I completely understand. CREV was designed to answer any hold'em poker question. That's trillions of questions! You should check out Ben's CREV video. I found it very helpful in understanding CREV.
If the last hand was tailored specifically against that villain then you can ignore the whole comment :D If not, then:
I was under the impression that when OTT the board is still twotone, bare OESDs or even low-ish FDs aren't great x/calls, what makes you think otherwise? Our equity realisation in such scenario on the rivers should be one of the lowest ones so it doesn't actually matter that equity wise we have clear x/calls vs bluff heavy BTN's cbetting range.
And if I'm right then the outcome of this changes significantly - BB will no longer have any issues defending frequently enough without doing any hero calls.
Also a raising range OTR is an option and I think a lot of players will have it so that's an extra amount of non-bluffcatchers that you won't fold out (even if it's only like extra 2-3%).
Good catch on the river bluff raise :). It definitely downgrades the bluff, and hopefully upgrades the implied odds.
The only hand that is over represented in the sim was J9o. The other suited junk was weighted very lightly preflop, so its not a huge part of the range (2%ish).
Occasionally players are going to c/c here with a J high or worse flush draws/straight draws. I think its okay getting 28% immediate odds and potentially being able to find some profitable one pair calls/implied odds. But even if I thought that I would never call j-high here, it would be foolish to assume that my opposition always folds here.
You're probably right about the hero calling frequency. It's not something I've seen a lot of in game. The GTO play of this hand is going to be complicated by the dynamic river cards, so we could see undercalling certain river cards by Villain hypothetically.
Thanks for such a quick reply, really interesting thoughts.
I guess I overestimated how many junk hands you need to reach ~14% of your range being FDs OTT, the J9 also explains such huge portion being bare OESDs. Anyway, the only part I still disagree is this:
Good catch on the river bluff raise :). It definitely downgrades the bluff, and hopefully upgrades the implied odds.
I think the cbettor is perceived to have up to 16 combos of 89 while the BB can have like up to 2 combos of it at best. So if the non flush 7 falls on the river I don't think BB should ever c/r as those 16 combos in my opinion matter a lot (%age of range wise). Again, I might be overestimating the significance of those 16 combos, especially if we take such gameplan where we bluff way too much OTT just because those hands play so well as a cbet.
I just assume that villain will have some profitable c/r's other than straights on the 7.
If villain is really calling any top pair to the river bet, we can bet fairly slimly for value on the 7 river, which would mean we would need to defend most two pair combos to a raise which would mean QT+ was a c/r for value, this should lead us down a path where are villain could c/r as a bluff. Whether our opposition does this is a different story...(same on most non heart rivers).
On hand #1 where we are looking at overbetting the river w/ 8Ts, what value hands would we be doing this with? If we expect villian to fold top pair with this bet sizing it seems like the calling portion of his range would bet if checked to. Thus if we hypothetically have a value hand and want top pair to call, it seems like we shouldn't be overbetting. The exploitative choice (with a value hand) I would think would be between betting a size to get value from tp+ or checkraising to get value from 2p+.
I'm just trying to get a handle on what your hand looks like to a thinking villian.
I play live cash and rarely overbet but am trying to better understand the concept to potentially incorporate it into my game. Any thoughts are much appreciated. Keep up the good work.
If he's folding top pair to the overbet, then the value hand is going to want to c/r for value. However, if he knew we c/r'd our value hands, then he would want to call Q+ to the overbet. Which would make us want to overbet our value hands...
The strategy oscillates because the its out of equilibrium here. Any pure strategy on the river with our nut hands or an incorrectly sized bluff range is going to be exploitable. In practice, this means everybody is exploitable here. In other words: you need to know your opponent.
Hi Tyler, really great video, I love how you mix in ideas of GTO with exploitation and are definitely not tied to one or the other in any spot.
Kind of wondering along the same lines as tiny's question, so in the first hand 2x river seems like a pretty strong line to just take often vs the way a lot of general regs will respond, and ones which we haven't pulled the same move on a lot and been caught lets say!
Do you think it would be reasonable and perhaps a line you would take in the future vs some subset of regulars, even perhaps mynameiskarl, where you might just elect to maybe 1/2-2/3 the river with the 8x whilst not worrying too much about how you are playing your nutted hands.
Sorry i'm struggling to word my question, i guess im just thinking that the regular sizing with the 8x seems like it could be a good compromise play when we are not sure if we can 2x pot it, but when we aren't worried about villain being a super elite player and having our river game plans memorized :) It also may stand out less when we are called and something about our general range not having too many bluffs makes it appeal to me for some reason.
Thank you for your compliments. It's definitely possible that I would think the smaller bet was the better option with T8 on the river given the right set of criteria. Since I'm still playing for a living, that's as much detail as I can give you now. Have a great friday!
Loading 16 Comments...
1st
These videos are brilliant. I'm trying to put a lot more work in away from the tables and they are really helping, thanks again!
same goes for me :)
Hey Player and Brit,
Thanks for the compliments! It feels good to know that the videos are useful to y'all.
