Tyler Reviews a Hero at $200NL

Posted by

You’re watching:

Tyler Reviews a Hero at $200NL

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:

Tyler Reviews a Hero at $200NL

user avatar

Tyler Forrester

POSTED Apr 05, 2022

Tyler Forrester breaks down some footage submitted by a fellow Run It Once member and seeks to correct some obvious mistakes and see what sort of pool tendencies can be gleaned.

15 Comments

Loading 15 Comments...

SoundSpeed 2 years, 9 months ago

Great explanations on everything Tyler. Felt very much like a professor critiquing his students work.

8:35 The 22 hand I understand the chk line on the turn and I understand why the 66% pot bet isn't the best. I wonder about playing our whole rng and perhaps the block size fits in if we can sufficiently cap our opponent and start betting our 8x and smaller pocket pairs. I believe we get floated a lot by overcards that he may chk back on turn a lot. To me it seems going full polar and betting big, maybe overbet, block and check make the most sense.

32:20 btm left kt and a few other spots it looked like some of heros 4bet oop sizings were small. The numbers were hard for me to read as i watched on a small screen but it looked like a few times the 3bet was to 18 or so and hero 4bet to around 45. I would think oop we would be going 54-58.

34:35 btm left kq hero xf but this seems like a mix between cbet, xc and xr.

What do you use for preflop rngs? I use gto wizard currently and have used preflop academy in the past. What are your opinions on those programs?

Thanks!

RunItTw1ce 2 years, 9 months ago

32:20 btm left kt and a few other spots it looked like some of heros 4bet oop sizings were small. The numbers were hard for me to read as i watched on a small screen but it looked like a few times the 3bet was to 18 or so and hero 4bet to around 45. I would think oop we would be going 54-58.

3bet to $18 is just something clicking pot button to 9bb. 4bet to $45 is just 22.5 bb is pretty standard as you want to get about 20-25% of your stack in for the 4bet size. If you go full 3x to $54 you end up just isolating yourself against a strong range and don't give yourself a good price on 4bet bluffs.

Tyler Forrester 2 years, 9 months ago

Block is definitely more proactive with 22 and better than bigger— the primary concern is that he still folds over cards which is expensive or even worse decides the range is misconstructed and just flats overpairs. It’s possible it could be good but you need to keep the frequency very high to make it reasonable choice.

On 4-bet size everything is pretty close EV so I’m not going to worry about it much. Don’t go to 30bbs or min.

Go catch with kq off, definitely callable to small bet on T82 SB vs BB.

Any rng will do for preflop I have small program someone made that changes numbers every couple of seconds. For gto wizard, it’s a good starting point but has some inconsistencies like if we mix fold 33 and 22 in a spot and 33 is actually-EV then 22 is also-EV no hands in Holdem are 0 value. They are either positive or negative.

RunItTw1ce 2 years, 9 months ago

8:30 I'm actually going to disagree with Tyler Forrester here on the turn sizing. I know the 3/4 size is preferred size with most of hero's betting range and if you start overbetting the pool is just going to fold out too many QJo AK-AJ hands that would call b75. I don't think pool balances enough check backs with AA-TT and 9x where their range has enough check backs to call a large turn bet, so we want to offer them a price and hope they improve their over cards on the river. I think even a 1/3 size on the turn could be good here, so they stick around with 2 overs.

There is a principle I picked up recently where when you have a hand like 22 / 88 here, you also think about how your 2x and 8x hands want to play the turn. A small bet starts to make a lot of sense as well as check. I do agree pool is not finding enough turn raises, but I do think pool is starting to find more river raises when you appear weak.

Solver land check > 1/3 > OB.

Tyler Forrester 2 years, 9 months ago

So I really like checkraise with this region, but basically if you fold out everything with an overbet, you'll make more money with your entire range than betting normal sizings (because they call roughly gto-ish). If they call gto, bluffs make 0 value, and nut hands make just enough. If they overfold, then bluffs make ++ value, and nut hands make -- value. However we have way candidate bluffs than nut hands, so our system is higher value than smaller.

RunItTw1ce 2 years, 9 months ago

13min - Tyler mentions having notes on the players which is good. I did notice OP has his HUD color coded based on player type for Green = fish, yellow = reg, reg = nit by the looks of it. Having some extra notes on whether or not player open limps would help.

A couple of spots that I noticed that will help hero think about how to play his range a bit more
hero Jd7d on AA2hh board. How would you play A7s AJs? JJ 77? Ends up being a range bet on this texture.

Hero 9c8c BvB on A74cc. How do you play your 99/88 hands? If you Jam AK preflop vs the 4bet. How are you playing your A9s / A8s on the turn?

Hero Tc7c on A54hh 3BP BTN vs SB. How does hero play TT, 77, J10c, 87c?

What am I saying is your exact hand usually interacts with other parts of your range when choosing what bet size or line to take.

Tyler Forrester 2 years, 9 months ago

Hey RIT, thanks for the comment!

