Interesting Hands Plugged in the Solver
Posted by Patrick Sekinger
Video Player is loading.
This is a modal window.
The media could not be loaded, either because the server or network failed or because the format is not supported.
Resume Video
Start from Beginning
Watch Video
10
Loading 13 Comments...
to wide for CO 34%?
Timestamp?
9:32
sorry 12:11
Square size proportional to weight is unticked, this makes all non-0 frequency mixes look like full frequency raises. This is the exact range: https://gyazo.com/75c324e4e6b03622fc5b0b2d973941e3
Around 19:47 on J87s3s2x (OOP big XR after flop xx); I think you mention this somewhat in the video, but it makes sense that the concept of checking J7 J8 is so IP can bet air, and at the same time bet QQ-AA for value. (I believe this a decent chunk of IPs river composition)
Also, OOP's blockers w/ J7 J8 block IPs continue range vs jam (think stuff like JTo J9s), however you can see 88/77 are pure river jams b/c of their unblocker effects.
Patrick Sekinger thank you for the education. Two things to say.
1) 27 min mark I found quite interesting as usually when I barrel AQ here I mostly choose AQo without a club on the turn. Didn't really think about blocking Qd4d before. Looking at this sim I think unblocking club combos and blocking Ad4d & Qd4d makes AdQh or AhQd your best AQ combos to barrel unblocking clubs and back door spades and blocking some 4x combos. How important do you think these blockers are vs just choosing to barrel aggression and exploiting players not willing to put in a lot of money? In other words is it necessary to split your AQo combos?
2) I see a lot of coaches do this, but when you move your mouse around a lot, hard for viewer to really analyze the PIO sim. I think I learn the most when you stop and pause over your hand combo. Let the viewer soak in the sim for a few seconds at least.
1) I wouldnt worry too much about specific suits (outside the FD preference i.e AxQc bet > AcQx)
2) Thanks, duly noted for future
Last hand of video PiO is using a range bet on T95r at 95% for co vs btn 3 bet. This was a little shocking to me because I would think CO range hits this board pretty hard here. I have been using a more delayed cbet strategy on these T9x 98x boards checking back some tpwk even, also checking AXs without a back door, only betting AXs with bdsd and bdfd. I wanna say I am only betting 50% of my 3 bet range on this texture. Do you think that is bad? I don't wanna be one and done on the flop with a hand like As2s when turn comes non spade and no 4 3 or A. Feels like range bet makes our turn frequency for double barreling drop dramatically and also opens us up to a lot of check raises. In the video you mentioned you don't want to get into if range bet is highest EV or not. Maybe you can elaborate more now?
I think here you can choose to rangebet 1/3 or play more polarised cbet strategy using a larger sizing. It would be huge mistake to be cbetting 1/3 and only using half your range to do so imo. Rangebet 1/3 I think will lose almost no ev. This board is so good for OOP you can probably bet near range for halfpot
Maybe I am not understanding something. If the board is so good for OOP, why are we bluffing so much of our range?
I was using mostly 50-75% sizing on this board with roughly half my range. Mostly avoiding using 1/3 here on T9X and 98X specifically. I think the 1/3 bet just induces a lot of check raising and hero is forced to fold a ton of their range or call and fold to a lot of turn double barrels. Yes, most of the time people tend to just call the 1/3 on this flop, but how much of our range is actually barreling a brick turn here? Feels like 1/3 is just exploiting myself rather than my opponent, but I know i'm wrong on this point. Just lack the understanding on how 1/3 game tree plays out on this board on different run outs.
Appreciate you taking the time to respond to my simple / silly questions. I know they are someone basic to a more studied player. Maybe my main misunderstanding comes from A8s-A3s, and 88-22 on this T95 board. Not sure how these hands are going to proceed on various turns. Looking at other parts of the range, quite a few gut shots or turn cards that improve the equity, but also these cards can have reverse implieds if you hit top pair with a hand like AQ, now villain could have 2 pair or a straight. Feels like a lot of my range here, AK-AJ region that has some sdv wants to pot control more and I want to bet more KQ, KJ, QJ type hands.
Just a quick note, try not to think of hands pre-river as 'bluffs' or 'value' - much better to think of hands/ranges in terms of ev/equity.
Sorry, I misread the spot - thought this was SB/BU not BU/CO. Board is good for IP not OOP. I think in these IP 3BP spots choosing 33/25% cbet sizing is good on high equity textures and sizing up on boards where we have worse equity with range but want to cbet polarised
Patrick Sekinger Thank you. I'll try and think more in terms of EV. I know some times I do, some times I don't. Like i'll make really thin ace high value bets on some wet textures where they have like 48 combos of over cards / gut shots, much like this T9X board, but usually these bets for me come on the turn as delayed cbets and not so much on the flop.
Lastly I see like 22+ A10o+, K10o+, A2s+, K8s+, Q9s+, J9s+ T9s+ for BTN's 3 bet range. I know these are not full frequency plays, but roughly 18-19% of hands if they are. I think I am 3 betting roughly 13% BTN vs CO, is this too tight? How come there are no 98s-54s hands in BTN's 3 betting range?
Thanks again for quick responses.
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.