TBH I think you are way too loose with your 4B GII range.
The hand when the guy 3bet you with Q5o in his BB, why do you think that is so atrocious? I thought it was well known that a great strategy for 3betting your BB is 3b your hands that have value, and 3bet some hands which are not strong enough to defend to balance out that range.
I think it's pretty bad to be three betting Q5o in this spot. You're getting flatted enough that you need more playibility that Q5o allows for. This hand showing down suggests one of two things, either the opponent is three-betting way, way too wide as a bluff here, or he is balanced but picking poor hands. I'm not sure i would say 'atrocious' but certainly it indicates a poorly thought through strategy.
.....I would argue Q5o is not going to be a profitable defend vs you, even with your very wide button open range.
So based off this, isn't it a fine 3b as long as your not unbalanced? (Because I understand the range will be very bluff heavy the villain is 3betting all K2o-K8o, Q7o-Q2o, J6o-J2o, T5o-T2o etc...)
I'm prepared to be wrong here but it seems very unlikely any reasonable strategy would involve three-betting Q5o. Seems better to construct our range around suited hands that can peel small 4bets or at least have some post flop playability when we get flatted.
Most strategies should only have around 20-30 bluff combos here and committing 12 of those to Q5o must surely be a mistake, even if you are constructing it around blockers and not suited low cards.
This could only be good as an exploit, against someone opening the button way too much or someone not defending enough verse three bets. Neither of which i'm doing. Way less of the field has an all-in or fold strategy in this spot and other similar preflop spots. As a result we can no longer just think about having value combos we felt with and then random bluff combos. We must always be considering post-flop equity verse peeling range.
The QQ hand 37:00 looks to me a more complex hand. I have few thoughts. First, for the river, i think we don't need have a balanced checking range because most time villains won't have a bluff range for the river, almost all of his hands will have at least some showdown value.
Checking or not the QQ i think must be based on his calling range at river.
2nd, turn is way more complicated, but making a bigger bet as you said and doing this for all range is going to be good and makes the hand easier, but i don't know if it is the best option, maybe we can do 2 sizes and split our range between these 2 size bets, maybe 2/3 for hands like QQ that are very vulnerable in this board and 1/2 for sets and straight and split bluffs and draws between both ranges, but as our sets/straight range is big enough you could place all bluffs and hands like 99-QQ place draws.
I'm saying all of this thinking our range is strong enough to bet 100% of the hands at turn, so no checking range for turn.
To take your first point regarding the river bet... I'm not going to pretend that i'm employing some sort of perfectly thought through GTO strategy in MTTs. However, I don't think we can be checking river in as unbalanced a fashion as you suggest and simply offering villain a free-roll spot to turn any and all hands that don't beat, say, A7 into a bluff. It may be that having a strategy where we bet all hands that beat AK high on the river and pick a small sizing is preferable to my suggestion of having a big bet sizing where we bet everything that beats KK. However, simply betting how hand strength is something we should be trying to move beyond.
Once again your second point revolves around the thorny issue of balance! While the strategy you outline makes total sense, in reality it's very tricky to accomplish! One of the things people doing solver work are increasingly finding is implementing complex strategies with multiple sizings is brutally tough to deploy in game. While it would be nice having two turn sizings and making them both 'balanced' it's gonna be almost impossible to do. So while i did use a medium sizing in game I stand by my initial assessment that we should be betting on the larger size with range.
As I say, thanks very much for the high level response. Most of us at RIO are moving steadily in the direction of a more GTO approach and this kind of discussion with subscribers about the merits and pitfalls of that is invaluable.
Thinking about the most profitable way to play QQ otr, this is just going to be too hard to balance all these splitted ranges. Why not just put him in an indifference point with his range? Shove, put 12 combos of bluffs and your 22 combos of value (sets, A5s and QQ, I dont presume you would call with 9Ts pre) and let him cry. This solves how he should play TT/JJ, and QQ/KK/AA.
6 mins 30 sec : Your going to 4bet AK here? Ok seems like something i would do to sometimes, whats your plan if you get 4bet?
Do you expect to bee way head when you get it in? 4b/f seems a bit thin when you can call and play post flop very deep stacked IMO.
Also I think people tend to call with the suited coonecting hands more often and 3b their unsuited broadways for blocker value, whats your opinion on that?
Four-betting is still my standard play at 50bb in an online tournament, but checking for anomalies on your opponents HUD is important and a lower than normal three-bet % would encourage me to flat.
