Facing Turn Raise: Solver vs Human Lens

Posted by

You’re watching:

Facing Turn Raise: Solver vs Human Lens

user avatar

Tyler Forrester

Elite Pro

Video Player is loading.
Current Time 0:00
Loaded: 0%
Duration -:-
Remaining Time 0:00
  • descriptions off, selected

Resume Video

Start from Beginning

Watch Video

Replay Video

10

You’re watching:

Facing Turn Raise: Solver vs Human Lens

user avatar

Tyler Forrester

POSTED Nov 28, 2023

Tyler Forrester filters for hands that see him getting raised on the turn and he discusses the best course of action along with what the solver says to do.

14 Comments

Loading 14 Comments...

SoundSpeed 1 year, 3 months ago

It's interesting how such subtle changes in solver input creates such drastic changes in strategy. Despite the somewhat "solved" nature of the game, it still boils down to reading your opponent. The old, pre solver soul reading days aren't dead yet it seems.

Tyler Forrester 1 year, 3 months ago

I'm probably dinosaur, but I can't figure out why the solve isn't an approximation of the game, because we still have to input things like betsizings and raise sizings and preflop ranges which are judgements. Also, the output isn't the highest value line against all strategies, but the highest value line against the best possible opponent (which we never should play).

matlittle 1 year, 3 months ago

Hello Tyler, enjoyed the analysis. These turn raise spots can pivot quite drastically on a few combos given that they are such narrow raising ranges at equilibrium. I think I saw that you recently started using Hand2Note - it would be good to look at how humans raise the turn data-wise in these spots vs how solvers play, so that we have a better idea how to react.

In the 2nd hand, when your opponent raised to larger that optimal sizing on the turn, I am never sure how to read this. For some players they are panicked with vulnerable value hands like you suggested in the video. Some players though will raise this massive sizing because they don't want to raise-fold a combo draw. If they raise smaller and get shoved on, they hate the idea of folding so much equity. Perhaps this is a question for Hand2Note too - comparing small raise size vs big raise size, and referencing each vs solver strategies.

Tyler Forrester 1 year, 3 months ago

Thanks Matt! I always look forward to your contributions.

It's hard to get a good read on this situation in the data, because it's reasonably rare and there's lot of different board textures represented in the turn-raise data along with several player types -- an RIO pro is going to raise differently than amateur who raises differently from somebody from say Nick Howard's stable.

The small and big raises both seem to be less bluff-heavy (though it's a small difference in data). The sweet spot for bluffs is around 3.2x though that doesn't necessarily mean you should call the sizing.

matlittle 1 year, 3 months ago

Thanks Matt! I always look forward to your contributions.

Thanks, very kind of you to say!

It's hard to get a good read on this situation in the data, because it's reasonably rare and there's lot of different board textures represented in the turn-raise data along with several player types

That's a good point. The board in question was extremely draw heavy and will of course be the reason behind the extra large raise size the player took. You can filter in H2N by board texture, but of course this will diminish your sample size significantly.

You can also filter by player type, in particular for this example you could use a Rec filter, a Reg filter, and a Reg filter with WWSF > X, where X is your boundary for what you would consider an aggressive reg. Again though, this would of course bring about sample size issues, especially if filtering for board texture too and would make it impossible without a massive hand sample.

matlittle 1 year, 3 months ago

The small and big raises both seem to be less bluff-heavy (though it's a small difference in data). The sweet spot for bluffs is around 3.2x though that doesn't necessarily mean you should call the sizing.

From the last sentence here I'm guessing none of the raise sizes are bluffing enough hands compared to a solver to warrant an over bluff? Are all sizes significantly under bluffed?

Tyler Forrester 1 year, 3 months ago

matlittle I don't think the bluff frequencies here over the last couple of years justify calling very lightly. The typical opponent c/r folds about 30% of the time and the solver is closer to 45% so that would seem to indicate an under bluff.

777TripSevens777 9 months ago

Tyler,
Enjoyed this video. Really like the way you approach the analysis of these hands and just how sensitive strategies are. You mentioned geometric sizing at one point during the 96s hand. Would enjoy seeing a video on geometric sizing in the future.

Thanks Tyler

TRUEPOWER 8 months ago

Hey Tyler once again great video man really appreciate it

Great to see written out your thought process when we’re facing this jam with 85cc

1 we want to have the nuts

Nuts are important hehe

So I guess we block set of 55 and 88

Villain can still have some jj or 66 97 74 i guess,

But still some overpairs maybe?

Interesting that j5 mixed fold given this jam

Oh wow villain hammed 87dd!

What a hero lol

Be the first to add a comment

You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.

Runitonce.com uses cookies to give you the best experience. Learn more about our Cookie Policy