Hey reasonable question, would definitely love to hear Luke's thoughts regarding the first point especially the landscape for mid-stake, I know you don't play those stakes but would be nice if you can share some insights from coaching.

Cheers!
Luke Johnson

Luke's Journal has a lot of answers

Hi Luke, long-time listener, first-time caller.

Hi MCFace , welcome!

I've been watching your videos from the start am up to your "How I poker in 2024" video but thought I would write here instead. You mention that poker is not dead. As someone who has played very little NLH and never made an account on GG, I was wondering if you could go into the landscape of online poker a bit more. I've heard that the rake is very high, but that there is decent rakeback. What kind of winrate is required in your opinion? (Before rake is taken)

Rake is indeed very high at GG, however, the RB is decent at around a flat 33% if you get to the highest RB tier. There is additional RB in the form of BBJ, Cashdrops and Leaderboards. These are for lower (1k and below) stakes only, and BBJ/Leaderboards requires users to grind a LOT of volume in order to benefit well. I believe the top grinders re. volume can achieve (ballpark)85% RB if they do everything right. Achieving this is no easy feat, you need to be an exceptional player to do so.

WR's:
On other sites (WPN/PS) there are many players with 5-8bb WR's over large samples at low-midstakes. These players for the most part likely game select, too. So consider that WR achievable.

At GG AFAIK there are only a handful of players winning pre RB whilst also maintaining leader board EV. As such, I usually recommend players to steer clear of GG below 5k, unless they are good enough to battle 500/1k leader boards, which again, is not an easy thing to do.

Perhaps it's a faux-pas to ask, but would you mind sharing some results/graphs? I know some other coaches do so from time to time. I'm very concerned about the high rake and GTOWizard situation and am not sure if it's even worth getting into the NLH online scene. I am very curious to know how someone like you (who appears to be doing practically everything and has the EV decisions almost completely down pat and is mostly just concerned about frequencies at this point) is doing in a high-rake, competitive environment. Do you play on Ignition or ACR or anything else besides Stars and GG?

I am sharing my journey & results HERE. As for your concern, my response will always be the same, so long as you work hard and smart enough, you will surely out-battle the rake and other players. Try not to let the rake be a reason to not do something. In your case, I would likely recommend grinding alternative sites (WPN, Stars) to benefit from the lower raked bb/100. Despite this, I would recommend to battle vs other strong regulars at each limit, likely reducing your short term evBB/100, but improving your capability as a player. This will benefit you long term.

Apologies if this line of questioning is intrusive. I just honestly have no idea what high stakes grinders are making and even a sample of one would very helpful.

Not intrusive, don't worry. But also know that most HS players simply do not know what their bottom line EV is year on year :D. I'd like to say my overall evBB/100 is around 4.5 (incl. RB), but it could be a little higher or a lot lower. Over the course of a year, that is going to swing my yearly earning's by a few hundred K. Henceforth I try not to project in this way. I just try to show up and do my thing, making sure I am improving month on month.

mx404

iPoker/WPN/PS/Party seem to be great places atm for midstakes (200-1k). Higher (2k/3k) is mostly WPN and then 5k+ is essentially monopolised by GG, unless you plan to battle vs other regs, which you can do so on WPN.

Hey RunItTw1ce

Thank you for including some of the table talk (audio) that other coaches have not included.

Cool, thanks for letting me know :)

1) 10min when Dwan calls 95 on 733-K-Q board only thinking Dnegs floats front doors. Do you think it's good to advertise you called 9 high here or just quietly muck and pretend you had something like TT-88 or A3s etc.

I suppose this should entirely depend on how Dwan feels about his strat going into the game. E.g. if he intends to play tight, then advertising this is +EV.

2) Same thing for bluffing, I like to pretend I just have "it" in live games when they ask. But then when I have value it's hard to get paid off and there are so many MW pots, I tend to have more value than bluffs.

Well don't worry, you are supposed to have more value than bluffs.

FWIW, MW bluffs tend to be a little more creative, often taking parts of the board and turning them into a bluff, like pairs, 2p's and sometimes even trips. This is due to ranges become a lot more condensed and overall stronger, thereby requiring bluffs to be stronger (re. blockers), too.

3) 13:45 at 500-1k-2k + 300 ante there is a 10k iso from Phil (5bb IP vs a limper), then Dwan flats from the blinds, and Doyle squeezes to 55k. The commentator says Doyle has about $200k in front of him.

