For the river in this hand, I think check-raising is the play. His hand unblocks the betting range (mainly 2 pair hands), whilst blocking some of the check backs. He can check-shove with his check-raising range given that IP is capped and he is uncapped. IP will likely bet river too thin for value too which adds to the EV of check-raise. Also Patrik's image of being a bit of a sicko increases the likelihood of him being called given that we know he is capable of ripping in a massive XR bluff here.

matlittle on this river any thoughts to just betting big yourself rather than IP betting like 1/2 pot and then you XR and they bet + fold? If they bet like $10k and fold to a XR but would call $15-$25k we end up losing a lot of value going for the XR right?

Who is to say that IP will always bet fold? They are capped, so they will have to call down some 2 pair hands here, or they will just be way over folding. Against someone capable of pulling the trigger on a big XR bluff shove here like Patrik that's not a great idea. AJ exactly blocks AA and JJ, 2 hands Patrik could XR jam with.

Which line produces the highest EV will come down to a few factors:
How often will IP call/raise vs bet
How often IP bets when checked to
How often IP bet-calls
The size of each bet/raise

Easiest way to find out the answer IMO is to nodelock the river to how you think a human will play and then the solver will tell you the answer. Original sim without nodelocking has KQ as indifferent/mostly checking.

I nodelocked the following:
IP calls any 2 pair+ vs the 150% pot (the bet Patrik made), plus 50% of AK/AQ
IP bets any 2 pair+ on the river, plus 50% of AK/AQ
IP calls the XR jam with the original solver range of 50% of sets, plus most of AJ, small amount of AK.

Under these assumptions, KQ is 10BB higher as check than bet. Of course, these are all highly debatable assumptions. The biggest deviation I think people will make here from equilibrium is that they will bet IP for value way thinner than the solver. AK, AQ are meant to just check here, but I think people will bet them mostly, which is the biggest swing towards wanting to check the KQ.

For this board you suggested that you would bet 150% pot even though it sounds outrageous. That did sound outrageous to me so I ran some sims on GTOWizard:
EV for BB, 228BB effective (as played):
33% sizing: 10.32BB EV
66% sizing (Patrick's choice): 10.27BB EV
150% sizing: 10.22BB EV and range check for BB
If they started the hand 100BB deep, 33% is the highest EV bet size here too.
A 3BP 100BB deep vs CO or BTN would be a good spot for a big bet on this board, but against other positions or 200BB+ effective it's just not feasible IMO.

At 100bb I get very different results. For my solutions, clearly PSB is better.

Deeper it gets closer, however, I am not getting any EV loss for a big sizing choice.

BTW, Antonis is SB, not BB. Did you misread? That may make some sense as per your results, as the polarised 3b range from the BB is less wanting to nuke money in ASAP, as it hits the board is a less black and white manner like the SB does.

I also want to add this:
Try to be less rigid/reliant on the solver to determine your strategies. If the solver is clearly suggesting something, however the EV's are close with another strategic option, then consider both. Sometimes you may prefer the slightly suboptimal strategy in theory, for a slightly better outcome. This means subtree'ing often in PIO/adding NEW, UNRECOMMENDED bet sizes in the GTOw solver.

Note: this detail is accentuated OTF, where EV's are really easy to retain/maintain over multiple different strat choices

For the river in this hand, I think check-raising is the play. His hand unblocks the betting range (mainly 2 pair hands), whilst blocking some of the check backs. He can check-shove with his check-raising range given that IP is capped and he is uncapped. IP will likely bet river too thin for value too which adds to the EV of check-raise. Also Patrik's image of being a bit of a sicko increases the likelihood of him being called given that we know he is capable of ripping in a massive XR bluff here.

Yeah, agree with your (bolded) exploit points.

Counterargument:
IP is likely to underbluff w/ PP's. And I expect IP to arrive with PP's too often (RFI pre too often, and stabF too infrequently). This presents a decently sized problem for KQ which unblocks this.

on this river any thoughts to just betting big yourself rather than IP betting like 1/2 pot and then you XR and they bet + fold? If they bet like $10k and fold to a XR but would call $15-$25k we end up losing a lot of value going for the XR right?

Unless IP never gives credit to the XR, which here is quite unfair to suggest esp. given the line in play, then checking at least becomes reasonable, as per matlittle thoughts

BTW, Antonis is SB, not BB. Did you misread? That may make some sense as per your results, as the polarised 3b range from the BB is less wanting to nuke money in ASAP, as it hits the board is a less black and white manner like the SB does.

Sorry there was a typo in my comment, I should have written SB not BB. The ranges I used were SB vs UTG for a 6 max game.

Try to be less rigid/reliant on the solver to determine your strategies. If the solver is clearly suggesting something, however the EV's are close with another strategic option, then consider both.

