4:50 i think we have a lot of qx here plus we have some flushes in our range and we have the Ad. I feel like a bluff here might be good.
13:30 I feel like we can block to widen his call range or xc.
19:20 these spots are tough for me. Would the jam be for value/protection only? Maybe a bare flush draw calls. If it's a semibluff, I don't know what better hands will fold. Interesting spot.
4:50 and 13.30 both agree was too nitty in the first one and then 77 on the river QQ466 jamming its so hard to get called by king high, block is much better actually. Also we still lose often enough this was an overplay.
19:20: so good thing now with GTO wizard we can look the spot up even including ICM. However this is unique as this is FT but also before the money so I picked a FT spot, could go with near bubble also but as approximation think its ok obv not the same as we are not in the money yet.
And way i ran the sim it seems to be a small difference between jamming and calling though calling is clearly preferred. Also raising small is still tiny bit better than just jamming (probably inducing some worse stuff to jam over).
Now the difference to simulation and reality is the human factor and also future ev in a broader game perspective spectrum (whole rest of the tournament) as well as future play in this particular hand. Let's take the actual hand he had here, 74ss. So on turn we are way ahead of him and if we knew his hand, we wanted to just call to keep him in. But this presumes that we will comfortably call off his potential bluff on river. Let's say he is the type to always bluff river there when he bricks. We will actually struggle to call (I think its a reasonable hero-call though, but still tough). If he always gets us to fold and always bluffs with worse then there is a lot of EV we give him by just calling.
When we know or think that he is overbluffing the turn, which was my assumption, then i think it is still reasonable to think about jamming the turn. Because there is so much in the pot already compared to what we have left as a stack. Plus especially when he bluffs with a lot of gutshot + over type hands, there is also a lot of risk to bust the tournament or let him catch up and lose the pot for comparatively little additional gain.
All that said, I of course still decided in the end that calling is better. Just wanted to make clear the arguments for jamming are not so weak to me. Yes its a jam where we will only get called by better and also fold out a lot of stuff that we have beat by a lot. But in a tournament, there are also other factors than just that at play
15:25 Important to stay level headed and don't act on emotions. Reminded me of another quote.
"Your feelings are not an excuse to play poorly. You can still play well while feeling angry."
20:56 LJ open, HJ 3bet, you said you feel like he's bluffing a lot in this spot. Why? Is it just because it's the two chip leaders? Seems like a dangerous assumption with so many players left to act.
20:56: this is an experience thing. Some spots I just know from experience the big stacks like to take, to attack other middling stacks at the table in high icm pressure situations. And so is my experience, that the middling stacks often shy away from aggression there, hence for the big stack to take the spot is generally a good thing. However then they will also themselves shy away from bluffing against a small 4bet from the middling stack, because of exactly this observation of theirs of the general player population. Namely that said middling stack generally responds in a timid and too straight forward way. Under true GTO conditions though, in such a spot where the big stack correctly attacks the middling stack with a lot of 3bets, he also will have to 5bet jam a bunch of weak stuff to 4bets, which in my experience they just do not do (again mostly correctly so). This can be exploited though
example spot i just looked up on GTO wizard near the bubble that somewhat resembles the ICM pressure:
LJ opens 37bb stack, HJ with 52bbs (40bbs average stacksize) gets to 3bet 9.2%, this includes a ton of weak AX hands, essentially all A2s-A8s hands, as well as all the offsuit Ax hands at low to medium frequency.
Now lowjack here never really gets to call much anymore in theory, however he gets to not only jam (23.4%) but also 4bet small to 12.6bbs at 8.9% frequency. Vs this, the 52bb stack needs to jam almost all of the A2s-A8s and if he does not jam he calls.
If he does not do this, but instead overfolds, LJ can actually be the one exploiting and 4bet bluffing more.
There are more extreme examples even where big stack needs to 5bet jam ridiculously wide sometimes, the bigger the risk advantage in the first place, the more he gets to 3bet bully but the more he also needs to still 5bet jam over small 4bets.
And it's not an easy job for the big stack either, overly bluff-jamming vs 4bet because wrongly assuming the opponent correctly bluffs is even way more costly.
Here too all that said, does not mean I am always correct about a particular situation. But going off of player population reads is very important in mtts, where you have little time to gain specific reads.
Loading 5 Comments...
Great video Mathias. I hope to see a thrid part.
