Thanks mat, glad you found it helpful.

Very good question. It all depends on what do you expect them to be doing.

Note that if they do something crazy with an incorrect bluffing hand such as a random 2nd pair on the final example I used on the video that will often result into them overbluffing quite a bit and therefore our response would be to just click call with our entire bluffcatching range. Similarly, if they go too thin for value to the point that you beat their value range with a hand like AA, you can very easily call profitably.

As long as our hand beats their bluffs, we will just have a profitable call no matter how good/bad our bluffcatcher is if they overbluff in a significant way.

I nodelocked this spot and forced OOP to bluff all of their A3 combos and you can see how we start calling pretty much all of our bluffcatchers besides AA (even though the EV of calling goes up by a lot) because is the only bluffcatcher that heavily removes A3o.

If we force them to also bluff every 2x hand at full frequency (which in reality is to be expected if we expect them to bluff A2 every time IMO), this is what happens. As you can see, AA does still have significantly less EV than other bluffcatchers with better blockers such as K4 or K5 but now becomes, of course, a profitable call.

Thanks for the detailed response! What would be your default play against a recreational player who you don't know too much about? Would you stick with the GTO response until you have enough information on them in order to know how to deviate? Or would you suspect them to systematically deviate in a predictable way?

Good question again.

I assume that you're asking about the spot that I put as an example on the video. If that's the case then I'd probably end up overfolding vs most recreationals here. I think that they often struggle to find enough bluffraises in general.

In any other spot in which I don't have a clear idea of the population tendencies, I'd just stick to GTO until I gather enough information to deviate in some way.

Thank you for the kind words!

23:31 – The most important thing to take into account here is whether or not those players remain balanced when they expand their value range and start shoving AKo, AQo combos very liberally. If they do, then our Ax hands become much better bluffcatchers since they start blocking their value range. If they don't, then we can just fold our entire bluffcatcher range and only call with hands that beat/split against their value range.

Note that most players will just be unbalanced in these flush completing River spots mostly because of the fact that they will lack offsuit hands on their preflop 3B ranges.

23:31
Thanks for the kind and nice reply.
These are ideas based on heads-up range. right?
I play 6 max cash 100nlz . In BTNvSB 3BP of 6Max, Let's say It's same board texture if we face triple barrel shoves and got A7s, A8s type Hands on IP, considering 100nlz of underbluffed population tendencies, I don't know if a weak Ax will make a good calldown. If you think about blocker, this is a clear call, but because the hand strength they show in showdown is so often very strong.
range would be different but I think the concept will be maintained.
or maybe BTNvBB situation would be more simillar. This is because BB's 3B range at BTNvBB fits better compared to the 3B range at Heads-up.

These ideas are based on HU, yeah, but they still apply to any situation in poker.

If your opponent underbluffs a certain spot, you can always fold profitably all of your bluffcatchers. So those weak Ax hands can always be folded and you just need to call with hands that beat/split against their value range.

Haha, nice one. Thank you very much mx!

Cheers!

Would you consider doing some common mistakes/misconception people make with middle/bottom of the range from street to street? I think it will be quite interesting and although I don't play HU at any meaningful volume, I find understanding HU concepts really solidifies my SRP play. Could be a fun series :D

Hmm, can you elaborate a little bit more on the idea of the video? I'm not sure I understand what you mean.

Oh -- for example, I sometimes bluff way too much with the bottom of my range and only finding out some of them are pure give up due to blocker property even it's the bottom range. Maybe you can tackle on that + some usual misunderstandings .That's just one example popping out of my mind -- hope this makes sense :D

Oh, I understand now. Thank you for the suggestion, noted.

Thank you! Glad it helped :)