I_Fold_Jacks Thank you very much as always. <3

Happy to see you are still enjoying :)

28:15 when you are trying to explain why J9 is better than J10 on the 864ss it's because J9 can turn two open ended draws with 7 or T where J10 can only turn 9 for OE.

Yep, nice (Y)

I think the thought process of having a bdsd or bdfd and wanting to raise is "incorrect." I don't like the word incorrect here because it was a major leak of mine not too long ago. It was Tyler and Steve that corrected this leak for me. In essence PIO thinks there is more value to turning top pair rather than turning a draw. On the 972r boards 1hr 6min mark you see hands like A9s and K9s raising more often than hands like T9 and 98 because while T9 and 98 can turn OESD the A9 and K9 unblock some of the J10 / T8 type hands. Becomes a merged value raise to charge the two overs + gutter IP will have.

I'm not sure what you're inferring. A9 and K9 will clearly raise more than T9 and 98, as they are far stronger top pairs. However, you can see 98, T9 and J9 all raise more than Q9, as they have BDSD equity.

1hr 8min on the 986r board something Tyler talks about in some of his videos (not recently), but some of his past videos is in order to keep your frequencies in check you are going to choose to raise your suited hands over your off suite hands or your bluffing frequency ends up sky rocketing. If you look at PIO in your example you will see K7o is mostly folding and K7s is raising. Earlier in the video when you talked about when you continue vs a bet 1 out of 4 times you end up raising. When you consider 16 combos of K7, you pick the 4 suited combos, 4 out of 16 or 1 in 4 times. This is how I like to think of it at least.

It does not work like this. K7o and K7hh are two different hands. PIO will not just fold the offsuit hands as part of its algorithm. The reason K7hh calls more than K7o is that it unblocks x2 BDFD PSB bluffs here. K7o will always block at least one, and sometimes two. And naturally, the other 3 suited hands are BDFD's themselves.

1hr 11min 40 sec on the T72r The reason why 66 is a fold and 55-33 are calling at a frequency (I am pure folding 66-22) is because the 66 is blocking some of the bluffing region 96s, 86s, 65s, where the 55-33 unblock the gut shots that are bluffing. Also when you do float 66 and turn a set, then opponent can make a straight with 98, so there are more reverse implieds with 66 than 55 as 55-33

Agreed x2. Nice job.

I would like to see another deep dive of BB defense post flop vs other positions such as the CO. In the video you mentioned on one of the boards you continue with like 88 on KTX and say vs BTN you would continue and vs CO you would fold because the CO has less air in it's range. If not vs CO then a deep dive of BTN defense in a 3BP vs SB vs 1/3 cbet and vs 1/2 cbet as another common spot.

There's potential, however I'd rather it be vs MP or UTG, where the disparity is greater. If it gets requested, I can definitely put it into works.

Despite being a long video managed to watch your video as well as imbajimba back to back! Two of the best video producers on the site

Good dedication, well done. & thank you!

There's potential, however I'd rather it be vs MP or UTG, where the disparity is greater. If it gets requested, I can definitely put it into works.

consider this a request :-)

side note I am not sure why I can make a sad face on RIO but can't make a happy face Emoji.... LIke ti shows up on my screen when I paste from word document, but when I submit the comment it just shows question marks... Just finding some unique stuff to add to my comments. Will post a picture below of what I'm talking about.

�� ☹

you get much more than $100 per month in value from Luke's videos, so it would be an easy decision to sub. i don't wanna sound arrogant but i don't learn that much from many other coaches on the site any longer, however Luke always gives me ideas of how to improve my game or how to use PIO etc more efficiently. imo he is now quite far out ahead as the best coach on this training site.

radtupperware

Thank you very much! I hope you do indeed watch other videos, too.

Demondoink

Not arrogant at all.

Thank you very much, as always :)

Demondoink I think based on your skill level you can still learn a lot from Nuno as well. Also I think a lot of these Elite coaches "dumb it down" for us members based on where they think we are at. I am sure a lot of coaches have potential to make some awesome videos, but they likely need to be requested. Then of course some of them are just trying to make simple videos based on whatever money RIO is paying them. If a video is advanced level training and takes a lot of time to make, a coach might not think it's worth their time. I do appreciate all the work Luke and other coaches like imbajimba put into their videos.

RunItTw1ce yes i have mentioned how much i enjoy Nuno's videos in other posts, but i do not play HU so i cannot really apply what i have learnt to my actual game. these videos are much more applicable as they are, primarily, 6max focused.

i completely agree that there are some very good poker players making content for the site, so it's not a slight on their skill level. however, as you alluded to, they perhaps hold some things back (which is completely understandable). Luke doesn't seem to do this, which is why his videos are so popular and now seem to get the most likes, comments etc of any Elite video content.

fwiw i don't think you have to make a video particularly complicated for it to be eye opening. imo this video wasn't overly complicated, but it still hit the nail on the head because the concept was new (how we have to alter our continuing ranges based on IP cbet sizings).

square size proportional to weight. that's weird if your PIO shows TT on TTT for example. i would have thought this combo wouldn't show regardless of whether ssptw is checked or not.

