How I Study HH's
Posted by Luke Johnson
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 36 Comments...
Hi everyone!
Here's the liveplay footage for the hands reviewed in the video. I would recommend watching it first, to get a better feel for the hands studied in this video :)
Sidenote: this is the first video where I did not record my webcam. How did you guys find that? Would you prefer for it to come back, or are you not too bothered? I'd be very grateful if you could let me know :)
Cheers!
Luke
Great analysis. At 9:37 you say it would be better to call river with a diamond. Is this because the hand checked to the river so opponent never really has busted diamond draws and so us having a diamond doesn't hurt us?
Similar spot at 14:36 where opponent should have bluffed q6sc and since hand checked to river we don't have many club or spade draws so him bluffing those suits is better?
Thanks. I learn a lot from your videos and I don't mind if they are with the web cam or without.
Thank you SoundSpeed !
9:37
Yes, with the XX XX X line, IP doesn't have many busted diamonds draws to bluff, so our diamond hands function well as unblockers to the XXB bluffing range from IP
14:36
Yep, exactly the same here. I do not have many busted club/spade draws to fold, as I'd likely have bet them more often, so they function well as unblockers. Sounds like you are understanding this nicely, wp!
Glad you enjoy them, and thank you for the feedback!
Cheers :)
wanted to ask something incredibly similar, so ty both^^
Very nice video thank you! I don't mind not having a webcam up as you need a lot of screen space to review stuff in pt4, to have pio sims, and notepads open for thoughts.
These types of reviews take a lot of effort; to make it less rote work I had built up a powershell script to run pio hands in a queue after they were marked for review in pt4 so that I wouldn't have to run a dozen or so hands manually, although that's unnecessary now that PIO 2.0 is out with its built in queue. However, even with the script I still ended up doing this once every month or so because of all the effort and defaulting to just simming a few hands after my short sessions and trying to study them in detail. Although as you said, getting tons of reps in with this approach will definitely make you a better player.
Is this something you do very regularly (reviewing lots of hands after sessions), or is it something that you use more tactically for a specific purpose, and what's a good balance with your reviews these days with all the other stuff like building/grinding through training sessions?
Thank you ctrlplay , glad you enjoyed! :)
Your powershell script sounds awesome, if I am correctly understanding what you mean!
I have quite a big database of sims built up now, so most of my studying can be done without having to run sims after sessions, which makes studying as in the video more feasible after every session. With that being said, I still try to mix up my studying a lot, to keep it fun and enjoyable. I plan to showcase a few more of my ideas and methods here in future videos.
In regards to balance. Hard question. I try to study 30-60min before and after playing, which is usually just spamming the hh's I'm interested in. I also study with a friend for 2 hours a week, too. Nothing crazy, I just try to be consistent.
Cheers :)
Yeah the script uses pio text interface to run jobs; I'd put new pio scripts in a folder, sometimes single hands in a script, sometimes a few hands in a script for standard 6 max spots like BN v BB, and just start up the automation after I finished adding one. After finishing 1 pio script it would move it to a processed folder, and the pio solution files would get put in the corresponding spot on the directory tree for 6 max 100bb spots, and would run until no scripts were left.
This reduced the manual load to about 20 seconds worth per standard spot, so I could set up all the spots I'd want to study then step away from the computer while they ran, before which I'd have to wait after every hand finished to start the next.
great video again Luke Johnson ! imo you are already making the best content on the site, extremely in depth and i seem to learn something new every time i watch your videos (not that i play HU poker, but i am sure i can apply these concepts to 6max effectively). also, i appreciate that you have stuck to your guns with regards to the longer videos, as it was clearly shown by the up votes when i mentioned enjoying this in your first video, that many other viewers agree.
