TOO SOON

Yeah I agree if those were my assumptions then yes the play would be call.

The assumptions I made were that some AsXs and AdXd would bet the flop.  Also I felt hands that we are ahead of are still doing pretty well against us.  Stuff like QJ/JT/T8/68/XdXd.  Also if he ever does bet the turn with Kx it makes our turn call far worse.  The biggest thing is I think we are going to have a really hard time on a lot of rivers after calling turn.  He's gonna chk back his weak Ax and his Kx if they ever bet.  Our range is capped and includes pretty much no strong draws other than 7dXd so he is going to be able to play rivers very well.

I still think it's a c/f.

If you're going to 5bet bluff it makes a lot more sense to me to do it with hands that don't have as much value, stuff like A5s-A2s or 22-66.  Seems to me we are wasting our 88 by turning it into a bluff assuming we should still be able to play pretty well in 4b pots OOP w/ it.

Yes that's an astute observation about my comment being contradictory regarding there being 'enough' value in taking pots down pre.  I noticed it when I was listening through before submitting the video but thought it was such a small contradiction that it wasn't a big deal to leave it in there.  That comment is outdated by a few years and I shouldn't have said it because it's no longer true, so disregard that.

Regarding dealing with 3 barrels on low-ish boards.  Do you think your opponent is 4betting 99 and TT, then 3 barreling all in on those low boards with those hands?  If so, then playing the hand the way I'm recommending would be a poor choice.  I think a lot of people are flatting 3bets now with TT, JJ and even QQ occasionally so it means that you are just up against bigger pairs less frequently than you might have been 6 months to a year ago.

I'm sure everybody appreciates your sarcasm and crassness.

...I can make those assumptions because there's no way anybody is good enough to play in these games yet have huge discrepancies in how they balance their made hands and draws on a board like TT8r.  I can't even make a video without a tiny contradiction because people pick up on it and mention it.  He'd otherwise get fleeced.

yea I can see how my 2nd comment could be taken as inappropriate.  I was just slightly amused at the fish emoji because when PS used to be available to US residents I don't think you could do that, so I was completely unaware that it was built into the software nowadays.

BUT BACK TO POKER

So basically you're saying that when you encounter opponents that you assume are pretty good, you make inferences about other parts of their range based on what they would need to be doing to stay relatively balanced?  I'm just asking this because I have always heard that this is a faulty logical connection to make...but if you've successfully been making these connections then maybe I'm wrong.

I don't see why it's a faulty logical connection to make.  I am gauging his play against what I assume the average 5/10nl regular on stars to play like.  I think if he doesn't balance his made hands and draws in that spot that he is going to get fleeced by most opponents in those games.  If I find evidence to the contrary then I can assume he is a very weak regular and I can adjust my game accordingly.

I was just defending Juan.  It takes courage to put footage of yourself playing up for a lot of people to see.  The guy making a comment was just trash talking how Juan played but I don't see that guy offering his footage up to be critiqued.  I know you guys value my videos because I see improvements in my opponents' play immediately after them being released.

Yeah, I understand, and also think his commentary about juan's play was pretty unescessary. I just said that cuz I feel like you've been a little over defensive thinking everyone is being sarcastic and over critical, after that thing with that guy. But anyways, looking forward for the next video!

where did I trash talk his play? I said lol @ the emoji because I didn't know that graphic could be done.

Great video Peter! Really cool to see review of "high-stakes" games, since most of the "pro-views" here were for people playing 1/2 and lower. Awesome to be able to see some of the leaks the guys are making at 5/10.

Hey Felipe ! I like your videos a lot, nice you decide to post here. 

What leaks did you find on my overall strategy ? Or what would you say is my biggest weakness from this video? 

If you don't have enough bluffs in your range in any given spot, it means you are mostly only getting called by better against competent opponents.  You and I clearly have different definitions of 'competent'.

Well, yes, but I would argue the solution in those cases isn't to stop betting hands that beat the majority of villains bluffcathers. Adjusting our sizing accordingly is by all likelyhood the better alternative as it actually forces villain to make a decision with his middling hands, rather than him getting to play close to perfectly against our checks. 

The last sentence is a bit ironic as you just a few comments up called a guy sarcastic and crass (for no valid reason I might add) and yet you now resort to the same? 

Personally, I'd never go into someone else's video thread and attempt to educate them.  Second, you say any competent player can easily know that I 'just don't understand' this concept yet you give no specific example of a spot where I'm making this 'mistake'.  Then you tell me you aren't attacking me so I shouldn't get defensive.  It doesn't matter how I respond to that because anything I say is going to come off as defensive.