Ben
Tools → Configuration → Data presentation on 13x13 grid → tick "hide empty cells"

This is for PIO1. Not sure if it is elsewhere in PIO2.

Glad you enjoyed!

Demondoink

Where did you see TT available on TTT? I have this

Luke Johnson nah i didn't see that, but i thought that is what Ben was meaning with his original question. so just ignore my comment as i clearly misunderstood his question haha.

Is this friend you speak of also very handsome and charming??

Luke Johnson he has a voice straight out of an Audible book on British mountaineering in the early 1900's.

Luke Johnson I guess I thought handsome and charming would go without saying

Preserving your outs is a nice idea, and it should definitely factor somewhere in addition.

That is food for thought. Thanks (Y)

Hi Jeff_ Can you timestamp please?

Indeed the 9x and Tx boards are 3b more often. However, this is partly due to the IP player also sizing up on them, thereby reducing the SPR.

The BDFD blocker rule is universally true yes, bar some of the time when you've a suited BDFD combo.

It works in the same way as the rule I was speaking of, where you are blocking villain's calling range, which is bad, as we are valueraising, and want to get called. The issue is that sometimes the equity of quite literally having the BDFD outweighs the negative blocker effect, which reverses everything. Unfortunately, I haven't figured out exactly when this happens. Yet...

It is a mindf**k.

Hope that makes sense.

I think when you have a truly monster hand (sets, 2 pairs, trips...) then you don't want to hold a flush card (blocking C-range). But when you have a strong but not amazing hand (top pair, over pair...) then now you do want that bdfd extra equity.

This is similar to: on monotone board, now you bet more often sets/2 pairs with flush-blocker, because these hands are now just "strong but not amazing".

joomorrow

Agreed with the stronger "monster" hands

However, with the weaker hands it isn't so simple. As evidenced by PIO sometimes utilising them more w/ the BDFD, and other times not. :'(

sandr1x Thank you! Glad to hear you are still enjoying :)

Yep, you nailed it. Disappointed I never caught onto this at the time. -_-

You're welcome! Thank you for watching!

Yep, nice job Icantthinkofusername

That and I think with 66, you block some of his bluffs like 68,69

There are certain boards in which using pot or check is very applicable. The very same people would likely use 1/3 or check on other boards. The boards shown in the video are examples of them given that the trainer uses sims to dictate the size used.

rcrane Yes, many.

1/3 is used more on average, however, there are many boards that are optimally pot or check. The boards showcased in the second GTO trainer session are as such. Also, see 18:27 PIO window; here we have a PIO sim showcasing a heavy preference for pot with all 4 sizes (27/50/70/102) available

TheCheddarman1
(Y)

ahh yeah i see, you explained it very clearly around 46 minutes, must have got distracted there

URI Peleg did one of these I believe, I didn't attend, but it was unfortunate that he hasn't made a video since then. If this stops you from making future videos I would not attend LOL People seem to disappear once they do this for whatever reason. Saulo stopped making videos, Uri stopped making videos (his youtube is very good though), and now Luke? Hopefully you come back to us.

Thank you Zache! Glad to hear that you enjoyed :)

How were your answers compared to mine?

I will do :)

I got some of them wrong and some of them correct!
Tbh i kind of cheated because i was studying defending vs big bets last month so i had some euristics like thresholds of defense for some of the boards that appeared on the vid.
My studies were against an overbet on the flop so not exactly the same but at least i had some guidance

Kudos for studying vs the big bets zache86 (Y)

jimmylepapichulo

Thank you! Glad you enjoyed it :)

Not a fish question at all. The sizing metric in my sims is x100. For example, 100bb = 10000. I did this for two reasons:
- PIO rounds instead of using decimals, so by x100 we effectively add two decimals.
- It's convenient for looking at things in relation to BB/100.

If a play loses 7 from equilibrium, it must lose at 7bb/100, or 0.07bb per hand. At 1knl, this would be $70(7bb)/100=70c. Instead at 500nl, 35c.

When value raising, you always want to unblock the calling range. 74 does a fantastic job of unblocking the top pair, so elects to raise often (every time in this case). And Q7 does a fantastic job of coolering other hands. Q4 ends up being the effective short straw, as it doesn't cooler as well as Q7 does, and it blocks the top pair which you'd like villain to have, unlike 74.

Seed2Shade No worries!