Good video. As someone new to CREV it's nice to see you break down a hand as the software is a little overwhelming at first.
I completely understand. CREV was designed to answer any hold'em poker question. That's trillions of questions! You should check out Ben's CREV video. I found it very helpful in understanding CREV.
If the last hand was tailored specifically against that villain then you can ignore the whole comment :D If not, then:
I was under the impression that when OTT the board is still twotone, bare OESDs or even low-ish FDs aren't great x/calls, what makes you think otherwise? Our equity realisation in such scenario on the rivers should be one of the lowest ones so it doesn't actually matter that equity wise we have clear x/calls vs bluff heavy BTN's cbetting range.
And if I'm right then the outcome of this changes significantly - BB will no longer have any issues defending frequently enough without doing any hero calls.
Also a raising range OTR is an option and I think a lot of players will have it so that's an extra amount of non-bluffcatchers that you won't fold out (even if it's only like extra 2-3%).
Hey Jonas,
Good catch on the river bluff raise :). It definitely downgrades the bluff, and hopefully upgrades the implied odds.
The only hand that is over represented in the sim was J9o. The other suited junk was weighted very lightly preflop, so its not a huge part of the range (2%ish).
Occasionally players are going to c/c here with a J high or worse flush draws/straight draws. I think its okay getting 28% immediate odds and potentially being able to find some profitable one pair calls/implied odds. But even if I thought that I would never call j-high here, it would be foolish to assume that my opposition always folds here.
You're probably right about the hero calling frequency. It's not something I've seen a lot of in game. The GTO play of this hand is going to be complicated by the dynamic river cards, so we could see undercalling certain river cards by Villain hypothetically.
Thanks for such a quick reply, really interesting thoughts.
I guess I overestimated how many junk hands you need to reach ~14% of your range being FDs OTT, the J9 also explains such huge portion being bare OESDs. Anyway, the only part I still disagree is this:
I think the cbettor is perceived to have up to 16 combos of 89 while the BB can have like up to 2 combos of it at best. So if the non flush 7 falls on the river I don't think BB should ever c/r as those 16 combos in my opinion matter a lot (%age of range wise). Again, I might be overestimating the significance of those 16 combos, especially if we take such gameplan where we bluff way too much OTT just because those hands play so well as a cbet.
I just assume that villain will have some profitable c/r's other than straights on the 7.
If villain is really calling any top pair to the river bet, we can bet fairly slimly for value on the 7 river, which would mean we would need to defend most two pair combos to a raise which would mean QT+ was a c/r for value, this should lead us down a path where are villain could c/r as a bluff. Whether our opposition does this is a different story...(same on most non heart rivers).
Great Vid Tyler!
On hand #1 where we are looking at overbetting the river w/ 8Ts, what value hands would we be doing this with? If we expect villian to fold top pair with this bet sizing it seems like the calling portion of his range would bet if checked to. Thus if we hypothetically have a value hand and want top pair to call, it seems like we shouldn't be overbetting. The exploitative choice (with a value hand) I would think would be between betting a size to get value from tp+ or checkraising to get value from 2p+.
I'm just trying to get a handle on what your hand looks like to a thinking villian.
I play live cash and rarely overbet but am trying to better understand the concept to potentially incorporate it into my game. Any thoughts are much appreciated. Keep up the good work.
Hey Tiny,
Thank you for your kind words.
If he's folding top pair to the overbet, then the value hand is going to want to c/r for value. However, if he knew we c/r'd our value hands, then he would want to call Q+ to the overbet. Which would make us want to overbet our value hands...
The strategy oscillates because the its out of equilibrium here. Any pure strategy on the river with our nut hands or an incorrectly sized bluff range is going to be exploitable. In practice, this means everybody is exploitable here. In other words: you need to know your opponent.
Hi Tyler, really great video, I love how you mix in ideas of GTO with exploitation and are definitely not tied to one or the other in any spot.
Kind of wondering along the same lines as tiny's question, so in the first hand 2x river seems like a pretty strong line to just take often vs the way a lot of general regs will respond, and ones which we haven't pulled the same move on a lot and been caught lets say!
Do you think it would be reasonable and perhaps a line you would take in the future vs some subset of regulars, even perhaps mynameiskarl, where you might just elect to maybe 1/2-2/3 the river with the 8x whilst not worrying too much about how you are playing your nutted hands.
Sorry i'm struggling to word my question, i guess im just thinking that the regular sizing with the 8x seems like it could be a good compromise play when we are not sure if we can 2x pot it, but when we aren't worried about villain being a super elite player and having our river game plans memorized :) It also may stand out less when we are called and something about our general range not having too many bluffs makes it appeal to me for some reason.
Thanks and keep up the good work!
Hi ElectricBlue
Thank you for your compliments. It's definitely possible that I would think the smaller bet was the better option with T8 on the river given the right set of criteria. Since I'm still playing for a living, that's as much detail as I can give you now. Have a great friday!
Tyler
Great video for someone who is willing to work away from the tables!
Thanks KnoxOx!
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.