Good vid, but one point I disagree with and that is your comment on the k3 2 pair hand turn bet sizing. I think it's the other way around than you said. You must actually balance your bluff range bet sizing to be bigger to protect your value range here. The reason is the hands that are calling weigh on highly kings or aces with a bigger kicker= one pair type of hands of draws with lots of outs to beat you. They have a surprisingly strong equity since if board pairs, your 2 pair hand gets counterfeited. Your sizing of around 55% pot is closer to being optimal therefore on that particular "wet" board. You really can't make it under half the pot there. Making it as small as 1/3 pot as you suggested, would be a mistake that may cost you that pot unnecessarily.
You raise some good points, but if we were picking one sizing with range I feel like it should be smaller. This hand does need protection but KQss, KJss, As4o and the like don't. think we should be tailoring sizing to range rather than specific hand.
GLad you liked the vid and thanks for drawing attention to this spot.
Around 34:30 where you're working out the equity you need with 77, is this the best/easiest way to do it? I would've thought that we'd need to run two calcs given two all-ins from different stack sizes, no? So you have roughly 50% vs SB and 24% vs both, but I'm not sure this is the whole picture. Would really love some advice on how to work it out if indeed it is necessary to start with two calculations instead of just one.
Yes I think it could be done more efficiently and more accurately by someone who is super proficient with HEM resources, but you can see from just the work that i've done that it's almost certainly a fold.
Perhaps in the future I'll do a video on breaking down complex hands. When I feel my own skills are sharp enough of course!
15.12 Raising 55 utg seems ambitious. We cant really call any any reshove stacks. The only reshove stack we can call is the BB and think his rejam range is pretty strong vs UTG open since he can flat so wide. We're deep with CO and BTN that can call the open but still 55's play kinda meh postflop, would rather open A5s than 55.
11:00 88 - What if the 5791 chips stack shoves? Would you just call your whole range? Would that include 88? Or would you split your range and reraise some hands because it feels much better to get it in with hand like AK?
I probably do split my range. I think with stack sizes being so dynamic in MTTs, people don't get a sense of how you play your range enough, for that to be exploited, but I could be wrong.
I think calling 66-99, KQs, AQ, AA, KK and jamming AK, TT+, might be best. In later positions those ranges would change. Also we obviously have to scrutinise our opponents, flatting tendencies.
Are you concerned by note cady etc software which will show your tendencies? I don't use it as I am dumb but I always am aware that people have it and it makes me try to play lol balanced ranges when shoving.
Hello Sam
First of all, thank you for your videos are TOP!
As to the first video of the hand, AA, how u balance your calling range with effective stacks 15-20 bbs in SB?
One thing I have taken from my game is the call of the SB, im "always" 3beting hands when I play this position, except when I'm playing very deep.
What do you think about this approach?
Thank you =)
Hey there. I'm certainly not able to play a entirely 'balanced' strategy from the sb and particularly not at this stack depth. The reason, of course, being that so many hands benefit greatly from preflop fold equity and suffer from going to a flop three way, AQ, KQ and the like.
In general my range is pretty condensed and will mainly consist of playable missling strength hands that got flop 'OK' top pairs and strong draws. This is why slow playing AA is so appetising a prospect as normally on paired boards and low flops our continuing range is very limited. While my range is a little transparent it's still hard to exploit as we are getting great odds and with stack sizes so shallow we are normally only going to be playing one street.
More generally I've moved away from only continuing by three-betting. As solvers get better at suggesting a preflop strategy I'm certain you're going to see good players flatting a far greater range from small blind verse opens from all positions.
hey sam, around 24 min you talk about balancing the openshove range from late position with around 22bbs and how we cannot only shove 22-55. With what can we balance it though?
haha! That's the point i guess! Creating a balanced strategy for this spot requires a LOT of work. Work that only the best hyper sitngo players have done. However, we could start by adding in some broad way holdings, some suited Ax and maybe like A9o and A8o. It remains the case that shoving JUST 22-55 is unexploitable even if you announced your range in the chatbox! As games get tougher though, we might have to do the detailed Hold Em resources work that is required to create a better strategy in this spot. It's likely that would include a limping range of this stack size also.
Loading 14 Comments...
