23:20 - from my understanding, in high rp scenarios button is supposed to play open jams with ATo to AKo at very high frequency (basically pure) in theory. Do you think that the HS player pool plays this spot differently, opting for rfi with these hands and thus their jamming range ends up being weaker?
24:15 - QT4r seems like a standard range bet in theory. Given both of you are big stacks and he is incentivised not to play a big pot with you, maybe theory will dictate for bb to under x/r this spot compared to cev, so really the case for c-betting range for small size is even stronger.
What was your rationale behind checking back? are you opting for a more big bet/check strategy? doesn't big betting seem suboptimal since you are also not incentivised to play a big pot vs him?
can you share more thoughts on the imperfections of of the icm model and spots where we shouldn't try to mimic hrc? Where first principle thinking/a more practical approach can trump hrc outputs?
37:51 seems like a pretty wild SB range, and small changes in btn's response vs Sb aggression will make big differences in how SB plays facing the btn open. Do you recommend to make the 40bb rejams w hands like A5o or K2s or 33?
7:50 You have 83o not 33 as mentioned. I bring this up because you say 33 would be a fold in this situation where it seems like it should be a pretty clear call with around 50% of the field remaining.
10:35 AA On the turn I like a smaller bet around 10-15% pot which should do a good job of keeping in some worse hands and possibly inducing bluffs.
13:35 6bb seems to be close to the sweet spot for calling sb v ep. With 25% field remaining, solver calls more often than it jams (15% vs 13%)
17:30 J5s As far as I know, the theoretical preflop adjustment vs very aggressive player sb v bb would be to stop RFI, limp a tighter range and always call iso. Of course in game you can’t predict which iso size he will use so have to be more flexible. Would you have preferred open folding this hand or RFI instead of limp folding after giving it more thought?
23:50 A3s on QT4r Will echo previous commenter, also interested on your overall strategy here - what are the advantages of having checks on this board and is the adjustment dictated mostly by ICM considerations? How big would your checking range be?
I appreciate your videos a lot, looking forwards to the next one!
Loading 7 Comments...
Great stuff!
Thanks Justin, really enjoy your pace, nicely explained!
Top notch review!
Great video!
23:20 - from my understanding, in high rp scenarios button is supposed to play open jams with ATo to AKo at very high frequency (basically pure) in theory. Do you think that the HS player pool plays this spot differently, opting for rfi with these hands and thus their jamming range ends up being weaker?
24:15 - QT4r seems like a standard range bet in theory. Given both of you are big stacks and he is incentivised not to play a big pot with you, maybe theory will dictate for bb to under x/r this spot compared to cev, so really the case for c-betting range for small size is even stronger.
What was your rationale behind checking back? are you opting for a more big bet/check strategy? doesn't big betting seem suboptimal since you are also not incentivised to play a big pot vs him?
can you share more thoughts on the imperfections of of the icm model and spots where we shouldn't try to mimic hrc? Where first principle thinking/a more practical approach can trump hrc outputs?
37:51 seems like a pretty wild SB range, and small changes in btn's response vs Sb aggression will make big differences in how SB plays facing the btn open. Do you recommend to make the 40bb rejams w hands like A5o or K2s or 33?
7:50 You have 83o not 33 as mentioned. I bring this up because you say 33 would be a fold in this situation where it seems like it should be a pretty clear call with around 50% of the field remaining.
10:35 AA On the turn I like a smaller bet around 10-15% pot which should do a good job of keeping in some worse hands and possibly inducing bluffs.
13:35 6bb seems to be close to the sweet spot for calling sb v ep. With 25% field remaining, solver calls more often than it jams (15% vs 13%)
17:30 J5s As far as I know, the theoretical preflop adjustment vs very aggressive player sb v bb would be to stop RFI, limp a tighter range and always call iso. Of course in game you can’t predict which iso size he will use so have to be more flexible. Would you have preferred open folding this hand or RFI instead of limp folding after giving it more thought?
23:50 A3s on QT4r Will echo previous commenter, also interested on your overall strategy here - what are the advantages of having checks on this board and is the adjustment dictated mostly by ICM considerations? How big would your checking range be?
I appreciate your videos a lot, looking forwards to the next one!
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.