Whilst I agree with this advice in general, in this exact spot my sim has a 0% cbet frequency if I tell it to use the 150% cbet size. If I then force it to bet overpairs for 150% they are getting between 6 to 9 BB in EV loss by betting 150% as opposed to checking or betting a block sizing. The only explanation I can find is that we have very different preflop ranges for the IP player. If I give IP a way weaker range then it gets closer (albeit still a range check in my sim if 150% is forced).

matlittle

Sorry there was a typo in my comment, I should have written SB not BB. The ranges I used were SB vs UTG for a 6 max game.
Whilst I agree with this advice in general, in this exact spot my sim has a 0% cbet frequency if I tell it to use the 150% cbet size. If I then force it to bet overpairs for 150% they are getting between 6 to 9 BB in EV loss by betting 150% as opposed to checking or betting a block sizing. The only explanation I can find is that we have very different preflop ranges for the IP player. If I give IP a way weaker range then it gets closer (albeit still a range check in my sim if 150% is forced).

Ah, whoops. I was looking at vsBTN for some reason, my bad. Yeah in hindsight this deep & vsUTG we should size down. Still, I heavily prefer b50-b70 over block. But yes, OB is too much to VPIP with our leveraging range on average here

Ah cool, thanks for letting me know. Man, I'm out of touch, not even knowing the modern WSOP winners!

AceSpade river would be a much bigger decision point for sure. However, with the J/A taken, there's not many spade combos left for Patrik. And QQ/KK with spades make for great bluffs, which Aldemir would unblock and perhaps consider

Thanks mate! Really glad you're enjoying this despite it being a little removed from my usual content. I'm going to make a couple more episodes to this series

Luke Johnson i think goes to show as well how much differently these games play compared to online 6 max cash! so really interesting to get the theoretical deep dive from you regarding these hands and spots for live cash games!

i think goes to show as well how much differently these games play compared to online 6 max cash! so really interesting to get the theoretical deep dive from you regarding these hands and spots for live cash games!

Oh for sure, online 6max 100bb is going to be a completely different strategical game versus LIVE 200bb FR with plenty of different calibre players. With that being said, we're still playing Texas NLH!

7:47 you mention going for a xr with queens. Are you abandoning show down value and looking to fire off rivers?

Not completely abandoning, hence we did check instead of blast turn with a bet. Once we face a bet at this depth, it's quite hard to get bet into by a worse value hand. Not entirely implausible, but unlikely, heavily reducing our SDV in the XC line. So yes, given the depth, I'd rather take our blocker and then turn it into a bluff facing a bet.

22:45 appreciate the discussion on when to fire turn bluffs and when
you should look to have eq or not. Very helpful!

Awesome :)

I enjoy this format.
Thanks!

I'm glad, thanks to you, too!

33:00: you say you’d check KJ, KT as oop. Vs the range you’re describing for IP, can’t these hands get 2 streets of value?

They can, but you'd have to size down the turn, which I'd prefer NOT to do with my sets & 2p's.

You could play some sort of mix of b70/b150, but that isn't something I'd entertain. Instead I'd like to ultra polarise turn, somewhat sacrifice the KT/KJ, and maximise 66 77 76 22, and also 54 A4hh. Polarising doesn't only capture more with nut value hands.

Great format

Thanks man, glad you enjoyed! More to come

Will do, cheers mate

36:30 on K76hh-2x-9x board given the flop X back and they are showdown bound as you said. Are we finding many bluffs? Maybe trying to get QQ-TT to fold? How are we playing at T9s, XhXh, 88, maybe some As5s type hands on this turn and river if we have low FE?

In general if we suspect villain to be relatively strong, condensed and SDV bound, bluffing small will not accomplish much/anything at all. That doesn't mean we rule out bluffing altogether, though, we just need to find a different gameplan, which is to ultra-polarise and size up

I think players play like 6-8hrs and footage we see as the audience is just condensed to the biggest pots for a 45 minute episode.

Yeah... that makes a lot more sense :D

Welcome mate, thanks <3

Great vid as always Luke and would love to see more vids in this format.

Thanks mate, more to come!

At 3:51 you said to fold AJo in Aldemir's shoes since both players are deep. You would fold even with the bb ante and ip? Folding KQo as well?

Yes, unless I think I have a decent edge over them postflop. We want to draw toward more robust eq. E.g. 97s A8s 44, not KQo that gets dominated when stacks get considerably deeper

In the deep stacked live cash game that I play, we play $100/100 with bb ante of $100 and deuce seven bounty, $300 a man. What would you do with AJo KQo in that spot deep stacked facing a 3bet? (HJ vs SB 3b)

Same as above. Really no idea how much the 72o (72o only or suited, too?) effects strategy for SB 3Bettor. In case any case, I'm still leaning to first defend wider with robust EQ, not KQo AJo

To both of your questions, in later positions I'd definitely look to defend with calls and 4bets

Welcome mate :)