Q9dd vs the 13bb stack - I think another option is to use a sizing that sets up about a turn size shove. (50-60% achieves this) I mean, tons of gutters and Ax that can call the flop to fold the turn, and if he jams on you, you have a pretty easy call. Think this ends up being higher EV, as if he is calling any pair on turn, same is true for flop, cept you get a bit of value from his weak hands when they fold turn(from the previous street, as they are calling to fold turn with incorrect odds)
17 min ish w A7o:
What do you think about these types of hands in games where your RFI size is bigger? Like I play 2-5 full time, and I'm often opening to 3-4x in the CO. The players are almost exclusively weak with few exceptions for the occasional reg. Do you think that because we are opening bigger, raising wider becomes less good? I do think the pool dramatically under 3bets fwiw, like many people wont even 3b AK, and use only QQ+. Not 100% true, but like 85%, and the people who use AK, will only have a AK/JJ+ range quite often. So even when we use the larger open, we still get to realize much more equity, so while we are risking more which technically would make us want to be tighter I think, I think this is counterbalanced by the fact we aren't getting 3b off our equity often at all, pre or post, so I can see it still being a viable strategy.
with the T8o hand BB, I imagine other sizes are being used alongside the overbet on turn yeah? I paused the video and I would often be using a more 2/3 sizing and following thru on alot of rivers, targeting A high to fold. This clearly isnt happening here, at least in your metagame. What kind of various sizings do you think you would have here? I think we cant go too too thin given some Qx check back as well as turned 9x in the form of A9. interesting spot to me that I wouldnt have found an overbet on. I typically would be following a line of thought of 2/3 turn, expecting some FD's to call, Ahigh, and turned pairs+top pair, maybe something like JT that didnt cbet, etc. I would expect alot of A high to fold to a river bet while 9x+never folds, and maybe some 2/4x fold as well, but I think the 2/4x would often be bet on flop as part of a high freq cbet to deny equity, so don't see too much of them being present
Great video and I really enjoy the live play analysis from you. I would love to see a video from you that dives deeper into your reasoning behind going more exploitatively as you have progressed. Maybe a hand review session with some examples would be great.
I am confused as to why you labeled the player around the 11:00 mark a possible Rec because he 3bet BNvHJ from 2.25 to 7? A few minutes later you 3bet BNvLJ from 2.5 to 7.5. Why is his sizing worse than yours?
I have watched a few of your videos using pio and after watching this video I have a clearer understanding of how to use it exploitatively. For the way I learn I think I need to be hands on with the software to start to be able to fully understand and apply. Can GTO+ do the same thing with the same efficiency as Pio? I ask because the cost of pio is pretty high for someone playing 50nl/100nl, and I am trying to decide between purchasing GTO+ or waiting until my winnings are large enough that purchasing pio is more easily justifiable.
the value of PIO is greater than the cost. That being said, I think it's possible the newer gto trainers may be more efficient for learning. I have post flop PIO, but have only seen the gto trainers used in videos.
If you're working towards playing higher than 100nl online, than pio+trainers is probably reasonable. The nice thing on pio is its a fixed cost as well. And if you are savvy to do the work, you can save your work to look back on and build a bank of situations to study.
My intuition tells me that GTO+ is probably more efficient than PIO, and if I was to ever get back into playing online extensively, I would very much consider it as an option. PIO is very labor intensive and time consuming. But is powerful as well.
Long story short, if the cost is an issue, I would think starting with GTO+ is a good idea, and then when you're ready for a greater commitment, consider PIO if nothing new has come along by that time
Loading 4 Comments...
Q9dd vs the 13bb stack - I think another option is to use a sizing that sets up about a turn size shove. (50-60% achieves this) I mean, tons of gutters and Ax that can call the flop to fold the turn, and if he jams on you, you have a pretty easy call. Think this ends up being higher EV, as if he is calling any pair on turn, same is true for flop, cept you get a bit of value from his weak hands when they fold turn(from the previous street, as they are calling to fold turn with incorrect odds)
17 min ish w A7o:
What do you think about these types of hands in games where your RFI size is bigger? Like I play 2-5 full time, and I'm often opening to 3-4x in the CO. The players are almost exclusively weak with few exceptions for the occasional reg. Do you think that because we are opening bigger, raising wider becomes less good? I do think the pool dramatically under 3bets fwiw, like many people wont even 3b AK, and use only QQ+. Not 100% true, but like 85%, and the people who use AK, will only have a AK/JJ+ range quite often. So even when we use the larger open, we still get to realize much more equity, so while we are risking more which technically would make us want to be tighter I think, I think this is counterbalanced by the fact we aren't getting 3b off our equity often at all, pre or post, so I can see it still being a viable strategy.
with the T8o hand BB, I imagine other sizes are being used alongside the overbet on turn yeah? I paused the video and I would often be using a more 2/3 sizing and following thru on alot of rivers, targeting A high to fold. This clearly isnt happening here, at least in your metagame. What kind of various sizings do you think you would have here? I think we cant go too too thin given some Qx check back as well as turned 9x in the form of A9. interesting spot to me that I wouldnt have found an overbet on. I typically would be following a line of thought of 2/3 turn, expecting some FD's to call, Ahigh, and turned pairs+top pair, maybe something like JT that didnt cbet, etc. I would expect alot of A high to fold to a river bet while 9x+never folds, and maybe some 2/4x fold as well, but I think the 2/4x would often be bet on flop as part of a high freq cbet to deny equity, so don't see too much of them being present
Great video and I really enjoy the live play analysis from you. I would love to see a video from you that dives deeper into your reasoning behind going more exploitatively as you have progressed. Maybe a hand review session with some examples would be great.
I am confused as to why you labeled the player around the 11:00 mark a possible Rec because he 3bet BNvHJ from 2.25 to 7? A few minutes later you 3bet BNvLJ from 2.5 to 7.5. Why is his sizing worse than yours?
I have watched a few of your videos using pio and after watching this video I have a clearer understanding of how to use it exploitatively. For the way I learn I think I need to be hands on with the software to start to be able to fully understand and apply. Can GTO+ do the same thing with the same efficiency as Pio? I ask because the cost of pio is pretty high for someone playing 50nl/100nl, and I am trying to decide between purchasing GTO+ or waiting until my winnings are large enough that purchasing pio is more easily justifiable.
the value of PIO is greater than the cost. That being said, I think it's possible the newer gto trainers may be more efficient for learning. I have post flop PIO, but have only seen the gto trainers used in videos.
If you're working towards playing higher than 100nl online, than pio+trainers is probably reasonable. The nice thing on pio is its a fixed cost as well. And if you are savvy to do the work, you can save your work to look back on and build a bank of situations to study.
My intuition tells me that GTO+ is probably more efficient than PIO, and if I was to ever get back into playing online extensively, I would very much consider it as an option. PIO is very labor intensive and time consuming. But is powerful as well.
Long story short, if the cost is an issue, I would think starting with GTO+ is a good idea, and then when you're ready for a greater commitment, consider PIO if nothing new has come along by that time
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.