BTN 2.5x → BB 11.5bb

Luke Johnson Not sure if this is possible to make a video out of, but would be curious to see what ranges we should be continuing vs small 3bet sizes IP / OOP. One pretty major leak I have is over folding to small 3bets and being pretty stagnant with my continue range. I.E over folding ATo and KJo BTN vs SB 3bet of 8.5bb. People that are just clicking POT. Because even though it's a small 3bet, their range is plenty tight 11-13%, so even with better pot odds, I feel I am dominated too often in this spot and just end up folding. Then I'm sure with your small 3bets IP you already have a good grasp of how to exploit the pool. Is there a formula I can use for pot odds + range I give them + my RFI range and figure out how often I should continue?

Nice comment RunItTw1ce

Is there a formula I can use for pot odds + range I give them + my RFI range and figure out how often I should continue?

No easy science to it I'm afraid.

Not sure if this is possible to make a video out of, but would be curious to see what ranges we should be continuing vs small 3bet sizes IP / OOP.

Not possible, as it takes a staggering amount of time to run your own preflop sims. It would render itself not worth the time and effort.

———

It is worth mentioning that people often tend to overevalute preflop. Given current PC hardware/software availability, it is not possible to have accurate preflop sims, relative to how accurate our postflop sims are.

I'm sure this will eventually right itself in the years to come. However, for the time being, everyone (including the very elite) have what is best described as "budget" preflop sims.

Thank you 72Just4U !!

More to come B)

Sorry for the delayed reply ChiUse !

No problem, glad you enjoyed :)

I bought most of them (50/50 with a friend). I'm not 100% sure on the website he used, sorry.

Cool :)

Thank you, I will try!

The ranges are different. Luke ranges 3b more of the broadway hands and SCs and calls more Axo, k7/k8o, etc. I’m assuming this makes it more difficult for bb to defend on flop and thus allows button to Cbet a higher freq.

uszhh0102 tinyelvis58

I'm not entirely sure. CBetting only 1/2 the time BTNvsBB seems very wrong to me. GTO Wizard is a great tool, however, it does come with many flaws (mainly re. ranges/sims), too.

In GTO wizard General sims where 33% if the smallest size available to BTN, cbetting is 53.3%

In the Complex sims where the smallest size available to BTN is 23%, cbetting is 67.2%.

I think it's just the 33% isn't the best small size to be using on all textures. I know in particular for mono and paired boards very often even smaller is preferred. Probably true on some A high as well

I should imagine that if GTO Wizard allowed for preflop SB CC's, that would make the BTN RFI stronger and therefore allow the BTN to cbet more vs the BB, than if the SB played raise fold.

I don't know what ranges GTO Wizard use, but they are clearly not great if the BTN only cbets 50%

My sims run off a 12bb 3b, and my excel sheets include all flops (1755). The only clear difference is that I don't allow donks on flop from the BB, which if anything, should deter BTN from cbetting by a small margin.

Hey tinyelvis58

Sorry for the late reply. I will make one big reply here to your recent messages.

Either way I believe this highlights how different villians will play vastly different strats/ranges. It’s interesting to think about how this affects our own strat and who is actually getting exploited?

The "exploitation" is likely very minimal with good preflop sims. As I mentioned in a previous video (HERE), all ranges (and therefore sims) for 6max 100bb+ cash are going to be budget, relative to perfect sims that nobody yet has. This is similar to what Saulo says in his screenshot.

In hindsight, I should not assume their ranges and sims that determine a 50% CBet Frequency BTNvsBB to be bad, or unreasonable. I assumed as much, against my experience with BTNvsBB sims, and my past experience with seeing very flawed seems in GTOWizard. In any case, I am not bothered, as I know my sims to be at least reasonable.

Hello Juoksekerran123 thank you very much! :)

Hi BigBoyPoker

You can filter them in excel, grab the list of boards where you are concerned about an EV difference, and then rerun for what you believe is the correct size. The manual process is deleting the redundant files that you have since rerun. AFAIK there isn't an automated way to go about that

Yes, definitely!

BTNvsBB IP SRP, SBvsBB OOP SRP, BBvsBTN OOP 3BP and SBvsBTN OOP 3BP are IMO the best tree's to become a master at first, as you cover different SPR's, ranges, whilst being both IP and OOP

Thanks!

Welcome <3

Hey Oback2 thank you!

Very pleased to hear you're going to run through my content. Feel free to comment and I'll get back to you

Wow, thank you very much Orca206 for the great feedback, I'm thrilled to hear you got so much from it

Your study process seems very good, and I've personally not heard this method before, so props to you. With patience and consistency, it should really work out well for you.

Enjoy the other content here, if you've questions on other videos of mine, feel free to post them there.

Cheers!