I tend to construct my range around offsuit blockers at sub 35bb and around suited connectors at plus 35bb. In really simplified terms at 25bb we just looking for top pair at 50 bb let's make a flush!!!
Sam, I like your videos a lot i think your a very good player and really appreciate the fact you make videos. I'm thinking a good idea for a series or video sample would be donk betting. I think i understand the basic ideas behind it, and fair spots to do it, but i would still be interesetded to see some spots you think are worth looking at.
Woah woah woah woah, hold on, what does "slightly less BBs mean", this is vague as shit, and very sketchy bro...
12 mins 10 seconds : AQs, you say, and i quote "in these positions i would be stacking off with AQs if i had slightly less BBs", this si very skethcy to me bro bcos stacking off here with more than 30bb is going to be a bit of a spew with ICM considerations when you have AQs and can play post flop vs a very wide 3b range which you are mostly crushing and foldout worse by 4b/GII, and get called by better.
IMO it would be better to 4B/GII with this stack size vs a higher percentage of players since u actually look like u have room to fold still and might be just trying to bluff out his 3b bluff range.
You're right to call me out on this. I think I am a little bit vague. However, shipping 30bb with two strong suited blockers against someone who is three-betting 12% overall is going to be extremely profitable. That said 30bb is significantly less bbs and not slightly less.
25 min 30 seconds : do you think defending A8s this deep vs the 3b will be profitable? The way i see it A8s has most of its value when you hit a flush, other than that you might be able to make a dece amount when you hit 2 pair+, even then vs players who are good i would be shocked if u gtd urself to get doubled every time this player does infact showup with the top end of their range, since a lot of the TT-KK or JJ-KK depending on how tight he is and what not, will get spooked when an ace falls anyways.
I think I outline my thoughts on this topic reasonably clearly. It's simply a case of pot odds. We need 25% equity and we have 30% verse a pure value range of JJ+ and AK. If we can develop strategies where we can realise the required amount of equity it becomes a profitable call.
You can see that the villain doesn't even cbet on a flop he can profitably cbet a 100% of his range, so the hand itself suggests that they player pool is not even going to exert pressure as much as they should.
The hands A8s, A6s, even QJs is the type of hands that can call by pot dds but the real point here is the equity realization OOP and cap range. Normally again 3b we need close to 35-38% but the point is postflop we need back some percent or equity or pot money. Do you have any clear point about that? Thanks for the video.
Hey Thomca. Firstly we're not exactly capped because we will peel AA a percentage of the time, we will elect to call with 77 and 88 some percent and also 87. On top of this we have AJ,KQ,QJ, and JT of diamonds which we can check shove or check call, so it's not like on this board our opponent can put in big bets with every part of his range. On some boards, absolutely, having less overpairs and a weaker range is going to hurt our ability to showdown, but there are run-outs that are more favourable for OOP than IP.
You're right to bring up the question of equity realisation. We have to allow for the fact that OOP we don't tend to realise all our equity, but of course, that is the point of this series, to discuss strategies for realising equity in a variety of situations.
seems like standard bluff catch spot with AQ with the A of spades IP, call brick turns (and some less bricky type turns), call almost retarded frequencies on rivers maybe fold on 9 river or J river if complete brick turn.
hey there sam. I want to ask you about using equilab to calculate our equity preflop. We won't be able to realize all that equity, so shouldn't we be tighter?
Also about the 3x size in position, i've been thinking that it's hard to have some bluffs when i do this, so i have a really hard time 3betting 3x when we are 20bb deep
(also i don't even know why you wouldn't get a new contract, you're the icon of the elite! sam "the power of the pair" grafton! I upgraded to elite so i can watch your videos)
Hey bro. Thanks very much for the compliments! Regarding pre-flop equity, you're absolutely right that we have to consider factors other than just range verse range equity. Position is certainly a factor, and also player tendencies. Against a good reg out of position at thirty big blinds deep, we certainly aren't going to be able to realise all our equity. In position against a weaker player, at a hundred big blinds deep we are going to be able to realise more than our fair share of equity.
This is where the analysis we do away from the table, and in video series like this, is invaluable. What equilab demonstrates time and time again is that people have been surrendering lots of equity by folding to small pre-flop three-bets. We identify this leak, plug it, and then find that in-position is c-betting relentlessly and we're surrendering our equity here. We then develop a more sophisticated check-call, or check-raise strategy and we move on to the turn and the river. This is what it is to improve as a poker player! My videos definitely don't provide all the answers, but hopefully they're giving you the outlines of a methodology by which we can analyse these spots and become more profitable.
