Hi Luke,
38:15 at 200bb if flop is meant to be a range check do we xc down and stack off on that given runout?

Hey SoundSpeed

Do you mean XC down w/ TT? If so, we'd almost never get/want to XC down for 200bb's here w/ TT. We'd reserve that for KK+ if we're talking about majority-of-the-time stackoffs

Thanks!

Welcome! ;)

Ok, then yeah we'd need a much stronger holder to comfortably look to XC down often at this depth. KK+ is the threshold imo. Ofc there are going to be runouts TT can XC down as a premium bluffcatcher, but they'll be the minority of times.

That being said, you are right also that 9s is a bad blocker to have with your queen as it still blocks a bunch of bluffs, even if those bluffs aren't at such a high frequency as other potential bluffs.

Hey matlittle sorry for the slow reply

Yes, non busted fd bluffs will fire more than busted fd's. To be clear, busted FD's are not good bluff candidates here, however, the key note is that there aren't enough non busted fd bluffs for OOP to otherwise use, given the expected polarity in their turn probe approach, meaning that they'd therefore need to fire some of the busted fd's OTR, which I expected wouldn't be happening in reality. If the board were lower, enabling OOP to probe more liberally for 1/2p or so at a relatively high freq, busted fd's would virtually always be a giveup OTR

I was going to comment on this as well. When earlier streets are played passively, missed flush draws are played more aggressively on later streets. When you front load aggression with flush draws then you end up playing more passive on later streets. Luke Johnson sound right?

RunItTw1ce yep sounds right. The more you front load flushdraws, the more you will give them up. Inversely, the more the aggressor would have frontloaded their flushdraws, but instead missed the opportunity, the more you can now bluff them even if they miss.

Hey matlittle

The hand at 47.00 on J66r6 was quite interesting with QX being the only constituent of the XR bluff range on the turn. I am guessing that AX and KX are too strong to check-raise as they chop with a bunch of the BTN range. That only leaves QX with outs against BTN's JX, so it is the only hand type that check-raises as a bluff. QX also too strong to bluff turn for BB's probing range, so ends up in the checking range almost pure but then is turned into a bluff-catcher when facing the bet.
I tested this theory by changing the board to T66r6 and indeed the BB is now check-raise bluffing some JX as well as QX.

Yep, the bluffs make complete sense in hindsight once we reverse engineer what's going on. It's always fascinating when PIO reveals hidden gems like these

Given that this would be so hard to figure out in-game, do you think this spot would end up under-bluffed on average when the BB check-raises, or do you expect opponents to find enough bluffs with random hands like Q-high, K-high, A-high?

Indeed, this will be way underbluffed, and likely xr'd to the wrong size, too. I expect some good regs may incorrectly find hands like 87 with a smaller xr size. But yes, long story short, no human is playing this XR strat so precisely, unless they've already experienced a similar spot in their career already

Hey Bouscotte

I've started selling these sheets privately. DM me for details.

Perhaps. These outputs are just sizing/frequency awareness with your range, though, there isn't any direct RTA as per specific hands, which is the most damaging/advantageous way to RTA. Ofc if the situation suggests to do X with entire range, then it does indirectly enable RTA with hand, however, this is only for the flop. For Turn/River this isn't feasible, and certainly not when considering specific holdings.

41min also J8 on 842cc-Jx board IP B100 turn. You used a B75 XR. Is this smaller B75 size rather than B100 because of the SPR? Being IP B-B rather than delay bet?

We size down because:
• SPR
• Vs large large (b75→b100 > b27→b100)
• Vs completely uncapped range, therefore must respect negative asymmetry

41min also J8 on 842cc-Jx board IP B100 turn. You used a B75 XR. Is this smaller B75 size rather than B100 because of the SPR? Being IP B-B rather than delay bet?

35:45 Q87hh-4dd with 65o when you BB pots and you raised 2/3 you mentioned you should raise bigger around pot. A couple minutes before (32:50) this it was similar where you faced a 1/3 probe and raised 1/2 pot, but you said you were supposed to only raise 1/3 pot. I noticed this with donking turns as well in a lot of spots. The bigger the flop CB is the bigger you can donk bet. Is this mirroring effect correct?

The two situations are totally different. One was vs a polar probe and we are IP, the other was vs a depolar cbet and we are OOP.

The bigger the flop CB is the bigger you can donk bet. Is this mirroring effect correct?

There isn't any correlation worth noticing here. Equity/Frequency impacts are more worthwhile. E.g. The bigger the flop CBet, the equity OOP has, and the more they can donk (re. frequency), on average.

All of these raises are just spade flush xr's. Unticking the spade results in pure blue response

Well, that would of helped if I noticed the flush completed LOL

As I mentioned in game, I thought the Jx was actually a counterintutively GOOD turn for us given the position and board formation, henceforth I as firing a LOT with Ax. It turns out I was wrong, and as such we should shut more a lot more frequently.

Indeed Axdd>Axcc here, regardless of good or bad turn.

52 is what we're praying for tbh. I doubt he has any K8 in range here.