Thanks man, appreciate your questions!

What is a 3x player? And do you think min raising will cause a lot of multi way pots in the micros?

Somebody who opens to 3x preflop, it's been widely known among professions for years that 3x isn't as good a smaller sizing between 2.2-2.7 big blinds. This instantly categorizes the player as someone hasn't been a long-term winner in the game. There is the occasional exception, but it's a solid read.

You mention 8 a lot. Was that just a coincidence in this video or is there something magical about 8 on a board?

I'm hyper aware of 8x and 9x when I minraise because they have lots of offsuit combos of 8x, 9x that I don't have.

What vpip/pfr where you playing? And does this change when you play higher or lower?

It's pretty stable though it will change slightly based on table dynamics -- more 3-better = tighter opening range, more callers = slightly looser opening range.

You folded A5s UTG because of rake. What’s the worst A you raise there? And why did you raise the j9s UTG?

It's either A9s or A8s. Solvers love A5s, it's should be negative here based on database analysis of current winrates with these hands and also a more theoretical model based on past winrates and rake. J9s is really close and is something that gives I think slightly better board coverage, but I could be convinced to fold it in UTG (but not MP).

.

Was the isolating with A9o really that bad? What hands should we isolate with then?

So iso ranges are completely dependent on the limping range and you need a wide limping range before the hand has 50% against calling range. The limp fold rates hover in the 5% range so you will always see a flop. Additionally, your opponents can 3-bet, which is quite bad for the hand (-4 big blinds).

Thank you for all the answers Tyler Forrester

Do you think it’s smart at low stakes to also adjust to 2,2 / 2,7bb?

worth mentioning, some of those "3x regs", were opening into a field that had a REC player behind/on BB, which I think justifies this depending on the REC palyers tendencies, and the "3x regs" range construction - its a bit different with rec players behind since they wont face as many 3b's, and the recs will call to much with dominated hands/play poorly post

J9s - opening this UTG LJ makes sense with a weak BB IMO - if its indifferent, open it with weak SB/BB, and fold it with only regs behind

emsterdad

I would. I don't think they're much downside and there are some technical problems 3x that are better to just be avoided.

Ryan

Actually I mark players who change raise sizes, based on situation as a different group of players. So if we'd a seen a 2.5 and then also 3, I'd mark the player.

On J9s, if I've got multiple recs behind in the field especially, I'll open, but one rec is only 20% of the players available and I think J9s is a just -.25bb/100 hand here against typical player pools. I should note GTO opens it pure though.

right, if GTO opens if for a 0ev open, I have to imagine the players you are playing are going to make it >0ev somewhere in game tree. Of course you're not perfect either, but I just think with a REC BB, it just has to make up the difference. Could be wrong, but I think we are incentivized to go after REC's when we have at least a decent hand. Anything thats close to 0ev in theory must be better than that if you are playing solid imo

It's close. The range wasn't wild and almost certainly included QQ+, so I'm not jumping up and down to essentially 3-bet a 20% opening range with KJo. If the players was a 40/5, I'd always raise. All indications from database and modeling indicate that most players tend to completely over-value hands after a limper. There's so many different limping strategies and against tighter limping ranges raising marginal hands burns money, because we are essentially 3-betting too 10-20% opens.

okay - its possible if they are as tight as you make it sound. Seems like a reasonable strategy on their part. Reminds me of this player on global poker who played kinda like this and seemed to be winning across stakes up to 500nl. Not saying its the highest winning, but yeah, if people do not adjust well then could make some sense. it would be really really hard for me to not iso KJo from the CO lol - but it makes sense when you frame it as 3betting a very tight range(but even then there can be merit to this if they are passive preflop and postflop, letting you over realize equity, and if they play to "fit or fold" post flop)

thanks for the feedback

Ryan

So one of the exploitative ideas in these games is that people tend to iso really widely, far wider than they 3-bet, so limping stronger hands should out-perform against many fields. I don't personally implement it, but recreational have recognized this as have a couple of weaker stables, so I'm really kind of careful against players who aren't 50/5 who limp.

The other side of this is that many players treat the iso as opening raise rather than 3-bet so the re-iso ranges tend to be very wide from most regs. (Maybe 3x times as wide as the 4-betting ranges.

its pretty interesting - I have thought of doing this very thing in the anonymous pool. having a limping strategy that takes advantage of people isolating to wide. its like you can raise and play against a tight range and make a ton of worst hands fold, or you can limp and get iso'ed by like 20% of hands. Ive talked about this with friends and in my discord server. just never actually did it. interesting to see people doing it.

you say "weaker stables" implementing it. I mean, it could just be a really effective exploit in an anonymous pool. imagine in zoom it could be really good since there is 0 sample there

confident not everyone is as aware as you are about this

So the edge postflop is probably 3% bigger than against a reg. On a pot of 5.5bbs (2.5bb open), we'd make .165. 6.5bb or .195, so about 3bbs/100 on these opens. This is offset by the regs in the pool making more money against us in the other positions. It seems like once it washes out, it's maybe 1bb/100 better than 2.5.

I'm not going to go after this edge, because multi-tabling is hard enough with trying to raise slightly bigger when the rec is in the big blind.

That is the math I was looking for! Thank you Tyler Forrester

I played a session yesterday with 2,2 where I normally play 3x and I didn’t notice a difference in how players respond

emsterdad You shouldn't notice much of difference day in and day out between 2.5 and 3, but the big old databases, make it out to be about a .5bb/100 change in favor of 2.5

Yeah, what I was afraid of was that way more people would call pre flop or fuck around. But they don't. They don't seem to really care.

Thank you! I've sent you a private message.

Thanks Soundspeed,

I would barrel some of them in game, I was thinking that 66 with no flush draws blocker was the combo that I wanted to barrel the least, because it's got the most showdown value and the lowest suckout equity (sets when flushes come out aren't as valuable) .

So basically it boils down to a combo count of hands that are ahead of us. On J turn, it improves 6 combos of his range unless he's a big recreational so it's not that much different from say an 8 hitting which improves 3 combos. The flush card or the Ace improve substantially more hands (without a club we lose to an extra 10-15 combos of flushes) and on the Ace we lose to between 6-20 combos,additionally we usually have enough coverage for the broadway region, so our opponent will just overfold Ax, because there isn't a enough bluffs. On the J, our opponent doesn't get the advantage of the overfold against the value-bets, because we actually have more bluffs here than average before we barrel.