4:50 i think we have a lot of qx here plus we have some flushes in our range and we have the Ad. I feel like a bluff here might be good.
13:30 I feel like we can block to widen his call range or xc.
19:20 these spots are tough for me. Would the jam be for value/protection only? Maybe a bare flush draw calls. If it's a semibluff, I don't know what better hands will fold. Interesting spot.
Thanks!
hey man,
4:50 and 13.30 both agree was too nitty in the first one and then 77 on the river QQ466 jamming its so hard to get called by king high, block is much better actually. Also we still lose often enough this was an overplay.
19:20: so good thing now with GTO wizard we can look the spot up even including ICM. However this is unique as this is FT but also before the money so I picked a FT spot, could go with near bubble also but as approximation think its ok obv not the same as we are not in the money yet.
And way i ran the sim it seems to be a small difference between jamming and calling though calling is clearly preferred. Also raising small is still tiny bit better than just jamming (probably inducing some worse stuff to jam over).
Now the difference to simulation and reality is the human factor and also future ev in a broader game perspective spectrum (whole rest of the tournament) as well as future play in this particular hand. Let's take the actual hand he had here, 74ss. So on turn we are way ahead of him and if we knew his hand, we wanted to just call to keep him in. But this presumes that we will comfortably call off his potential bluff on river. Let's say he is the type to always bluff river there when he bricks. We will actually struggle to call (I think its a reasonable hero-call though, but still tough). If he always gets us to fold and always bluffs with worse then there is a lot of EV we give him by just calling.
When we know or think that he is overbluffing the turn, which was my assumption, then i think it is still reasonable to think about jamming the turn. Because there is so much in the pot already compared to what we have left as a stack. Plus especially when he bluffs with a lot of gutshot + over type hands, there is also a lot of risk to bust the tournament or let him catch up and lose the pot for comparatively little additional gain.
All that said, I of course still decided in the end that calling is better. Just wanted to make clear the arguments for jamming are not so weak to me. Yes its a jam where we will only get called by better and also fold out a lot of stuff that we have beat by a lot. But in a tournament, there are also other factors than just that at play
15:25 Important to stay level headed and don't act on emotions. Reminded me of another quote.
"Your feelings are not an excuse to play poorly. You can still play well while feeling angry."
20:56 LJ open, HJ 3bet, you said you feel like he's bluffing a lot in this spot. Why? Is it just because it's the two chip leaders? Seems like a dangerous assumption with so many players left to act.
hi runittw1ce,
15:25 yes indeed.
20:56: this is an experience thing. Some spots I just know from experience the big stacks like to take, to attack other middling stacks at the table in high icm pressure situations. And so is my experience, that the middling stacks often shy away from aggression there, hence for the big stack to take the spot is generally a good thing. However then they will also themselves shy away from bluffing against a small 4bet from the middling stack, because of exactly this observation of theirs of the general player population. Namely that said middling stack generally responds in a timid and too straight forward way. Under true GTO conditions though, in such a spot where the big stack correctly attacks the middling stack with a lot of 3bets, he also will have to 5bet jam a bunch of weak stuff to 4bets, which in my experience they just do not do (again mostly correctly so). This can be exploited though
example spot i just looked up on GTO wizard near the bubble that somewhat resembles the ICM pressure:
LJ opens 37bb stack, HJ with 52bbs (40bbs average stacksize) gets to 3bet 9.2%, this includes a ton of weak AX hands, essentially all A2s-A8s hands, as well as all the offsuit Ax hands at low to medium frequency.
Now lowjack here never really gets to call much anymore in theory, however he gets to not only jam (23.4%) but also 4bet small to 12.6bbs at 8.9% frequency. Vs this, the 52bb stack needs to jam almost all of the A2s-A8s and if he does not jam he calls.
If he does not do this, but instead overfolds, LJ can actually be the one exploiting and 4bet bluffing more.
There are more extreme examples even where big stack needs to 5bet jam ridiculously wide sometimes, the bigger the risk advantage in the first place, the more he gets to 3bet bully but the more he also needs to still 5bet jam over small 4bets.
And it's not an easy job for the big stack either, overly bluff-jamming vs 4bet because wrongly assuming the opponent correctly bluffs is even way more costly.
Here too all that said, does not mean I am always correct about a particular situation. But going off of player population reads is very important in mtts, where you have little time to gain specific reads.
Appreciate the thorough response. One of the best things about your videos is you look more deeply at the human aspect if the game.
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.