Hey Sam, I heard you repeated saying stuff like “hey we need 25% equity to call here, we certainly have 25% with this hand, it would be rarely a mistake to call here.” But we are talking about pre flop decisions here, yes the pot offers us 3:1 and our hand have 25% equity against their range. But that’s given we see all 5 cards, which we often wont. Like the hand at 28:00 when we have A6s. we open 500, and got 3 bet to 1225. We are getting 3:17 to 1, which we only need 24% equity. Of course we got 24% equity against their range, but that’s given our opponents check it down to us, which rarely happens. If we take positions (we are out of position), our hand strength (we are denominated by his value Ax hands and could lose a lot of money if A flops), we can argue strongly for a fold here.
Okay I just read through the comments, and you did address this topic. I think a better program to use than equilab is flopzilla. For example, for A6ss, we can see that we flop 2 pair plus 4.31% of the time, top pair 16.3% of the time, and flush draw 10.9% of the time. So around 30% of the time, we can flop good enough equity to go with the hand. I think use this program to evaluate preflop decisions are way better than equilab, because when we call preflop, we only get to see 3 cards, not 5.
Glad you enjoy it. I agree flopzilla is better than equilab, but I also think it's amazing what we can learn with a relatively simple tool. Obviously the next step is utilizing solvers which give as a better understanding of how to realise our equity. I understand your apprehension about equity realisation oop, but actually people frequently don't play strong enough strategies IP when they have a range advantage. Indeed, often they telegraph there exact holding. A good place to begin any breakdown of a hand is by asking if our holding has the required equity verses there range, then we can talk about how we proceed.
As always, thanks for the detailed response. Sure other subscribers appreciate it as well.
Hi Sam, after watching a couple of your videos I have experimented a little bit with backdoor flushdraw + overcards or bdfd + gutshot hands, getting aggressive with them, cbetting them even on some boards I know hit my villain fairly often and barreling turn if my draws get stronger and try to check it down if I hit second pair on turn. I often barrel turn if my overcard becomes top pair, Im not sure if I should though, maybe its good enough of a hand to just try and get to showdown with? IP barrel turn, check river seems reasonable but OOP is harder because I have to check/fold to a lot of river bets if I check river OOP with top pair.
Backdoor flushdraw questions about the video:
At 06.55 if you had AhQh instead of AhQs as in the video would you make the call on flop which you described as a close spot? Would you ever consider raising in this spot with two overs + bdfd?
At 30.26 if you had KsQs instead of KdQs would that change your approach to the hand? Opponent has more flushdraws to bluff with atleast. What if you got a spade flushdraw on turn after calling the flop? The turn jam would be alright and not a "mistake" as you put it?
Think I was overly harsh on myself regarding the KQ hand. We definitely do need a turn jamming range and using the KQ that blocks his KQdd and AKdd seems to work well. Thanks for engaging with the vid.
great format sam u really have a good way of explaining things and i dont fall asleep as u tend to keep it intersting and dont ramble on
i still find it hard to muster the courage to bluff shove all in on the river or to understand the math behind jamming certain stright draws and flush draws on the flop and turn
i wish u could do a session just on jamming and explaining with the use of equilab the math behind this theory that to me just scares the hell out of me sometimes
obviously im no pro yet
thanks man
go ukk
hi sam
im thinking about buying pio solver pro and icimizer 2 are they worth the money and is there value in buying both products
any advice is appreciated
Hey mate. ICMizer or Hold em resources is a must in my opinion. It's value for money and a crucial tool for an MTT player.
PIO is a lot more dependent on what stakes you're playing and whether you are going to invest a lot of time in studying. In addition you need a 32 MB computer (minimum) to run the software.
Loading 40 Comments...
TBH I think you are way too loose with your 4B GII range.
The hand when the guy 3bet you with Q5o in his BB, why do you think that is so atrocious? I thought it was well known that a great strategy for 3betting your BB is 3b your hands that have value, and 3bet some hands which are not strong enough to defend to balance out that range.
I think it's pretty bad to be three betting Q5o in this spot. You're getting flatted enough that you need more playibility that Q5o allows for. This hand showing down suggests one of two things, either the opponent is three-betting way, way too wide as a bluff here, or he is balanced but picking poor hands. I'm not sure i would say 'atrocious' but certainly it indicates a poorly thought through strategy.