Ok thanks for the stack size input. $200k is 100bb with the straddle, so going to 27bb as an effective squeeze vs 1 limper, ISO'er and CC'er is going to be too much. At this point I'd actually want to play a mixed 3b small & AI approach, and AKo goes straight into the shove. Reason for AI is maximally capture the massive amounts of dead money (ante, 3 blinds, limper, iso'er & CC'er) & 'only' 100bb eff.

Ok thanks for the stack size input. $200k is 100bb with the straddle, so going to 27bb as an effective squeeze vs 1 limper, ISO'er and CC'er is going to be too much. At this point I'd actually want to play a mixed 3b small & AI approach, and AKo goes straight into the shove. Reason for AI is maximally capture the massive amounts of dead money (ante, 3 blinds, limper, iso'er & CC'er) & 'only' 100bb eff.

Luke Johnson With a shove Doyle would be picking up about 12% of his stack increase. Shoving $200k over a $10k ISO + a call seems ridiculous, but only because I don't understand the math on it.

Doyle would be risking 200k to win 28k. Using Redchip fold equity calculator we need them to fold 54% of the time. How do I figure out the profit for this spot? In my games if there is a limper and then a 5bb ISO and a 5bb call, I should just play 3bet to 15bb or shove 100bb?

Using wizard 8max 5bb RFI ranges its playing shoves IP small %, but OOP wizard is shoving QQ (40%), KK (40%), and AK (88%). The EV for AK on avg is +2.58 here. Would the mindset just be every time I shove in this spot with 10-14bb in the middle I make 2.5bb?

Think of it this way, there is 14bb out there, which is 14% of Doyle's stack, without a 3bet yet taking place. That's a LOT of dead money with a bunch of weak ranges. In a situation like this, I will want to opt for 3b-shoves with AKo, perhaps KQs, QQ and some JJ. The only hand I'd do every time would be AKo. Hands with more playability (KK, AA, AKs, AQs) can be 3b smaller.

17min the commentator said Phil was giving an unlimited amount of credit by "EIMF" who is this? Going back to the beginning of your video where you said Phil would need around $4M to play in a game like this.

No idea. Need Phil to help us out a little here :D

27:30 when Eli 3bets KK 16k to 40k or cold 4bets rather. How deep do we need to be in order to try and set mine if we think our opponent has a big pair? Do we want 8x the $40k bet or 8x the 24k difference in Phil's shoes if he had a pair like 77? If Phil did have a pair he would have to call 24k to win 64.1k, so he is getting 2.67 : 1 odds. Maybe I need to go back to essential poker and brush up on my fundamentals.

As the 3bettor facing the cold 4bettor, I think your thought process is way, way off here. Unless we're short (<100bb), or the c4b is exceptionally large, we aren't needing to think about this type of math here. PP's can also bluff well postflop, make other hands than just sets and can even herocall river. As such, PP's usually defend very often vs these actions pre.

I understand they can make other hands other than sets or be turned into bluffs like small pairs on AXX boards getting KK-JJ type of hands to fold. There are players who won't cold 4 AK or QQ though and they will just cold call 3bets with them to realize their equity on the flop first, so the cold 4 bet range at low stakes for a lot of live players is literally only AA & KK. Against this type of player I would only be set mining and not trying to get them to fold an over pair postflop.

In Tyler's recent video he 3bet 66 SB vs BTN and folded to the 4bet. Where he talks about in solver these pairs will show a +1bb profit, but against a tighter 4bet range these can quickly go -EV. That is why I don't think we should be defending as wide as the solver when the ranges in practice are typically much tighter.

If we have a sure enough read villain is overly tight, so much so that we cannot make back the EV postfop, then sure, we can fold. We should be careful with this. Too many people over-adjust without considering the other side of the coin; just because a player is too tight, does not mean we cannot make money with X hand

Haha, don't worry I felt I was being fair with my thoughts here. I did call him out on a few plays that I felt were quite OOL. BUT .... we aren't privy to Phil's reads/thoughts at the time, which could have been very meaningful. In fact, I'm sure they would have had to been given the play.

