Choparno

On the AT83 hand, are you discounting future tournament EV with the jam? With 50bbs in a 10k vs a probable recreational I thought you'd generally want to err on the side of calling rather than raising in a spot like this, even though it's good to be aware that raising is the technically superior play.

Top video as always.

Just a question on hand 1, Vision appears not to have a shoving range on the A turn, at least for somewhat similar boards like QT5cccAo, even at an spr of 0.75. Is there much if any EV difference between having a 1/4 pot sizing vs shove?

"Welcome to my TED talk" cracked me up. I agree though - it's better to play a flawed strategy well than a perfect strategy badly, although the dilemma is we also don't want to use this as an excuse to limit our self-improvement.

I'm going to defend all four of Juhasz's preflop decisions that came up (17m, 28m, 53m, 56m) here; someone correct me if my thinking is off.

First (17:30) the AQ84ss: he is second in chips, has the two short stacks of 7bb and 10bb to his left, a 23bb medium stack on BTN, the chip leader in the SB, and a likely recreational medium stack in the BB.

His hand blocks 3bets, he can raise/call vs the short stacks, and only has to fade Collopy deciding to do something from the SB, from where this is least likely to occur. With a 1bb ante the AQ84 probably isn't even that far off chip EV anyway (?) so I actually like this open.

Same story with the KQJ8ss (28m). Not having the ace blocker obv makes this worse, but since we aren't getting 3bet with anything like the same frequency as a cash game, and all the same stack size dynamics and positions as above still apply (2 <10bb stacks to direct left; CL in the SB; rec in the BB) I can get behind this open as well.

53m: Now we have the disciplined fold from the CO with the AK66ss! Which demonstrates that Juhasz has situational awareness, because it's a completely different spot: Wantman on the BTN covers him, the shortest stack has already folded, and it's the CL in the BB who can be expected to play very tough.

56m: Once again he is picking his spot with an ace blocker, Collopy in the SB, and the shorty who can bust in the BB, making Wantman and Tran also more likely to get out of the way. Idk if this open is necessarily correct or not, but as we see from the way the these hands have played out, getting HU with the BB is going to be +EV here.

Finally, a comment on the last hand (58m). There are many recreational MTT players who play exactly like Tourevski does in this video, and I suspect Collopy is much more in tune with this than you are.

If the graphics are right the flop SPR is ~1.2, and with only bare middle pair + bdnfd, Collopy makes a tough but disciplined explo fold. Notice how Tourevski shows his hand to Collopy after Collopy folds: "see I had it bro, wasn't bluffing you, good fold". This also happens a lot in live tournaments (even 5k FTs!) and probably means Collopy has more info on his tendencies than you might realize.

Thanks Jeremy, loved the analysis and the smooth pacing, i.e. skipping to all the relevant decision points.

Your humility and self-criticism is admirable. You're a true poker coach.

Would love to see some PLO content from you Jungle.

Great find on the KJT6 3way hand, very interesting.

Agree, loved it. Looking forward to rest of series.

Good video, useful to see the mix of 4/5card live play mixed with the Vision reviews.

3:45 Table 5 on K93r, Vision actually likes betting all of the QJT with two bd fds here, although if SB isn't finding all the leads he's supposed to have the x back might be the right exploit.

17:36 The T72ss solver hand... Since we're choosing a single turn size for this board, is there any incentive to pick a slightly larger one (say 1/2 pot) that allows us to potentially get all in for pot on the river?

It seems strange to me as a human, given we have a lot of flushes in our turn betting range, that'd we'd want to leave ~15bbs behind on the river even when we have a flush (and, exploitatively, I think humans do in fact size up on turn to get stacks in on river with their strong flushes), but perhaps this is simply what wins the most for our range on this type of board? Curious about the overall EV difference of leveraging entire stacks vs not: if we can executive a perfectly balanced turn/river strategy for 1/3 as well as 1/2, do we win more of less with those extra 15bbs in play?

Vision, for whatever it's worth, is only programmed with the half pot size for this turn.

11:35 Must be extremely close to a stack off with 10 nut outs 3way at SPR 2 for you in the bomb pot? Need ~29% and should have about 30-33% if they're getting in all sets, nfd, Kx+ spades.

Thanks for that Zach.

11:16 Would be interested to see what equilibrium river play is facing the jam here. In practice not sure how many people are even leading all in with 99 and flushes; very hard to see what bluffs they can have.

These are great, thank you.

I'd like to see a breakdown of this one too.

Ty boss, good to see you in the ring game streets.

Appreciate your work.

36:00 - As far as I can tell solvers mostly like potting with the overpair + fd at these ~1.5 sprs. My guess is this forces worse flush draws to stack off on the flop, rather than call and fold on brick turns.

I love this style of video

10:25 You skipped over delayed cbet strat here but it's interesting Vision basically never bets any aces on the turn without a FD or nut blocker. Maybe most opponents aren't hitting the 16% turn xr frequency?

Love this format, summarizing what monker would do but without the breaks in play to show the sims and slow down the video. Great stuff, welcome aboard.

Incredibly disrespectful line by Shea W. Think they should have their account suspended for "game integrity issues".

5:00
On the K76ssd with T865dd, to what extent does being 300bb deep influence your IP cbet strategy with this hand class? At 100bb solver likes mix here and bets your specific hand with a bdfd, but wondering if there is merit in ratcheting up the cbet frequency at 300bb on the assumption we likely face far less OOP aggression than we're supposed to.

7:00
On the J55ccs8c, interestingly Vision does not bluff any 5x on the turn as BB, so villain supposed to be a lot more polarized on river than people probably are in practice.

Great video, thanks.

I’m going to dissent on this one.

Maybe I’m a cynical veteran, but we’ve seen a lot of coaches make videos like this over the years, and their premise is always something like “my ranges win more than optimal, trust me”.

While this may or may not be true for a given stake/site, how usefully can this approach be taught?

For example, in the KK88 hand at start of video, Gayler advocates 3betting and betting flop as an exploit against general player pool tendencies, but when the student has his own explo reason for sizing down on the AJ4ss texture BTN vs BB, he gets over-ruled as “levelling himself” and choosing to play a “lower quality game”. But then with the AA62 on Q43 CO vs BTN, we’re back to massively deviating in our cbet strategy because we’re “playing against humans” again.

I don’t think you can have it both ways here. In fairness, with specific knowledge of your game environment and particular opponent tendencies, it is possible in principle that one reg’s explo preferences all win more and another’s all win less, but in the absence of solid evidence it’s all a bit speculative for me.

Yep, it's 73% call / 25% fold for BTN's range. Give BTN a 3 and it's 95% call.

6.00

According to Vision trainer trips are pretty much a pure call on flop for IP (at least for a 733 or 833 flop; 855 and 755 is 60/40 call/raise). It seems like a 4 is around the threshold rank where IP wants to start having a raising range.

It would be nice to see the sims run with the 1/3 turn sizing you're actually using rather than 3/4 cos I assume we'd expect to see a lot more of these medium strength hands make it into the lead range when IP is forced to defend more.

Thanks Richard.

Do you think as a part 2 to this you could look at IP's strategy on these exact same boards, or is there not as much to be learned there? I imagine IP's strategy might be very different to how the population plays as well.

Great series, thank you.

28.00: How close is LuckyGump's preflop decision with 7722ds facing psjebemvas's squeeze compared to a cash game? Would it be different if Tagult hadn't cold called?

I think this was better than part two just because it was faster paced and we got to see more spots covered. Definitely interested to see you analyse the rest of the tournament.