the K2o hand @2:30 i think the reason that we wanna bet large with this combo is that for us to start bluffing K highs, our opponent needs to start folding A highs and weak pairs. i would imagine that if we could only block bet this river, we would never bluff K high as it doesn't get enough better hands to fold. you mentioned that it has poor blockers, but i would argue that a hand like 53dd has much poorer blockers to bluff, but will simply have to as it is stone bottom of our range. because of this, however, 53dd just uses the small sizing, basically just hoping to get a fold from any random combo, as anything that folds will be a better hand.
with regards to the webcam, personally i prefer when a coach uses them as it does feel more interactive to me. i think hearing a voice without seeing a face is only something that has happened in the past 50 years or so, and that we as humans still prefer seeing someone's face when 'interacting', as if we were actually having a conversation with them irl. i could be off with this, but i'm sure it takes longer than 50 years for humans to be able to normalise faceless interactions when we have communicated for tens of thousands of years this way haha.
Thank you very much Demondoink for the huge compliment. That means a lot, so really, thank you!
K2o:
- Agreed with your thoughts re. K2o
- Note that 53 bluffs because of blockers and unblockers, not because it's the "bottom of range" — it's very rarely right to bluff something because it's the bottom of range (it's only right when you're doing so well that you'd thereby otherwise lack bluffs). It's important we learn to make the distinguishment, as there are similar spots to this (mainly in 6max), where we don't bluff random 5hi's in the BB in the same XX XX line.
Understood re. your thoughts about webcam. I side with you here in that I also prefer videos with webcam. I thought it would be better I ask instead of brute forcing my ugly mug on webcam to viewers who are sick and tired of it! haha
Luke Johnson yes good points regarding the 53s 'bluff' situation where we are not simply bluffing because we are bottom of range. it can be a little confusing with the constant blockers/unblockers and how this affects our sizing/frequencies/combo selection. those are a lot of factors to consider on the river when deciding what to do next.
what properties make 53 a good bluff in this situation? lets say we have the non bdfd combo, it seems like it pure bluffs otr on this line, despite seemingly blocking the random 5x/3x non bdfd combos that are checking down and folding to any bet otr. i guess we do unblock random high card hands, but i am assuming they are mostly calling vs a small block bet.
yeah good comparison with the 6max spot. its pretty cool i just checked a similar situation on AKJ28 and we actually don't bluff a hand like 54, despite it basically being bottom of range simply because it doesn't really block calls and blocks the folds (the 55/44/5x/4x x down's of IP). however, we basically bluff with all 2x, simply because when we have a 2, we unblock more of the folding range (such as mid pocket pairs, or unpaired x down combos).
studying these situations can be very eye opening.
1).
5x is a gutter OTT;
OOP will prioritise it to probe OTT ->
IP will prioritise it to delayed cbet OTT, also because it now unblock my folds! ->
OOP will again prioritise it to bluff OTR, as it's now unblocking IP's folds due to the above
That might seem like a lot to digest. However, the above pattern is very consistent, and should be of great use once ingrained well enough.
2).
Great, glad you can appreciate why I make the distinguishment. In truth, if a player decided to ignore this advice, they would still likely make more correct players than incorrect. However, it would inevitably lead to blunders somewhere down the line!
Yes absolutely, it is all eye opening. It also proves we are not total degenerate gamblers :)
Another great video! Just echoing what Demondoink said about really enjoying the longer videos. Nice that this one sets a nice structure for going away and doing your own study.
I personally barely notice the webcam and it gives you a bit more space for an extra notepad if needed. I don't have a strong opinion either way though if others prefer it.
Thank you CatorMan ! And again to Demondoink !
Great, glad it sets you up in some way for your own studying — that was partly the aim. I plan to release some more videos showing other methods and ideas, which'll hopefully further help you with study structure.
Thank you for the thoughts on the webcam. It seems fairly 50/50 so far.
I'll chime in on the video length. I prefer shorter videos (30-40 min) when the material is dense and thorough as your material is. It makes it easier to take in the info and understand it without being overwhelmed. It helps to alleviate brain fatigue as well.