I'm all for having a hud that is color coded, but given the small samples -- evidence such as showdowns or raise/bet sizes should be used to color the players. I think my tightest 100 hands last year, I played something like 10/8 and the loosest 100 hands 50/40. With this divergence, the best indicators of player types are limping and abnormal raise sizing, because a pro can show up with a wide variety of hud stats.

RunItTw1ce 2 years, 9 months ago

Tyler Forrester I would note the 2.5x open and the 8bb 3bet is VERY COMMON at 200NL and below. I don't think there is much to make of these sizes you pointed out. I think the 2.2-2.3x sizes are more uncommon as well as 66% / 90% post flop sizes. I understand what you mean but some of the common sizes at higher stakes are not very common lower stakes at least not in iggy pool. If people don't have hot key programs its just pot -1bb for 2.5. I think hero was doing this himself. Didn't look like he had any hot key program set up. I 100% agree showdowns are more crucial. Last month I remember a guy playing something like 17/13 over 80ish hands, gets to showdown and he opened 94s on the button! Another hand saw him open A7o in the cutoff. Sample size is definitely going to be almost meaningless vs showdown value with the note taking you talk about. Can quickly assume this 17/13 guy is instead opening 55% on the button and 32% CO and make adjustments from there.

Tyler Forrester 2 years, 9 months ago

So it’s not that the 2.5 guys are world class more than they are different strategy wise from someone who opens up 4 or 3.65. Also pro preflop strategies indicate more likely study so change ranges in situations. It’s a good data point to help with hand reading.

RunItTw1ce 2 years, 9 months ago

33 min probably the biggest leak in the game. Also a leak I suffer from quite a bit. Thinking 1) pool doesn't bluff enough. 2) Thinking my range is protected by enough flushes where I don't need to call Qx without a heart blocker. I went ahead and put this spot into wizard to show AQ+ is pure calling.

What wizard is showing here if you only call flush+ on the river you end up folding 61.2% of your range on the river. Its a very detrimental leak because we are supposed to be calling about 60% of the time. Could be a mindset issue as well. Speaking from personal experience thinking we want to beat some of their value in order to call, but that's not how bluff catching / pot odds work. When you bluff catch you are not supposed to be right more than 50% of the time to make money. You only need to be correct here about 30-40% of the time.

Tyler Forrester 2 years, 9 months ago

I think this hand is easily the costliest hand of the video. At 40% bluff/worse value with correct numbers he loses $40 dollars (20bbs) with the fold. At 33% bluff/worse value hero loses 16 dollars (8bbs).

A couple of realizations here on this hand. The first is that KQ actually looks pretty good here. You lose to just a 3-5 combos of sets, AQ and some flushes, lots of players see this as a value bet especially with Kh.

The other side of this is there are lots of good candidate bluffs here -- AJo, AKo, KJo, ATo with a heart (24 combos) and reasonably small value range better than AQo, (QQ+, Axhh, KJhh, KThh, JThh, sc with hearts), ,approximately 25 combos. There is decent incentive here to semibluff the offsuit broadway region (OBR) and check value region on turn -- so I think this ratio is actually more in favor of the OBRs. He needs to finish turn bluffs on the river at a 40% frequency with no spazzes and no mistaken value to make this call breakeven. He'll show up with QT+ here (low frequency on QJ, QT, KQ) for value and also have some spazz bluffs with random no heart broadways.

Dog18 2 years, 9 months ago

Thanks Tyler. Regarding 4betting ako on button vs a bb 3bet. You say that we don't pure 4bet Ako because it will make our 4bet range too unpaired heavy. And the result would be oop can jam all of its PP? Is that correct? So vs a villain that is 4betting ako pure and with some bluffs we should not be calling 99 to their 4bets? Just jam it at 100 bb?

And i am confused at the comment that the solver jams a5s even though it is a negative ev play. Why would the solver ever make a negative EV play? I was under the assumption solver makes highest ev play with each hand.

Tyler Forrester 2 years, 9 months ago

So if you play a range where AKo is a pure 4-bet, you can only 4-bet bluff about 34% of the time. The solver prefers to bluff (for some basically magical reason) about 50% of the time, so AKo is flatted to keep pocket pairs from making money as a jam against somebody who 4-bet bluffs 50% of the time.

The highest 4-bet fold number, I've ever seen for pool over a 100K hand sample is 45% with pool long-term averages around 35%. This means that even though they over 4-bet AKo, we still likely can't randomly jam pocket pairs.

On A5s, the solver plays a game against itself that maximizes EV if our opponent knew a strategy face up. So if we turned over our range and played exactly like a solver, then A5s would be slightly positive jam (there's a bump in equity compared to other suited aces). In practice players under-bluff compare to solver and over 4-bet AKo, so A5s is going to -EV against those ranges. However the solver guarantees that it's whole strategy is highest EV against the best possible counter-strategy, so you're exploitability value would be very low if jammed A5s at the correct frequencies, but A5s would be -EV against today's players, but the overall strategy value would be at least the loss rate of the rake, and possibly higher.

Dog18 2 years, 9 months ago

Beautiful insight Tyler. After reading your post I agree with everything you said but thanks for visualizing it better for me.

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