I don't have time for this.  If you can bring up an example of a spot you think I'm 'confused' or whatever, I'll respond to that.

I suppose my biggest gripe that I might have worded poorly with the second paragraph in the first post is that you have shown in earlier video threads, as well as throughout your videos that this whole balance and range building thing isn't an exact science for you. You have even admitted to as much yourself when defending your case. It's all a bit arbitrary and up in the air in a sense. 

With that in mind I find it in pretty bad taste to plug your coaching with the motivation that you will show people their range imbalances with that history of criticism. I humbly think it's below par for any video on RIO, let alone a hsnl one, and where would I voice this concern other than in the actual video thread?

I do agree with your sentiment that being heavily math oriented isn't the only attribute needed to be a strong HSNL reg, but my concern is not helped by the fact that you and I played together daily for about three years starting from late 2011. You play well, no doubt, but the context of your monetary achievements is not exactly transparent to your audience.

I hope that clears what I was getting at, even if you don't like my opinion. Nobody has to, off course, but I see no reason not to express it being a paying customer of this fine site. 

I wish you the best of luck.  

Being skilled in poker requires making a ton of assumptions.  Assumptions that can be quantified but only loosely.  Even in attempting to quantify them mathematically, there is still plenty of potential for error.

It sounds like you just think I'm not qualified to be here.  That's your prerogative if you think that.  A lot of people, specifically the one who matters most, Phil, seem to think I am.

Based on your comments I'm not really sure you understand the ideas you are trying to espouse since I clearly pointed out a few instances in the video of exactly what you were saying I was confused about.  

Here's two examples of specific spots where I don't need to know how to do the math in order to know that mathematically these were not the most optimal plays:

The A3cc on the river of K74r-Jd-To bet of 100 into 100 I said was too large due to the fact that we don't have enough bluffs in that spot to justify such a large bet with our value hands.

The 73hh on AT7r-Kh-6h where we c/r to almost 900 over a bet of 165 into a pot of 250.  This was unnecessarily large to balance out our river c/r bluffs unless we are bluffing the river a very high percentage of the time.  

Of course without doing the math and range analysis I don't know the exact amounts that these plays are off, but if you are getting coaching is that what you are looking for?  Someone to sit down and take 30 minutes to do a few calculations for you in a spot or two?  

If you don't like my videos you aren't required to watch them and if you don't want coaching you are not required to purchase it.

I think we're in agreement.  When I was saying I didn't think he had enough bluff hands, I was speaking specifically to Juan.  This was just my perception of how he's going to be playing that kind of spot when he gets there with other parts of his range based on how he played this 73hh.  I think it's probably a mistake against the majority of opponents to bet/call the river with worse than a flush.  Maybe it could be good against ambitious opponents to b/c hands like QhJx or QxJh (against a sizing smaller than all in) because I think the vast majority of opponents are more likely to show up on this river with AhXx that doesn't feel it can call profitably so when IP holds that Ah I think he is doing worse against most of OOP's river c/r range.

It's all something I just estimate in my head.  I don't have exact calculations for any of these things.  I just try to figure out about how many hands I'm bluffing with and about how many hands I'm value betting with, then I use trial and error seeing how frequently certain sizes get calls/folds.

Of the boards you gave me....

Q9652 2 tone I'd bet the largest.   K847Q rainbow I'd bet the smallest.  

I forgot to mention, but my question intended on monotone boards. Those are kinda solven for me but monotone boards I am not sure, since we have a lot of hands with just one card of the suit that is monotone on the flop and I don't know, compared to double tone how we should proceed in terms of bet sizing on the river. 

Thank you.

First of all I think the answer 'it doesn't matter too much' is an okay answer.  I think if you just size about 2/3rds pot in general you will probably be fine.  

This is another question I just can't answer without doing work in CREV.  Something I know I'm going to have to begin doing at some point soon if I want to continue to stay ahead of the curve.

My best guess would involve asking yourself these questions:  How are you playing your flopped flushes, two pairs and sets?  And, how light are you value betting the river?

My general strategy in these types of spots is to chk/call all my strong hands, and to value bet relatively thinly so in general I should probably stick with a small-ish sizing (like maybe half pot-2/3rds pot).  But like I said, this is not exact and I don't know the answer without knowing the range you are getting to that spot with then spending time w/ CREV.  If you really wanna know I encourage you to spend the time to learn the program, you just can't have any kind of big edge anymore without doing that work.

Thank you. It is just a detail actually, because I faced recently this spot in a monotone board and decided to bet larger than I usually do on double tone boards, since my offsuit combos with a heart that x/c the flop are usually higher than the suited combos on double tone, in BB x CO.