.....I would argue Q5o is not going to be a profitable defend vs you, even with your very wide button open range.
So based off this, isn't it a fine 3b as long as your not unbalanced? (Because I understand the range will be very bluff heavy the villain is 3betting all K2o-K8o, Q7o-Q2o, J6o-J2o, T5o-T2o etc...)
I'm prepared to be wrong here but it seems very unlikely any reasonable strategy would involve three-betting Q5o. Seems better to construct our range around suited hands that can peel small 4bets or at least have some post flop playability when we get flatted.
Most strategies should only have around 20-30 bluff combos here and committing 12 of those to Q5o must surely be a mistake, even if you are constructing it around blockers and not suited low cards.
This could only be good as an exploit, against someone opening the button way too much or someone not defending enough verse three bets. Neither of which i'm doing. Way less of the field has an all-in or fold strategy in this spot and other similar preflop spots. As a result we can no longer just think about having value combos we felt with and then random bluff combos. We must always be considering post-flop equity verse peeling range.
The QQ hand 37:00 looks to me a more complex hand. I have few thoughts. First, for the river, i think we don't need have a balanced checking range because most time villains won't have a bluff range for the river, almost all of his hands will have at least some showdown value.
Checking or not the QQ i think must be based on his calling range at river.
2nd, turn is way more complicated, but making a bigger bet as you said and doing this for all range is going to be good and makes the hand easier, but i don't know if it is the best option, maybe we can do 2 sizes and split our range between these 2 size bets, maybe 2/3 for hands like QQ that are very vulnerable in this board and 1/2 for sets and straight and split bluffs and draws between both ranges, but as our sets/straight range is big enough you could place all bluffs and hands like 99-QQ place draws.
I'm saying all of this thinking our range is strong enough to bet 100% of the hands at turn, so no checking range for turn.
A lot of great stuff in your response.
To take your first point regarding the river bet... I'm not going to pretend that i'm employing some sort of perfectly thought through GTO strategy in MTTs. However, I don't think we can be checking river in as unbalanced a fashion as you suggest and simply offering villain a free-roll spot to turn any and all hands that don't beat, say, A7 into a bluff. It may be that having a strategy where we bet all hands that beat AK high on the river and pick a small sizing is preferable to my suggestion of having a big bet sizing where we bet everything that beats KK. However, simply betting how hand strength is something we should be trying to move beyond.
Once again your second point revolves around the thorny issue of balance! While the strategy you outline makes total sense, in reality it's very tricky to accomplish! One of the things people doing solver work are increasingly finding is implementing complex strategies with multiple sizings is brutally tough to deploy in game. While it would be nice having two turn sizings and making them both 'balanced' it's gonna be almost impossible to do. So while i did use a medium sizing in game I stand by my initial assessment that we should be betting on the larger size with range.
As I say, thanks very much for the high level response. Most of us at RIO are moving steadily in the direction of a more GTO approach and this kind of discussion with subscribers about the merits and pitfalls of that is invaluable.
Sam
Thinking about the most profitable way to play QQ otr, this is just going to be too hard to balance all these splitted ranges. Why not just put him in an indifference point with his range? Shove, put 12 combos of bluffs and your 22 combos of value (sets, A5s and QQ, I dont presume you would call with 9Ts pre) and let him cry. This solves how he should play TT/JJ, and QQ/KK/AA.
Thanks for the vid!
Your welcome
6 mins 30 sec : Your going to 4bet AK here? Ok seems like something i would do to sometimes, whats your plan if you get 4bet?
Do you expect to bee way head when you get it in? 4b/f seems a bit thin when you can call and play post flop very deep stacked IMO.
Also I think people tend to call with the suited coonecting hands more often and 3b their unsuited broadways for blocker value, whats your opinion on that?
Four-betting is still my standard play at 50bb in an online tournament, but checking for anomalies on your opponents HUD is important and a lower than normal three-bet % would encourage me to flat.
I tend to construct my range around offsuit blockers at sub 35bb and around suited connectors at plus 35bb. In really simplified terms at 25bb we just looking for top pair at 50 bb let's make a flush!!!
Sam, I like your videos a lot i think your a very good player and really appreciate the fact you make videos. I'm thinking a good idea for a series or video sample would be donk betting. I think i understand the basic ideas behind it, and fair spots to do it, but i would still be interesetded to see some spots you think are worth looking at.
