I did not run the hand between Berkey and Adelstein through pio, but i think what Paul missed in his amazing analysis is the effective stack size. I would imagine if this were 100bb effective instead of close to 250bb effective, the SPR will subsequently be very different and hence the the tree. As we all probably know, if we get deeper, one pair hands go way down in value, and the potential to make a good hand goes way up in value like PLO, which explains the merge betting and the OOP choosing to call hands that can improve on rivers rather than hands currently ahead in absolute hand strength. If this were 100BB effective, I would imagine many OOP overpairs to check shove turn for equity denial, which leads to IP betting way fewer combos of hands like Q10 which really wants to realize its equity; since the SPR is still relatively large in the actual situation, these hands are not worried about OOP check shoving and losing their equity.

Very nice and interesting video. I like this kind of content

With Garrett raising to only 2.5x preflop and no rake I'd imagine that Robl would be getting in there with this 76o combos. He'd likely be check raising these combos much less often which would then give him ton of straights on the turn even though the suited 76 is heavily discounted.

Pretty sure what’s going on with KJ and AJ checking back turn in Berkey/gman hand has to do with shared cards and the fact AK is floating 100% on flop but folding turn. KJ and AJ can’t bet three streets and are incentivized to check not only for bluff catching rivers but because when our opponent rivers Top pair, we make two pair. Q10 also bets at this stack depth at high frequency on turn because it will only ever get to bet large on river on a 10 or 9, so its more incentivized to merge bet for protection since it struggles on almost all rivers. Plus by folding out oop’s AK on turn, it will be able to more comfortably bet Q rivers.

I like this video. I like to know what kind of caliber poker player i'm watching, but i've never heard of most these guys. They all live cash pros?

Also I am left a bit confused at the 2463 board, where you said it makes sense for Young to lead his entire range for small on the turn. Why does it not make sense to have a bigger betting range where we can put more money in with sets and flushes?

Cool stuff love this kind of video's!

Curious about jamming 99 in the 1st hand...

I really like the idea of these kinds of videos and I enjoyed the content.

However, you need to allow for multiple bet sizes, especially smaller sizes for the OOP 3better. Otherwise you risk the good old, garbage in = garbage out.

The first hand between Berkey and Garret for example, you say that you were suprised to see that Pio wants to check almost the entire range. However, Pio actually wants to use an overall mixed strategy of close to 40% cbetting and 60% checking, when given the option of betting 25%, 33% and 50% on the flop (and Pio unsurprisingly prefers the 25% bet size).
These results are based on the ranges that you show in your video and allowing for multiple betsizes across all streets for both players, including overbetting the turn and river (I used 50%, 67%, 100%, 150% and 200% plus all in for turn and river).

So just be wary that you risk drawing false conclusions, when you limit the game tree too much and don't allow for the most natural cbetting size.

I hope this doesn't come off too negatively - Keep it up :)

The first hand is interesting, especially the turn spot where IP is supposed to merge quite heavily with a big size on the turn. My guess would be that it's really sweet to get protection from AK/AQ/KQ, and by betting 33%, we're letting villain realise too much equity. Also, IP has so many good hands in his range that maybe it's simply too costly to construct a range that bets with a small size, despite the fact that maybe some not so clear valuebets would prefer that in a vacuum but can't do it because then you'd also have to bet small with some really strong hands in order to be properly balanced? Here I'm assuming that very strong hands are much better off betting big, which would make sense?

Cool stuff, cheers. I liked the video despite having 0 hands with Hollywood Haxton.

Don’t fall into the idea that bets as part of an equilibrium strategy are always classifiable as value or bluffs or anything else. Some combos can e.g. call , fold or raise for equal EV in a particular configuration. Action boards lead to such complex equilibrium with sometimes difficult to classify actions. Often they can be seen to serve a purpose later in the game tree. In any case EV for the range is the optimized parameter. All plays serve just that purpose.

I enjoy your work, thank you.

Nice stuff, sub tree configuration definitely best part because didn't know that feature oO

nice video. was a good format that was somewhat chill/relaxing to watch yet also informative.

The format makes for a very visually entertaining video. Would love to see more of these

32:00.

PIO tends to use lower size when the turn card complets 2str8 draw.

This is not Always the case but often the case

Adelstein actually raises hijack and Berkey 3bets from the SB, not the BB.
Interesting analysis anyway!

some of my favourite players to watch play live! thanks for doing the hand breakdowns here very informative!!!

really gross spot here for Garrett and a wicked raise by Robl here on the turn, Andrews actually got a ton of outs but has to feel hes behind, Garrett the old top pair top kicker has to be somewhat cautious with calling here as there are some scary rivers, interesting hand!