However, if the material being presented has natural stopping points, such as this video where we switch to a new hand often, or your first couple of videos where there was a shift in topic halfway through, then i think longer videos are just fine as i can watch some of the video, digest it, then come back and watch the rest later without hurting continuity.
I enjoy your deep dive and thoroughness. I especially learned a lot about blocker theory in your first videos.
SoundSpeed thank you mate!
Gotcha, understood your points on video length. I think it's a safer bet I make them longer, as worst case is I force you to come back for a second sitting ;-)
Glad you enjoy the deep dives! There's more to come!
Top notch work here! I am not a fan of the webcams from anyone. I watch the videos from my phone a lot, and the webcam takes up unnecessary space.
RoleTide Thank you RoleTide !
Nice, great opinion on why you prefer having no webcam. Duly noted moving forward (Y).
Thank you for the feedback!
15:45 with 44 when you say 44 is snapping this river bet (ended up being pure fold), but hand before the opponent chose not to bluff the Q6o (showing a propensity to not bluff frequently enough) at what hand strength do you adjust to bluff catching against players that do not bluff enough? Just start folding ace highs to them and calling all pairs? There was another hand where you folded KJ but ended up being a pure call in PIO. I would think folding is correct against this player who lacks bluffs. Would be interested in seeing some node locking where you just remove a couple of bluffs from opponents range to see if these bluff catchers are actually still bluff catchers or not. Some times PIO does some crazy stuff when you remove just a few combos from opponents range.
I agree with above comments when you are doing PIO work and have a bunch of note pads the webcam is not really useful. It does help user engage in the content, but you go fast enough with lot of moving pieces where we are not just staring at the same slide for 2 minutes with nothing happening.
Also I think all your videos have gotten fantastic feed back and quickly rising through the ranks of top elite coaches. Look forward to part 2.
A single hand sample size isn't enough to go off, as proven in this case, as acceleration definitely isn't a reg who's scared to fire off bluffs haha. Him missing Q6o is definitely a mistake, but a mistake that we'll all make from time to time. It's all good; no need to start modifying our strat just yet.
In general, I would STRONGLY advise against nodelocking — it's a really, really poor way to go about studying, as it is inherently subjective in a game of incomplete information; way too slippery of a slope imo.
Great, thanks for your thoughts re. the webcam!
& lastly, thank you for your positive comments about my videos. Tbh with you, I'm not happy, nor unhappy, about the quality of my videos so far. I think they can definitely be better. I'm working on it!
Thank you! Appreciate you taking the time to watch & comment even after a few weeks of the video being uploaded :) RunItTw1ce
Incredible video yet again! Looking forward to part 2
12:45 We bet K2 and A2 with a club on river more as we unblock calling range as villain would have probed turn with Kxcc, Kx with a club(With some frequency) and some Axcc, right?
Thank you tbag :)
12:45
Yes, spot on with the reasoning.
But on the other hand villain will bluff catch the river more often with Ac/Kc (great suits to unblock our bluffs), so it should balance out the effect no?
joomorrow He will indeed call more with those suits. However, due to the sheer low frequency of him arriving to river with them, it doesn't quite balance out the effect
@29:22 your comparing the different OOP EVs when using 2/3 or 1/3 made me realize that I might have been making a large mistake for some time now: when simplifying trees I typically just go with the most prevalent size, but I'm assuming it's more important to create subtrees and compare the EVs? Good to know. Thanks for an awesome video again.
Absolutely! The highest frequency size is not always the highest single EV size.
& sorry for the late reply, totally missed your comment
Luke Johnson This has always confused me a bit and I assume it's just a balance thing to protect other parts of your range with the same size. In softer pools I would worry about balance less, at least against recs, and choose what I think is the highest EV size. I'm sure it hurts me long run as I move up stakes, but still a little confusing when I am drilling a spot on wizard and choose the highest EV line, but get the "wrong answer" because it's the lower frequency play.
