PLO 3B Pots: OOP Checks, See a Free Turn?
Posted by Richard Gryko
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 10 Comments...
I like this format. Going over a certain situation on different boards is effective
hi Richard I have a issue with monker sizings. I am able to add multiple bet sizes but unable to use more than 3 it shows in window but dosen't show more than 3 below. do you know any settings of how will this get fixed ? I've seen your previous videos with monker analysis where I see you using 4 sizes. lmk if you have any clue. thanx.
Between the right edge of the left hand panel displaying iterations/nodes etc and the far left of the folded hands column there is a vertical bar you can drag to increase the width of the section where betsizes are displayed. Doing so should make >3 sizings visible.
wow it was so simple. Thank you so much.
lol, np, had my share of confusing monker issues with simpler than expected fixes.
16:36 once we pot and villain raises there will be 153 in the middle with only 125 left so we will see < 33%. great video as always!
hey, awesome content as usual.
at min 27:24 you say that ah will get to put money in for sure which is also my intuition in this spot. but in the end we can see that bare ah does never bet. i encounter quite a few spots now on diffrent boards in 3bet pots ip and oop where the bare ace plays passive. i cant make much sense of why and was wondering if you could shed some light on this.
hey, thanks :)
tbh im not totally sure, i do know that monker in general plays more passively with nut blockers than population esp when combos featuring the nfb also have ev in alternative lines, as the AA86 would have if chkd. theres a real world issue implementation issue though, i think, in that solverIP chks back nfb+nfd at some freq and solverOOP obv knows this, so future bluffs on flushing turns/rivs solverIP might make lose less effectiveness than would be the case for humanIP whose humanOOP oppt would assume after flop chk that IP has the nut flush draw essentially never. in this precise spot there may (im now speculating without having seen data, fwiw) be a solverland blocker effect where OOP is leading a lot of NFDs so chking midstrength NFB combos makes more sense bc we block fewer of OOPs remaining FDs, whereas the reverse is true of lower FD blockers.
this would also be a spot where knowing the precise EVdiff would be of use, if chking that combo is like 2% better than betting im quite interested in diving deeper, if its 0.003% better, not so much.
Great format.
17:06 we bet-call pure with that hand and with every akk combo.
Well, I know this video is a bit older...I like to re-watch your videos to see what insights I may have forgotten and what I have retained -- turns out there's a lot of the latter, so thank you for your excellent teaching! And definitely enjoyed this format of going through hands.
So at ~10:30 with the "slow play" of the wrap IP, I noticed at least through Vision's Practice mode that this is a hand class that protects the checking range for the PFA, either IP or OOP, and primarily the check-calling range if OOP, across a variety of boards in the "Unpaired" section.
Found the consistency of the passive line pretty interesting, so wanted to share that.
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.