Drilling a Node - Delayed C-Betting the SB

Posted by

You’re watching:

Drilling a Node - Delayed C-Betting the SB

user avatar

Peter Clarke

Essential Pro

Video Player is loading.
Current Time 0:00
Loaded: 0%
Duration -:-
Remaining Time 0:00
  • descriptions off, selected

Resume Video

Start from Beginning

Watch Video

Replay Video

10

You’re watching:

Drilling a Node - Delayed C-Betting the SB

user avatar

Peter Clarke

POSTED Oct 15, 2020

Peter Clarke utilizes the help of PIO solver and simple GTO trainer in an effort to drill delayed C-bets as the SB.

4 Comments

Loading 4 Comments...

I like to Move it, move it 4 years, 5 months ago

Hello Peter ! Awesome video once again thanks.
I do have pio pro + Simple gto trainer.

Do you think it's a good idea to generate 184 flops like this with a checking range for OOP and training in simple gto trainer? I mean, is it still good to study this strategy on 184 flops? I guess there's some board that SB wants to bet? Or we just don't care and simplify all of that by checking 100% for OOP?

Concerning the ranges, they look like "gto" ranges as we see from the frequencies that aren't rounded, is it really well adapted to the zoom 50 pool?
Is there a way you can post the screenshots of SB and BB ranges here because we don't see the first column on the video.

Thanks in advance!

Blaubarschbube 4 years, 5 months ago

I agree, checking range OOP is a great exploit against a probably overstabbing population.
The "Drilling a Node" videos are excellent, very happy if there are more.

One question: At 11:00 on the Ts4d3c8d board we often overbet bluff with overcards and there is a pattern: We overbet slightly more often with offsuit combos compared to suited ones. The difference is not huge, but quite stable across the different overcards. Examples: KQo sometimes overbets, KQs almost never; also slight differences for KJ, QJ, J9 and so on. The pattern seems to occur on other boards too, this is the board where I saw it the best.
Any idea why that is the case?
My guess would be that with KdQd for example we can sometimes x/c OTT (so we are less inclined to bet with this combo), while we can never defend any KQo against a bet. This would mean that the difference comes solely from the flushdraw combos, which check more often.

tinyelvis58 4 years, 4 months ago

Great vid Peter. Keep up the theory work. Super beneficial.

@27:10 - you bring up EV loss in simple trainer is a misleading column. It seems that in SRP when training cbets/delay the EV loss is usually going to be small/trivial vs 3b pots/turn barrels/etc where the pot is bigger and thus EV loss will be much more impactful. Do you look at EV loss in those scenarios (bigger pots) as a way to gauge play?

What do you use as an EV difference threshold to determine acceptable loss?

Be the first to add a comment

You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.

Runitonce.com uses cookies to give you the best experience. Learn more about our Cookie Policy