haha, I did not know this, my reads were wrong of course, but based on a small sample of full ring hands were I thought he was playing too loose and splashy. Obviously I was wrong, I'll make sure to avoid him at HUNL tables, I'd also add that I like my turn x/r at least some % of the time, mainly because while I am not folding any rivers there are many rivers that I can not raise for value. On a board this dynamic, even though I make him fold fairly oftenmost of his folds have equity vs my hand, and when he has a lower set or two pair I may not be able to get AI when either flush draw fills or the board makes a 4 straight or his two pair get counterfeited.

I am using HRC to show approximate push fold ranges, given that this a hand where I did not open shove, I need to run it as an advanced hand. I specifically said, that I disagree with HRC's assumption that villain should call 100% of hands in the bb and its clearly a mistake. In spite of this I think the shove range HRC gives is fairly accurate not only in terms of what people shove in reality but what they should shove. If I ran it as a basic hand it would not allow for the option of flat calls, which is a much worse model to look at it for obvious reasons. The HRC model is useful to approximate push fold and reshove ranges, thinking you should follow its assumptions as the gospel is wrong, however we can still glean useful information from their calculations which is why I used it for the hand.

I specifically said, that I disagree with HRC's assumption that villain should call 100% of hands in the bb and its clearly a mistake.

I'm getting the feeling you didnt understand what i was trying to tell you... it doesnt think you should call 100% of hands, so weather u disagree with it or not, you fucked up! The result of HRC telling the bb to defend 100% is based off if the BB realizes 100% of his equity.

No, I would not do anything other than call with my hand ott, villain can certainly bluff river, he also may fold a flush draw to a turn shove, we still have 1/2 pot to play and he is repping a very polarized range, almost all of his value hands have a 4 in them and I block a 4, I don't think there is much of a reason to shove the turn, and villain can easily bluff the river, I have no idea why you would think he would just auto give up on his bluffs, particularly when the hand begins with him x/r a flop from the BB that he should almost never be x/r because he has a range disadvantage and very few hands to x/r (maybe A4o, 44, the occasional AK or AQ) in a spot where he is likely defending 60% of hands or so. I noticed I said in the video I think he played it fine, I disagree its a bad x/r he has a low fd on a paired board, and is bloating the pot, i think x/c and bluffing if he doesn't get there OTR, and folding to a turn bet is going to be a much better way to play it.

I'm not running the spot to show how to play KJ here, I'm running it show how to play your range here, it is fairly simple but I think its important to brush up on these spots to make sure you are getting them exactly right, without looking at HRC I would not have been able to tell you for example the btn can profitably jam T9o but not j9o. Its worth noting that as we tighten our opponents range hands like KTo/a5o/a6o/a2s/k9s/qts go from calls to folds.

sorry but these uber uber basic HRC spots r just too simple. HRC is a pretty elaborate tool and can solve much more complex situations.

this however, is like..... level kindergarten.

Its just not what i would expect coming from a player of your caliber.

Its like who doesnt know how to play their range in this spot? Its doesnt take einstein to figure it out. this hand should have been reviewed by you like "ok button shove 15bb,, we got KJ in sb, obv snap call, moving on"

I think when using HRC in a video it should be for spots with far more depth then this. Any fish reg with hrc can run this spot on their own time, but the tool is capable of far more intricate scenarios and it would be nice to see a video of someone experienced with a lot of the very advanced sims to run thru some spots.

Alot of tournament poker is about getting your frequencies right, as to what range to profitable open, shove, what range to open but not shove etc. You make it sound like something you have figured out, i highly doubt it since the best tournament players in the world are not perfectly accurate deciding that in game, in reality often far from it. I agree they are basic HRC situations but still, seeing a player of Luke's caliber going through the ranges helps alot since he has shares his excellent views on it and points out things i wouldn't. Don't make it sound like you have everything figured out, because you don't. I'm extremely happy Luke teaches solid sound poker and goes over situations that seem easy but still situations the majority of people just autopilot. If that isn't alright with you there are other instructors on this site to watch.

Yes I realize they have the copy paste function, I use it some times others I don't, I suppose in theory I should use it 100% of the time but sometimes I'm irrational and waste my own time. I should have def included an ICM calc for that last hand, clear mistake on my part and I apologize for that.

The reason I went to PPT at the end was because I wanted to make a calculation, assuming our opponent is not playing optimally and from that perspective determine how wide he would need to shove over our 3bet for us to call a shove. While it is an ICM problem I chose to use PPT because I wanted to look at how loose villain would need to shove for ATs to be a call. What ICM tells us is how small an edge we need to call the shove, which I failed to include. Regardless its fairly clear I made a bad a call, if villain is opening tight OTB I think we can make a pretty good argument that I should flat the open.

lolololol, i dont even play on pokerstars and i knew who he was.