This is not the same thing as the video. But SRP 3 way on AQ3dd board. I wanted to check if solver is using big size as you said in the video. In this Co vs BTN vs BB spot (won't let me do BTN vs blinds) we can see 66% size being used 11% of the time and B25 being used 21% of the time. Range is very polarized as you mentioned geared towards AX mostly or QdXd type hands. Some GS like KTc or JdTx etc.

If I change the board to KQ3dd now betting frequency increase to 49% where B25 (35%) and B66 (14%). I am not sure how we should be splitting the two sizes here. I've just been keeping it standard 1/3 for MW on the flop. I could see as an exploit vs recs going bigger with unblockers to the calling range like lower sets or combo draws for bigger sizes. Maybe not too hard AJo ATo JTo with a diamond bigger size and without a diamond smaller size.

I thought MW strategy was small size with a polarized range?

Not always. As I've mentioned to you many times before, try to be less rigid with heuristics. There are very few 'golden' rules in poker.

AQ3s vs KQ3s is mainly due to marginal TP's ability to not relinquish so much EV by checking the flop. Moreover, xb naked A5 on AQ3 is good MW, but xb naked K5 on KQ3 MW suddenly relinquishes quite a lot more EV to two villains. Therefore, I'd opt for a more polarised, large size strat on AQ3s, and a smaller size (still relatively polarised, though), on KQ3s.

Thanks man! Glad you're enjoying. More to come :)

This was a fun video to watch. Interesting seeing the difference in the way the game plays now vs back then.

Thank man. Indeed, it was also a thoroughly enjoyable video to make. If there's enough interest, I can make more.

Interesting backstory on Phil's appearance in this video. Perhaps that explains a thing or two. Whatever the case, agree with you that he still managed to be on the right side of his reads postflop. It would be great to hear from Phil himself on how he thinks he played. E.g. if Phil played the same style in 2024, it'd be safe to assume he's deep into the read tank and that'd be that. But back in the 2000s, he may have just been a lot weaker of a player, and then perhaps it's less justified by reads

Indeed. & thanks man <3

Yeah, I think the lead decision is reasonable. Would pref 96hh and a smaller size, but that's nitpicking given this was such a long time ago. KTss standard continue, too.

Hey TRUEPOWER sorry, I missed your comments

Yes a 4, perhaps a hero call from Khi's. Moreover, Lex simply does not give credit to Eli for a protected range arriving OTR, so is looking to target its weakness

Luke Johnson hey buddy no worries man all good! You’re a busy guy! Love your videos hope your crushing the tables!!!

Haha yeah, as mentioned it is indeed way OOL!

Yeah, it is pretty insane call. Props to Lex

Thanks mate :)

Yep, more 3bing for sure with the inflated amount of dead money. Still happy to mix in some calls with KTs

Being proactive is good, mainly in spots where you either have a clear range advantage, or can perhaps tell a good, convincing story. Here, leading large into two uncapped ranges, seems like a dangerous game to play.

Just curious like this hand, how proactive should we be playing the turn if we are the BB, leading out 1/3 OTF and is there any particular exploit? (Personally I'll assume we probably barrel on any improved turn -- BD straight/flush but feel it might not be enough)

Given the size of the lead and the presumably condensed continue ranges from villains, I'd look to cbet very honestly; I don't believe we can do much else here vs strong, condensed ranges.

From your POV, where does the EV coming from?

Tough question, as it comes comes in many, mostly albeit small ways. To name a few:
SDV, BDFD, Overcards, Bluffcatching & Bluffing opportunities

... on such an innocuous texture, KTs retains a decent potshare vs bets OTF

Not sure on thresholds. Instinctively I'd shove a lot of JJ QQ KQs AKo, KK feels like a bit of a meh play, given it plays so well postflop if we 3b smaller, moreso than all the aforementioned hands.

Really, really dependant on image... with how I suspect Eli's image was a the time, a smaller bet seems a lot more appropriate. It reduces the time villains can make disciplined laydowns and may even induce some funky bluffraises

In your opinion, is there any exploitative implication nowadays with these none-solver big cbets?

I don't believe so, I expect the big cbets seen in this video were seen as relatively standard. People wouldn't have thought too much into the exploitatively implications IMO

Yeah, perhaps, but this is little 20/20 hindsight :D. It'd be extremely difficult to notice this whilst considering all of the other factors, live in hand. At least it would be for me. Then again, I don't play live poker ^^