Also wanted to ask you another question, recently wizard updated their sizes, where they have up to 19 different flop sizes to choose from! Because of this you see a lot of 4-8% of each sizing being used. Wouldn't this severely mess up the turn / river strategy as so few combos are being carried over because of so many sizes? For example if our main size is to cbet 1/3 and wizard only uses that size 7% of the time with a combo like KJ. Where we would bet all 16 combos of KJ for 1/3. Now only 1.12 combos of KJ are being carried over the turn right? Seems like a really shitty way for wizard to set things up.
RunItTw1ce I don't use the wizard software.
If they are all being mixed, then they are the same EV, so they are all the "highest EV" line.
If the 19 sizes are in a single sim, then that is a huge oversight.
Hi Luke,
First of all, thanks for the amazing content you provide to the community !
The videos I've seen so far, are a real eye opener to me.
@ 17:15 you say :
"given that i'm not mixing my sizes" [OTT]
Why is that ? Too complex to implement correctly ?
Is it specific to your field, that you estimate strong enough to exploit you vs bad implementation of multiple sizings ?
In this case I assume that on weaker fields we can use this mixing sizings strategy right ?(even if we do significant mistakes when constructing our ranges ingame)
Moreover I saw on a live video that you use mix sizes on the river,
why are you doing it OTR but not OTT then ?
Thanks again for the great content !!
Awesome wadja94 glad you are enjoying and learning my videos :)
I do not mix sizes OTF and OTT, due to it being extremely complicated, and as you saw in the video, not worth much EV.
Only because it is now too expensive to not mix OTR. As per the above, it is still extremely complicated, but now unavoidable. At least for earlier streets, if you choose not to mix, you still have later streets to recapture some of that EV back. Whereas OTR, you've no later streets, and therefore, the EV loss is a lot more steep and IMO not worth the sacrifice.
3:30 Do you ever consider bluff checkraising this hand? Aren't hands make good bluffs by betting also good candidates to bluff checkraise?
Not necessarily. Usually, our checkraises OTR are built around hands that have SDV, too
Hey Clanty, thanks for the video. I have only subscribed to RIO this month and these vids have provided best value for me by a mile.
With the Q6o hand at around 25:00 we are obviously highly polarised on the turn, however with this card being so good for us my approach would be to fire a hand like Q6o pure, and actually be LESS selective with my bluffs OTT. You mention that we need to be more selective as we obviously can have lots of bluffs on this turn. Seems like I'm slightly misunderstanding this concept! My process would be "Ok, K turn, good for us bet at high frequency" and build around that.
Once we take a look at your solve Q6o is mainly checking which makes sense as you explained as we have other hands we use first - is this thought process something you go through in game and if so how are you finding that threshold of pure bluff > to mixed bluff (say 50/50 as pure example) > to a hand like Q6o which was betting 10% of the time with these suits in your sim. Just intuition from having run tonnes of these?
Thanks again!
I'm playing 6-max zoom/reg so obviously the ranges will never be as wide as they are here.
Hey BigBoyPoker
Not to sound cliche, but it's all about blockers. Once you understand your hand has the EV to bluff, you need to figure out if
1). You lose EV by not bluffing. Extremely good blockers may result in this
2). If no to 1)., how good the blockers are. The better they are, the more you want to bet.
Using this should allow you to roughly stay in line, by building around a logic-based blocker metric, instead of firing too aggressively because the the turn is good for you.
Hope this helps
Luke / Clanty
Hey Luke Johnson another great video man!
Near the end 34h 45:00
On the river, do you prefer checking vs like a value bet, in that that his missed spades or ax gives them a chance to bluff? As well, if we do check, and depending on villains sizing, are we always raising or do we generally only call in that if we do raise we’re only getting called by better?
Thank you very much TRUEPOWER :)
Not with specifically 43hh. This hands does such a good job of unblocking calls and that we want/need to shove ourselves. Yes we unblock some bluffs, however, there will be other hands to check and induce instead.
If we check their only sizing is AI for ~1/2p
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.