SCOOP $25k HU NLHE Final Table vs alimounda
Posted by Sauce123
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 14 Comments...
great video, keep them coming
Nice vid. Definitely like the pio analysis mid video. +1 for the next installment obv
Pio analysis during the video on the tough games are really good ! Please continue to do so :)
I think the pace of the pio analysis was very good. It didn't drag on like some videos do and got to the point quickly.
villain seems to be c betting at too high of a frequency with his large c bet sizing, I imagine with 2/3 or 3/4 pot c bet you should be doing a lot more checking as you don't really wanna c bet 2nd pair for 3/4 pot. but he probably is c betting at around the same frequency as you and you are using just a 30% sizing, so shouldn't we expand calling range and really raise our check raising frequency to punish this??
his double barrel frequency also seems very high, albeit a small sample, and it seems as if we are over-folding as you are playing more of a GTO range where as in actuality his range is just way over-bluffing.
what i'm trying to say is do you not feel like slightly deviating from GTO and PIO when playing such an opponent as he is perhaps exploiting us with his strategy of big bet sizing's with high frequency. for example, he just pot/pot/pots blind every hand. we don't deviate from what PIO says and so on like an A9522 we only call down with A9,A5,A2,34,55 and perhaps A3/A4. he probably just prints as these hands make up such a small percentage of our range- roughly 4.98% of our range. so, obviously vs a 100% range triple barrel we should call down any A and any 9 and probably most 5x and 3s/4s.
so on that 99 hand @29:50 in PIO it says to fold 20% or whatever of our 99 combo's OTT vs the turn sizing and subsequent flop sizing, but villain is clearly not playing GTO and, as you said, is clearly betting way more than just 35% of the time on that flop- like perhaps even close to 100% of the time in a 3 bet pot on Qxxr. so we should fold probably 0% of our 99 combos. also, he was 3 betting over 20% of the time, even though he was opening tightish OTB his 3 betting range was pretty wide, so he's probably gonna have a bunch of hands worse than A high with 0 SDV OTT that just wanna barrel and hope we fold some A high's or perhaps even a pair ourselves, as in a vacuum betting them is prob +EV if we are folding to the frequency that PIO says.
there's this really weird reg at 1/2 who just pots like every flop or turn with the betting lead or vs a missed c bet, so I just started checking back like every top pair or even 2 pair and just raising the turn or calling him down, also increased flop check raising range vs him. clearly it's not GTO but he actually started to check turns to me lol so I think it worked :P cos obv if he pots turn we have to defend 50% of the time so that gets pretty tricky when you have A high's, K highs or underpairs a bunch so he just pretty much prints and can pot super wide as an exploit vs the average regs x back range. but when he starts to pot in to an uncapped and strong range with almost all of his pre-flop range, his equity in the pot could just be 0 a ton of the time, even with 1 more card to go. so suddenly this strategy is terrible. so clearly vs this opponent playing a PIO range OTT or whatever would be just losing a bunch of money.
okay i'm rambling now lol, great video though, looking forward to the next part!
I am not as confident interpreting small samples to predict unlikely strategy choices and going for big exploits.
For simplicity, assume our Bayesian priors are something like GTO. Or, more accurately, assume roughly a normal distribution around GTO frequencies with some players in the population more and less aggressive, looser and tighter etc. Over a small sample we should be much more likely to think our opponent is just running into aggressive bets than we should be to think he's playing an extremely weak strategy.
You should also consider the non linearity in the EVs of possible adjustments. For example, a slightly too loose turn or river call is likely to be losing just a fraction of a bb at equilibrium but might be winning >1bb against even somewhat too aggressive strategies. Furthermore, a pip too loose is unlikely to look like an adjustment to our opponent and force a counteradjustment. In contrast, very loose calls are likely to lose >.5bb at GTO and are likely to be counterexploitable for big numbers, while being easier to identify and adjust to.
fair enough, of course the points I made were based on a small sample size, and the only way we could identify if villain was playing a super exploitable/ loose strategy that involves too much betting and at too big of a sizing was if we played him over a larger sample size. you did however comment on how you didn't believe villain was grinding PIO around the clock, so we can then assume his strategy is not too close to equilibrium, does that mean we don't alter our strategy to make some exploitative adjustments? for example we know he is barrelling at too high of a frequency, do we expand our range or just keep trying to play as similar as we can to PIO?
it seems like a thin line between playing as close as we can to a GTO style and making small exploitative adjustments to our opponents. it always really annoys me the most when I call with say J7 vs a river bet, thinking he is barrelling too wide, when I know the cut-off is J8 to call and he shows me a value hand. it's like PIO is giving me the middle finger.
I suggest trying to avoid statements of the "we know" variety and instead describe situations probabilistically with varying degrees of belief grounded in a loosely Bayesian framework. I think this is what good poker players do intuitively so if the previous sentence sounds confusing just make small adjustments based on what you see that are unlikely to cost you a lot if you're wrong.
Nice pacing and well constructed video -- ty. The PIO was included with purpose and alacrity. I appreciate how you are so open and clear on what is and is not a close decision. If find this is one of the trickiest things in poker.
I've noticed in a lot of your videos when you look at pio results you decide to always click on the action to view the range that takes that action (in yellow), rather than click on the strategy button to see what frequencies each hand takes each action (in red/green/blue). In some situations it's much easier to get the answer you're looking for by clicking the strategy button (eg if you're looking for the threshold between calling and folding) rather than clicking between the different actions a player can take. I was wondering if this is just a matter of personal preference (or my observation is just a small sample size and you don't actually always do this), or if you think you learn a lot more by doing that rather than clicking the strategy button
waiting for 2nd part
what happened to the 2nd part of this??
be patient
therapist LUL
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.