Handling 4-Bet Pots OOP: 2 Hand Examples
Posted by sauloCosta10
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 11 Comments...
First hand is very interesting, as you said, Pop is generally missing these small size OTT and flop high xr frec vs range bet .
Thanks for this one, i learned a new stuff !
Good vid. @21:15 villian bets a high % in sim on K turn. This includes 99/TT/JJ. Can you explain why the sim bets 99-JJ here? What does this bet accomplish? Is pop or yourself betting in this spot in reality with that hand class?
Thx. Keep up the good work.
Hi Saulo,
20:50~ On the Ks turn, the sim says oop chip EV>Ip cEV slightly (4239 vs 4174) but the overall ip equity is much greater than oop (~58%). Is the slight cEV advantage the reason for oop leads to appear?
Im also curious about this strategy. I would think TT is low in BB cold 4 bet range and would think population mostly checks back the medium show down hands here as bluff catchers on the river and mostly wants to bet bluffs and Kx+ for value. The small bet with 99 tt jj hands doesnt make sense to me as I expect sb range not to have many SCs where those hands need protection. Curious if you remove some of these SCs and AXs from your range if BB is still supposed to use small turn bet on this 642Ksss board.
Would like to see more of these node locks in the future.
A very important thing to note there is the fact that OOP is leading most of the AA and 66. And that the IP betsizing used is 1/6 of the pot. Once OOP caps his range a lot by leading with the top of his range then IP can bet really small with thoose hands since OOP doesn't have many Kx at all and wont have a substantial check/shove frequency.
nice video, thanks!
I really enjoy the Pio oriented videos
about the first hand - I don't think node-locking the turn IP bets after OOP check to become shoves instead of the smaller sizing is very efficient way to check what the best strategy is
the problem with that is that you make hands like ATs or KQo that was bluffing IP for non-AI sizing to shove now, which causes a big EV loss for IPs, which is a good reason for PIO to want to ''push'' towards this node, especially with the best hands in OOPs range
so I think node-locking shove instead of small bet without adjusting the range that uses it is not the way to go
I think the better way you could use node-locking there in order to compare your turn options - is to node lock different raise strategy for IP vs OOP turn block like you suggested will happen in reality (maybe only all in size or just to lock your assumed strategy)
and also block the option for IP to bet small (if you assume population will just almost always use shove/check in reality), because than PIO will come up with a strategy that will lose EV for IP (if we don't get to small bet IP there we'll definitely lose significant amount of EV) , but at least be somewhat reasonable and more similar to what people use in reality, and not just punting too much money with too weak of a range IMO
I agree with you that locking all small bets towards shove is not very accurate or representative of the real strategy played. That said, any node lock you try to do will also be largely assumption based and you can make the sim spit out whatever you want based on how you lock the nodes. So the idea of just shifting the small bets towards the bigger bets was to try an input as little assumptions as possible. But yeah I like the idea of simply removing the option to have a small bet size there
Hello, since you are strong with Theory, I'm curious why in this situation: SBvsBU 3bet and when face cold 4bet from BB. We are defending very similiar range to BUvsSB 4bet.
BB 4betting range is defiently stronger than BU.
I can get abroad with PP, since they hold their equity vs any range fairly well. But stuff like ATs KTs,QJs,JTs seems like way too dominated.
the range looks fairly similar because our pp need highcard hands with playability in order to maintain their ev. According to simple postflop solutions we never slowplay aces in these 2 spots. instread of flatting 37% we are only flatting 20-22%. We should be mucking AQo ATs and a bit of KTs which we would call vs button. QJs is only called 35ish % vs button and none vs bb. But saulo is flatting aces at a high frequency which allows him to flat wider and face less pressure as well as be forced to call less marginal hands when he does face it. That said I agree the range he flats should be tighter vs bb and at least lead to lower frequencies of the worst performing handds like ATs and QJs even when he is protected by aces.
cheers for chipping in!
That was a pretty good answer jayhood187
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.