I take that on board mate. Definitely a potential future topic.
Woah woah woah woah, hold on, what does "slightly less BBs mean", this is vague as shit, and very sketchy bro...
12 mins 10 seconds : AQs, you say, and i quote "in these positions i would be stacking off with AQs if i had slightly less BBs", this si very skethcy to me bro bcos stacking off here with more than 30bb is going to be a bit of a spew with ICM considerations when you have AQs and can play post flop vs a very wide 3b range which you are mostly crushing and foldout worse by 4b/GII, and get called by better.
IMO it would be better to 4B/GII with this stack size vs a higher percentage of players since u actually look like u have room to fold still and might be just trying to bluff out his 3b bluff range.
You're right to call me out on this. I think I am a little bit vague. However, shipping 30bb with two strong suited blockers against someone who is three-betting 12% overall is going to be extremely profitable. That said 30bb is significantly less bbs and not slightly less.
25 min 30 seconds : do you think defending A8s this deep vs the 3b will be profitable? The way i see it A8s has most of its value when you hit a flush, other than that you might be able to make a dece amount when you hit 2 pair+, even then vs players who are good i would be shocked if u gtd urself to get doubled every time this player does infact showup with the top end of their range, since a lot of the TT-KK or JJ-KK depending on how tight he is and what not, will get spooked when an ace falls anyways.
I think I outline my thoughts on this topic reasonably clearly. It's simply a case of pot odds. We need 25% equity and we have 30% verse a pure value range of JJ+ and AK. If we can develop strategies where we can realise the required amount of equity it becomes a profitable call.
You can see that the villain doesn't even cbet on a flop he can profitably cbet a 100% of his range, so the hand itself suggests that they player pool is not even going to exert pressure as much as they should.
but ye with A8s i would think being over 30bb would be a bare minimum and even then still prolly let it go, unless the guy is just a massive punter.
The hands A8s, A6s, even QJs is the type of hands that can call by pot dds but the real point here is the equity realization OOP and cap range. Normally again 3b we need close to 35-38% but the point is postflop we need back some percent or equity or pot money. Do you have any clear point about that? Thanks for the video.
IMO there is a big difference between QJs and A8s
Hey Thomca. Firstly we're not exactly capped because we will peel AA a percentage of the time, we will elect to call with 77 and 88 some percent and also 87. On top of this we have AJ,KQ,QJ, and JT of diamonds which we can check shove or check call, so it's not like on this board our opponent can put in big bets with every part of his range. On some boards, absolutely, having less overpairs and a weaker range is going to hurt our ability to showdown, but there are run-outs that are more favourable for OOP than IP.
You're right to bring up the question of equity realisation. We have to allow for the fact that OOP we don't tend to realise all our equity, but of course, that is the point of this series, to discuss strategies for realising equity in a variety of situations.
seems like standard bluff catch spot with AQ with the A of spades IP, call brick turns (and some less bricky type turns), call almost retarded frequencies on rivers maybe fold on 9 river or J river if complete brick turn.
Dont this this is worthy of review FTMP.
and call flop OBV... /\/\
hey there sam. I want to ask you about using equilab to calculate our equity preflop. We won't be able to realize all that equity, so shouldn't we be tighter?
Also about the 3x size in position, i've been thinking that it's hard to have some bluffs when i do this, so i have a really hard time 3betting 3x when we are 20bb deep
(also i don't even know why you wouldn't get a new contract, you're the icon of the elite! sam "the power of the pair" grafton! I upgraded to elite so i can watch your videos)
Hey bro. Thanks very much for the compliments! Regarding pre-flop equity, you're absolutely right that we have to consider factors other than just range verse range equity. Position is certainly a factor, and also player tendencies. Against a good reg out of position at thirty big blinds deep, we certainly aren't going to be able to realise all our equity. In position against a weaker player, at a hundred big blinds deep we are going to be able to realise more than our fair share of equity.
This is where the analysis we do away from the table, and in video series like this, is invaluable. What equilab demonstrates time and time again is that people have been surrendering lots of equity by folding to small pre-flop three-bets. We identify this leak, plug it, and then find that in-position is c-betting relentlessly and we're surrendering our equity here. We then develop a more sophisticated check-call, or check-raise strategy and we move on to the turn and the river. This is what it is to improve as a poker player! My videos definitely don't provide all the answers, but hopefully they're giving you the outlines of a methodology by which we can analyse these spots and become more profitable.
