$25/$50 Hands Against the Best (Round 2)
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 4 Comments...
Love the breakdown in these videos and again especially as it's against players I'm recognizing. Although in hand 2 you should know its Omaha4rollz, he just has it, no need to analyze further Kappa. Very much looking forward to the 6 max video.
Great pick of hands, very insightful!
Regarding the last hand, is your thought process and hand choice only applicable to very short stacked games because we risk less on our turn shove compared to deeper stacks? If yes, up to which stack size would you recommend pulling that move?
So I think we need some raises like this at deep stacks too. The tricky part is that we have a lot of incentive to bet a wrap OTF with deep SPRs because we get rewarded more for making the nuts and getting straight over straight.
That being said, our top two should go down in value OTF in those deep stack scenarios so we may end up having more slow plays that reach the turn at deep stacks and therefore more value that could raise a blank turn like this (I'm thinking of AQT5 no BDFD). In that case we need to find some bluffs, but maybe we want them to be more polar at deeper stacks? A hand like 3 with a straight blocking pocket pair comes to mind. The logic would be that we shouldn't get 3B nearly as much as when stacks are short, however if we do, a hand like my AKJ5 would be really miserable to see a pot raise. The polar raises should disincentivize OOP from 3Bing, thus allowing us to play a one street polarized toy game on many rivers.
I find it difficult to visualize the outputs with the line graph. IMO it would be more useful if you used either a bar graph or a single dot above each category. Additionally, and this is a much more minor point and one I feel less sure about, but I think it could be more intuitive to visualize what an action is comprised of if categories are grouped by frequency of action. i.e. group all the highest frequency bets on the left in descending order followed by all the highest frequency checks on the right (or something to that effect). This allows the viewer to see "what are the bets and what are the checks" instead of seeing "what do I do with the ranges as ordered by strength"?
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.