hey man havent watched this yet but will soon, just want to say i left a comment to the first part but guess i came a bit late, would be nice if you could give your thoughts on that

Wow, that's cold, man. Isn't poker tough enough without giving grandma 30% to straight die during a match?

Well done series, even though I've definitely heard the conclusion before, especially in SNG videos. It's good to go back and build it up from the ground, though. Looking forward to future vids.

Yea, I don't play many sit n goes so none of this is stuff I've heard much about but it's possible (and probably fairly likely) others have thought of this as well and maybe there's even videos out there somewhere.

I do think it's a concept not many people at lower stakes mttts are familiar with though which is the largest demographic of people I'm targeting with my videos

Great video! i think its really important that someone make these kinds of videos.

Chris, how can I calculate it when I am playing live tourneys? Any suggestions?

You just have to learn to approximate it in your head

Very useful series Chris. It looks like you're attempting to answer questions so far unspoken, which you alluded to in an earlier video being the force moving poker theory forward. Well done, I think you're doing it..

and finally you won the ticket and actually made 25th at the main event: congrats! I did something like that in Malta...

I think this is very useful as far as estimating how big our edge is and deciding whether to take spots accordingly in FT situations. The only confusing part for me was In the second example you had an exploitative read that when he uses a bigger sizing that he is not bluffing which is why you raised turn. For this reason, given the different range we are giving him from a normal situation, his range should be almost exclusively pairs and rivered two pair which we can safely go for value against. We may be able to exclude straight and flushes almost completely given the turn sizing. I would argue that we are just as rarely beat given our read as we would be on the off suit 6 river(without the turn bet sizing read). I really agree with the thought process, in this specific hand I think our exploitative read that made us raise turn should also lead us to value bet river.

How strong would your read on the turn have to be to follow my logic here and bet river anyway and is there a way for us to quantify this or is this just part of the feel of the game we cant analyze?
Given our edge in this match, should we find a lower variance spot to use our bet sizing read and just play closer to theoretically optimal as you were originally suggesting? thanks for your time