Review: Calling in the BB
Posted by Tyler Forrester
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 9 Comments...
Hi Tyler, i'm often trying to figure out why Pio prefers to raise the suited combinations instead of the offsuit ones, on the first hand we can see that he's pretty much always raising JTs, KJs, KTs, sometimes Q9s but never JTo, KJo (at 6')... I think that the EV between raising JTs instead of JTo is very close and Pio prefer to choose to raise this hand when the EV is slightly better but i don't know where this extra value comes from. There is the same case in hand 2, where he raises QJs/JTs/QTs and not the offsuit combos. In this hand i find however that having QJ with a backdoor FD is better to call than QJo as we can easier call the barrel on future street (if we hit our bd fd, 25% of the time).
22' : i don't find that we have any bluff interested in check raising the turn and that we prefer to just bet our drasws on the flop or on the turn (unless that we have a specific read on vilain that he's betting to often on the turn and bluff. Thanks :)
Sometimes it has to do with card removal against certain ranges the JTs blocks marginally more combos fo nutted hands. If we look at the ev differences between calling and raising with all hands, its very rare for the difference to be more than a couple of % of pot, so realistically both strategies (raising offsuit or suited) are good. However we want to make sure our raising frequency doesn't become too high or we can become counter exploited.
@22, I think that's a mistake to not have any bluffs here. Something like AK here with a spade makes a good checkraise bluff. It blocks his two street calling range (KQ, AQ) and some of his flush draws, so it should be at least breakeven to raise here against a balanced strategy. Because villain needs to make AK with a spade here breakeven to bet, he'll call the two big bets relatively lightly. Otherwise, he will be overfolding. This is a spot where knowing your opponent can net a lot of money.
18:45
This is a spot where solvers usually do more leading than I expected. I think it mostly has to do with the low SPR and equity advantage. On similar board textures where, say, UTG raises and CO flats, they recommend checking a lot even with an equity advantage.
Here's a Pio sim I ran. From top left counterclockwise:
1. OOP EV allowing for OOP to cbet
2. OOP EV checking 100%
3. IP preflop range
4. OOP preflop range
I think 93s in particular benefits from taking the lead somewhere. I liked your idea of jamming the turn - you can have some A6s,96s,86s,65s,64s,76s, right?
Just realized that image is a little too small, but you can get the jist. Cbet $40 with 68% strategy has EV of 40.21. Check everything strategy has EV of 37.98.
Thanks for the awesome sim! You're right. I definitely should be leading this board. Its a situation where six max ranges play a little bit differently than headsup ranges. Next time I'm leading the flop or jamming the turn.
P.S. I'm liking your second post because you deserve two likes.
I got a lot out of this video. One question -
You 3bet with 23s. Do you think that's ever a profitable hand to play?
Yes it's certainly profitable to call a min raise with 32s and is more profitable to 3 bet if our opposition folds more than 60% to 3 bet here.
Hey Tyler, awesome! special thanks for making the effort and correcting the "mistakes" from your last video! much appreciated! sorry for watching it so late - hope you still get to read the feedback
Thanks Wushu!
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.