Very nice video, like seeing this type of stuff where you can see change in trends. At the end, you mentioned that BB CC less when the BTN CC. How does the BB strategy differ if BTN CC 3x more than GTO?
Very interesting question and definitely something important to think about.
In general, when we defend the BB OOP Multiway, we are looking for hands that have nut potential and decent playability Postflop. Given the fact that BU is Coldcalling 3x more, we don't run into the issue of domination as often compared to a very condensed 10% BU CC range. We are therefore supposed to widen our Defends in the BB by a bit. In GTO we are supposed to defend ~22% whereas against a 30% BU CC range we can defend ~27%. I hope that makes sense to you. Let me know if you have any further questions.
Yes makes perfect sense, and anticipated it to be the case but did not know by how much. 27% is still rather conservative but the trend is clear. I can imagine that players on the BTN that CC even wider than 30% increases not only the BB's CC range but its squeezing one as well.
Emty Welcome to RIO, been enjoying your videos so far and like what you are doing with the graphics.
I think we need to be a bit careful on videos like this. The concept of how to adjust to specific players is useful, but when we attempt to study gto adjustments to players deviating dramatically from theory there are often more profitable things to consider. In the exact scenario here for example, understanding the post flop tendencies of the player flatting button at 30%are going to have a bigger impact on our win rate than gto adjustments. Is the player continuing to over flat post flop and raising dramatically fewer combos than optimal? Are their raises weighted to value? Are they checking behind too frequently? This isn't a one size fits all spot and I worry that presenting the information where a player deviates dramatically from gto on one street but then plays gto the remaining way doesn't really give us the best lines.
Additionally I think our original c-bet %'s are being skewed by the sizing choice. For example you have 16% cbet on QJTr but that's influenced by using a 50% cbet sizing which is far from optimal. I'm assuming it's just easier to compare all on the same size c-bet but I'd at least make a significant point about this in the video.
First of all, thank you for the great post. This is exactly what I need from the community to produce better videos in the future!
I completely agree that depending on the Postflop tendencies of a player who flats the BU with a 30% range, we have to take further factors as the once you mentioned (stabbing %, raise vs cbet%, etc.) into account to further determine our cbet strategy; which also would be just as true for a player who flats the BU with a GTO 10% range.
I think there could be another full video spent on this topic and as you probably know there is never a one fit all approach when presenting rather "general ideas and strategy". My main idea behind this video was to illustrate the major differences vs a GTO BU flatting range and present how range and polarity advantages on certain boards shift against a significantly wider coldcalling range which in turn gives us more room to cbet.
For the QJTr I did use the 50% out of convenience because the original sim was also setup with a 50% cbet sizing. But I agree that when we look at straight Flops we should stick to a one-size-approach of 33%. I will try to be more cautious about this in future videos and hope you could still gain a couple things from this video. Thanks again for the detailed post.
Loading 6 Comments...
Very nice video, like seeing this type of stuff where you can see change in trends. At the end, you mentioned that BB CC less when the BTN CC. How does the BB strategy differ if BTN CC 3x more than GTO?
Hi frenchi78
Glad you enjoyed :)
Very interesting question and definitely something important to think about.
In general, when we defend the BB OOP Multiway, we are looking for hands that have nut potential and decent playability Postflop. Given the fact that BU is Coldcalling 3x more, we don't run into the issue of domination as often compared to a very condensed 10% BU CC range. We are therefore supposed to widen our Defends in the BB by a bit. In GTO we are supposed to defend ~22% whereas against a 30% BU CC range we can defend ~27%. I hope that makes sense to you. Let me know if you have any further questions.
Best,
Emty
Yes makes perfect sense, and anticipated it to be the case but did not know by how much. 27% is still rather conservative but the trend is clear. I can imagine that players on the BTN that CC even wider than 30% increases not only the BB's CC range but its squeezing one as well.
Emty Welcome to RIO, been enjoying your videos so far and like what you are doing with the graphics.
I think we need to be a bit careful on videos like this. The concept of how to adjust to specific players is useful, but when we attempt to study gto adjustments to players deviating dramatically from theory there are often more profitable things to consider. In the exact scenario here for example, understanding the post flop tendencies of the player flatting button at 30%are going to have a bigger impact on our win rate than gto adjustments. Is the player continuing to over flat post flop and raising dramatically fewer combos than optimal? Are their raises weighted to value? Are they checking behind too frequently? This isn't a one size fits all spot and I worry that presenting the information where a player deviates dramatically from gto on one street but then plays gto the remaining way doesn't really give us the best lines.
Additionally I think our original c-bet %'s are being skewed by the sizing choice. For example you have 16% cbet on QJTr but that's influenced by using a 50% cbet sizing which is far from optimal. I'm assuming it's just easier to compare all on the same size c-bet but I'd at least make a significant point about this in the video.
Hi Thallo , Thanks for the warm welcome :)
First of all, thank you for the great post. This is exactly what I need from the community to produce better videos in the future!
I completely agree that depending on the Postflop tendencies of a player who flats the BU with a 30% range, we have to take further factors as the once you mentioned (stabbing %, raise vs cbet%, etc.) into account to further determine our cbet strategy; which also would be just as true for a player who flats the BU with a GTO 10% range.
I think there could be another full video spent on this topic and as you probably know there is never a one fit all approach when presenting rather "general ideas and strategy". My main idea behind this video was to illustrate the major differences vs a GTO BU flatting range and present how range and polarity advantages on certain boards shift against a significantly wider coldcalling range which in turn gives us more room to cbet.
For the QJTr I did use the 50% out of convenience because the original sim was also setup with a 50% cbet sizing. But I agree that when we look at straight Flops we should stick to a one-size-approach of 33%. I will try to be more cautious about this in future videos and hope you could still gain a couple things from this video. Thanks again for the detailed post.
Best,
Emty
Thanks for the thorough reply. Glad the feedback is somewhat useful. Really enjoying your videos so far and looking forward to more
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.