Hope that helps.
i'd argue that your videos in fact do cover all of the questions :D
Any advice you can give about any of these hands would be much appreciated sam thanks, like the videos?
Yes bruv! I'll get on it. Moved from Prague to Warsaw this week and was without internet. I appreciate your engagement and i'll reply in full soon.
Thanks for your patience.
i meant to write, "like the videos!" not sure why i put a question mark lol
Hey Sam, I heard you repeated saying stuff like “hey we need 25% equity to call here, we certainly have 25% with this hand, it would be rarely a mistake to call here.” But we are talking about pre flop decisions here, yes the pot offers us 3:1 and our hand have 25% equity against their range. But that’s given we see all 5 cards, which we often wont. Like the hand at 28:00 when we have A6s. we open 500, and got 3 bet to 1225. We are getting 3:17 to 1, which we only need 24% equity. Of course we got 24% equity against their range, but that’s given our opponents check it down to us, which rarely happens. If we take positions (we are out of position), our hand strength (we are denominated by his value Ax hands and could lose a lot of money if A flops), we can argue strongly for a fold here.
Okay I just read through the comments, and you did address this topic. I think a better program to use than equilab is flopzilla. For example, for A6ss, we can see that we flop 2 pair plus 4.31% of the time, top pair 16.3% of the time, and flush draw 10.9% of the time. So around 30% of the time, we can flop good enough equity to go with the hand. I think use this program to evaluate preflop decisions are way better than equilab, because when we call preflop, we only get to see 3 cards, not 5.
Anyways, great video, Thanks Sam
Glad you enjoy it. I agree flopzilla is better than equilab, but I also think it's amazing what we can learn with a relatively simple tool. Obviously the next step is utilizing solvers which give as a better understanding of how to realise our equity. I understand your apprehension about equity realisation oop, but actually people frequently don't play strong enough strategies IP when they have a range advantage. Indeed, often they telegraph there exact holding. A good place to begin any breakdown of a hand is by asking if our holding has the required equity verses there range, then we can talk about how we proceed.
As always, thanks for the detailed response. Sure other subscribers appreciate it as well.
Hi Sam, after watching a couple of your videos I have experimented a little bit with backdoor flushdraw + overcards or bdfd + gutshot hands, getting aggressive with them, cbetting them even on some boards I know hit my villain fairly often and barreling turn if my draws get stronger and try to check it down if I hit second pair on turn. I often barrel turn if my overcard becomes top pair, Im not sure if I should though, maybe its good enough of a hand to just try and get to showdown with? IP barrel turn, check river seems reasonable but OOP is harder because I have to check/fold to a lot of river bets if I check river OOP with top pair.
Backdoor flushdraw questions about the video:
At 06.55 if you had AhQh instead of AhQs as in the video would you make the call on flop which you described as a close spot? Would you ever consider raising in this spot with two overs + bdfd?
At 30.26 if you had KsQs instead of KdQs would that change your approach to the hand? Opponent has more flushdraws to bluff with atleast. What if you got a spade flushdraw on turn after calling the flop? The turn jam would be alright and not a "mistake" as you put it?
Thanks for the video!
We can see that PIO comes to the same conclusion I did in the AQo hand. It calls when it has a club and calls AQhh about half the time aswell.
Think I was overly harsh on myself regarding the KQ hand. We definitely do need a turn jamming range and using the KQ that blocks his KQdd and AKdd seems to work well. Thanks for engaging with the vid.
great format sam u really have a good way of explaining things and i dont fall asleep as u tend to keep it intersting and dont ramble on
i still find it hard to muster the courage to bluff shove all in on the river or to understand the math behind jamming certain stright draws and flush draws on the flop and turn
i wish u could do a session just on jamming and explaining with the use of equilab the math behind this theory that to me just scares the hell out of me sometimes
obviously im no pro yet
thanks man
go ukk
Thanks for writing bro! next two vids are already complete, but I do take your suggestions on board.
hi sam
im thinking about buying pio solver pro and icimizer 2 are they worth the money and is there value in buying both products
any advice is appreciated
Hey mate. ICMizer or Hold em resources is a must in my opinion. It's value for money and a crucial tool for an MTT player.
PIO is a lot more dependent on what stakes you're playing and whether you are going to invest a lot of time in studying. In addition you need a 32 MB computer (minimum) to run the software.
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.