Key Concepts: Over-Betting
Posted by Peter Clarke
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 27 Comments...
Brilliant. Thanks Pete. OOOGH
Obnoxious OverBet Shove Giant thanks you.
Nice video. A bit goofy with the mascots and sounds and stuff but I liked it.
One question about bet sizing. In the 42s hand you discussed at the end of the video, you overbet turn for about 150% pot which leaves about a pot-sized bet on the river. Do you think we might want to change this to something like 125% on both streets (a more "geometric" sizing). Or it doesn't really matter either way?
With different bet sizes, is there some danger that Villain might shove over our overbet on the turn and we might not be getting the right odds to call? Does Pio ever shove over our turn bets, or is that not much of a danger because his range is relatively capped?
Yeah I had this thought myself after I finished recording. I wasn't 100% aware of the SPR at the time of this hand. I think turn could be a very slight over-bet and then jam river could be slightly better, but I doubt it matters much to our EV.
Excellent, interesting well explained video Pete, one of the best video makers on the site. As I've said before these Key Concepts videos are great. Keep it up!
Thanks a lot!
Love your videos man! I have primarely focused on mixed here at RIO, but get more and more into NLHE content. How strong computer is needed for PIO? Anyone can help me on that one?
Thank you! I'm about as far as you get from a computer spec guy, sorry. My new PC can handle pretty much any tree I need to build and my old mac couldn't.
Great fan here. Love your videos and your teaching skills.
The only grievance I have with this is that I believe the opening assumption does not apply to how population plays. That is bet/call line from the BB on T62ss flop does not cap the villain in any way, shape or form. This is what I believe, what I think and what my experience tells me (notice how all are feel based and not data driven). Villain is still full of sets. I see it on unfavourable run outs that go to showdown, when I hit an odd overset and on turns when I hit trips with my top pair and end up paying the villain. They do it with 99 on 932 rainbow board as well as with 77 on JT7ss board and anything in between. I am not privy to their thought process and I do not know if it fits "oh no he can only fold if I c/r 9s" in the former example and "better call down with my bottom set because he either has JJs or straight" in the latter but it is what praxis shows. Additional proof would be instances where villain check/raises the flop and then check/folds the turn or checks on turn and river on blank run outs. No set does that.
I wish I were more database savvy so I could prove my "feel". Maybe someone knows how to set filters to get answers to these questions.
You kind of alluded to that on the end that posh theoretical concepts do not necessary apply to micros.
P.S. And I love your graphics and sounds.
I could easily be off the mark here and Pete may chime in and correct me later, but my understanding is that when he uses the concept of villain having a "capped" range, it is not literally and technically capped, but rather probabilistically capped. What this means is that you may very well be correct in your understanding, but also villains ranges may still be "capped" in those spots because while they may still have a small probability of having nut hands, they are vastly less likely than had they taken other actions. Maybe thinking about it like this could be helpful: view a "capped" range as simply a roughly 90% chance that their range is capped. Hopefully this makes some sense!
Thanks for the feedback. Cappedness is a gradable notion. It is probably false to say that the average Villain in the pool NEVER has sets etc. but it's also going to be false to say it doesn't cap them to any extent. Cappedness is a function of how frequently the best combos are eliminated from our opponent's range relative to other combos.
OMGIsildurrrrman12 and Peter
Thanks for the replies. I understand this probabilistic nature of being capped and I can accept it.
Maybe if I had a chance to rephrase my question I would put it as:
Every time a villain has set OOP how often does he "just" call vs. x/raise?
This depends on what stakes we play. At lower stakes like 10NL zoom, I'd imagine there's far too much out of position slowplaying of monsters going on. IN the recreational side of the pool there will also be a great deal. In the reg side of the pool at higher stakes there will be very little of this happening in these spots and the pre-flop caller's range will be much more capped, just like it should in theory.
Finally, if someone fails to check/raise their nutted sub-range against you on the flop, you will make a ton more money from them failing to extract value on most branches than you will lose from over-betting turns and rivers the rarer times they show up with a flopped monster.
Makes sense. Thanks.
Makes all the difference the way this is edited (with the silly graphics etc) just makes it so much more entertaining and easy to digest.
Nut combination of theory & light hearted content blended in to make it digestible.
Keep raising the bar!
Thank you, these videos do take more time, but I think it's worth it given the feedback I've been getting. More to come.
Hi pete,
I was interested on the 853 last hand about turn play, could you check to see if this combo checks turn at some frequecy with the intention of c/raising instead
And how much merit would you put on this line vs population if this is used?
Thanks
Love your videos, specially these "key concepts" ones. Keep it up!
ROFL @ "FFFUUU BRO!!" - I love it!
hi pete
love the series, have watched all these videos a couple times now.
looking back on your vid about overbetting flops from 2018, where you suggested that it was possible to implement an over-bet OTF without sacrificing tons of EV (and forcing villain to confront unfamiliar moves), do you still feel this is a viable option? The reason im asking is because you mention in this vid that we probably shouldn't overbet OTF because villains range is still uncapped. of coarse there are obvious caveats to this but im wondering if maybe your perspective has evolved on flop sizings/strat since then. For example now favoring 33% / 75% or a mix of the two
Love your vids thanks again peter!
Nice video.
These videos are incredible! I would love to see one on bet sizing if possible. Keep up the great work anyway, you're a great teacher.
Just finished your FTGU and am now watching your other videos. Love your style of making videos. Easy to understand but not overly dumbed-down. Also funny. Thanks for your hard work.
I have a question about the example hand at the end of the video. Which river cards that don't make our hand nutted are we bluffing on? My guess would be any non-spade 8, 5, 9, 4, 3, or 2 as these hands will make our sets and straight draws nutted. I could be way off here though.
Or are we stuck almost always having to jam here with only 4-high as it is always losing when the river checks through? If we do have to make this shove almost always, which rivers are the exceptions?
around 22:30
i thought in general OOP im supposed to bet bigger to charge the IP player to continue but i can see betting smaller in some situations for pot control and range disadvantage etc
on the last hand w 42s, do you think there is a significant different between overbetting river rather than turn?
I often reserve most overbetting for the river just as a simplification. My best guess is that alot of strategies will work here. even going small over bet turn and riv. potting turn and overbetting 1.4x on riv, etc.
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.