player? What about board texture? Because MDA says river xyz spot overbluffed, maybe this type of runout isn’t? MDA is just finding a average of all players for a specific spot. It’s a useful tool, but just that, a tool.
Sorry about the rant! I somewhat went on a tangent!
So is it fair to summarise like this:
MDA useful vs recs and lower stakes/bad regs
Vs higher stakes regs it becomes less useful and other information often is more important?
Loading 12 Comments...
Nice quick efficient video. I was surprised by the AK call but you touched up on that at the end. The 4 flush board that ran out a board pair was a pretty cool spot to think about as villain and the threshold to try and make for shoving river
Thanks TJsuited!
Great review vid. You tackled a node that can be difficult to figure out. So many of these hands we are looking to call with are pushed nearly to indiffernece and it's hard to know what to do.
10:45 I am glad you covered the topic of being able to bluff backdoor draws on the river more often than front door draws. That has always confused me.
Thanks!
Thanks Sound and Happy New Year! Yea it's actually a very useful concept that can help both sides of the coin (betting and defending).
Good video Frankie. Do you use any MDA considerations when making these river calls?
Thank you Matlittle! Yes I do…to an extent.
You also mentioned briefly at the end that you would be more likely to make deviations/exploits at 200nl or 100nl. Could you explain what deviations you would mostly be making there as compared to 500nl?
Great question. In general, pool deviates more from “GTO” the lower the stake which of course makes sense. Exploits become more of a slam dunk. So far at 500NL, there are exploits but some aren’t as robust, meaning not as far of a deviation from theory expectation. I think the key with MDA, IMO, is to truly highlight and understand the “M” in MDA. It’s mass data, taking from the aggregate. There are so many other idiosyncratic variables at play to arrive at a decision. Type of player? What about board texture? Because MDA says river xyz spot overbluffed, maybe this type of runout isn’t? MDA is just finding a average of all players for a specific spot. It’s a useful tool, but just that, a tool.
Sorry about the rant! I somewhat went on a tangent!
So is it fair to summarise like this:
MDA useful vs recs and lower stakes/bad regs
Vs higher stakes regs it becomes less useful and other information often is more important?
Mmm...yea that's a fair statement. Just to be clear, still useful at all levels of human vs human poker.
what a great video!
Thanks Humberto! Glad you liked it.
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.