Good vid, but one point I disagree with and that is your comment on the k3 2 pair hand turn bet sizing. I think it's the other way around than you said. You must actually balance your bluff range bet sizing to be bigger to protect your value range here. The reason is the hands that are calling weigh on highly kings or aces with a bigger kicker= one pair type of hands of draws with lots of outs to beat you. They have a surprisingly strong equity since if board pairs, your 2 pair hand gets counterfeited. Your sizing of around 55% pot is closer to being optimal therefore on that particular "wet" board. You really can't make it under half the pot there. Making it as small as 1/3 pot as you suggested, would be a mistake that may cost you that pot unnecessarily.
You raise some good points, but if we were picking one sizing with range I feel like it should be smaller. This hand does need protection but KQss, KJss, As4o and the like don't. think we should be tailoring sizing to range rather than specific hand.
GLad you liked the vid and thanks for drawing attention to this spot.
Around 34:30 where you're working out the equity you need with 77, is this the best/easiest way to do it? I would've thought that we'd need to run two calcs given two all-ins from different stack sizes, no? So you have roughly 50% vs SB and 24% vs both, but I'm not sure this is the whole picture. Would really love some advice on how to work it out if indeed it is necessary to start with two calculations instead of just one.
Yes I think it could be done more efficiently and more accurately by someone who is super proficient with HEM resources, but you can see from just the work that i've done that it's almost certainly a fold.
Perhaps in the future I'll do a video on breaking down complex hands. When I feel my own skills are sharp enough of course!
Yeah the 77 hand at 34:00 is closer than you state as the side pot with the sb makes a big difference and he has the weaker range.
15.12 Raising 55 utg seems ambitious. We cant really call any any reshove stacks. The only reshove stack we can call is the BB and think his rejam range is pretty strong vs UTG open since he can flat so wide. We're deep with CO and BTN that can call the open but still 55's play kinda meh postflop, would rather open A5s than 55.
Good point. thanks for bringing it to our attention.
11:00 88 - What if the 5791 chips stack shoves? Would you just call your whole range? Would that include 88? Or would you split your range and reraise some hands because it feels much better to get it in with hand like AK?
I probably do split my range. I think with stack sizes being so dynamic in MTTs, people don't get a sense of how you play your range enough, for that to be exploited, but I could be wrong.
I think calling 66-99, KQs, AQ, AA, KK and jamming AK, TT+, might be best. In later positions those ranges would change. Also we obviously have to scrutinise our opponents, flatting tendencies.
Are you concerned by note cady etc software which will show your tendencies? I don't use it as I am dumb but I always am aware that people have it and it makes me try to play lol balanced ranges when shoving.
Hello Sam
First of all, thank you for your videos are TOP!
As to the first video of the hand, AA, how u balance your calling range with effective stacks 15-20 bbs in SB?
One thing I have taken from my game is the call of the SB, im "always" 3beting hands when I play this position, except when I'm playing very deep.
What do you think about this approach?
Thank you =)
Hey there. I'm certainly not able to play a entirely 'balanced' strategy from the sb and particularly not at this stack depth. The reason, of course, being that so many hands benefit greatly from preflop fold equity and suffer from going to a flop three way, AQ, KQ and the like.
In general my range is pretty condensed and will mainly consist of playable missling strength hands that got flop 'OK' top pairs and strong draws. This is why slow playing AA is so appetising a prospect as normally on paired boards and low flops our continuing range is very limited. While my range is a little transparent it's still hard to exploit as we are getting great odds and with stack sizes so shallow we are normally only going to be playing one street.
More generally I've moved away from only continuing by three-betting. As solvers get better at suggesting a preflop strategy I'm certain you're going to see good players flatting a far greater range from small blind verse opens from all positions.
hey sam, around 24 min you talk about balancing the openshove range from late position with around 22bbs and how we cannot only shove 22-55. With what can we balance it though?
haha! That's the point i guess! Creating a balanced strategy for this spot requires a LOT of work. Work that only the best hyper sitngo players have done. However, we could start by adding in some broad way holdings, some suited Ax and maybe like A9o and A8o. It remains the case that shoving JUST 22-55 is unexploitable even if you announced your range in the chatbox! As games get tougher though, we might have to do the detailed Hold Em resources work that is required to create a better strategy in this spot. It's likely that would include a limping range of this stack size also.
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.