Citvej

That's a great answer. Ty James Hudson

Sorry I didn't really understand the answer but I think I figured it out on my own. When filtering by 'opportunity to open the pot' I should strive for > -50/100 but when filtering by 'Raise first in' I think I should be > 0bb/100

Awesome video. Somehow I found myself in both categories. One way trying to improve in every way but on the other fearing to lose the label of "intelligent child". Thanks again.

Phil Galfond Oh sorry I mixed things up since there was some time between voting and posting the comment. Anyway I liked most of the design and would like to see most of it implemented.

Do the votes even matter ot is it some kind of a level? :)

Saying this because I voted for most of multiple option questions. Except not that last question glitched ad finished before I would click all the options

Regarding tables I would sometimes like to see some regs playing too many tables and not payig enough attention. Or when I'm stuck open another table and make some more mistakes. That's why my vote would lean toward 6 tables.

Thanks. Now I can dabble with the variance calc :)

Hey Peter Clarke! In Grinder's Manual you recommended a 3bet sizing smaller than 3x but here you say even 3x is outdated for IP and to go bigger, and for OOP you say to go 5x. The players in both situations are 100bb deep and it perplexes me even more because the reason is not that villains are overcalling but that they are getting the odds to call.

Also I'm using HUD stat colors for different frequencies (like vpip>30 -> green -> too loose) but I see you using colors for different stats. This is something I've been wondering for some time - which of these do you think is better?

Yeah I had this thought if I ever wanted to fake a tell then a situation like this is probably best to do it because it only works one time and you should use it in a weird spot

Yeah the straddling one makes sense. Probably best to buy in for 200bb

Savage :D

Thank you very much

First time I'm hearing of this term but I never yet employed any mathemathical approach to determining the impact.

Most I've done is analyzed how many bb the rake is taking from my winrate based on the hands I played.

To adjust the preflop ranges I watched some RIO videos for the stakes I play

Is there a software, method/approach or RIO esstential vid for doing what you said?
And to clarify, your answer confirmed my thinking was correct?

I don't know whether this video was so action packed, the right cards were falling for review or it was just you, but I liked it a lot. The thing is I think it kept me engaged and I can easily rewatch it if some things didn't sink in.

Year or he will deposit again just to not waste that 3€, which is probably more likely <3

Hey Phil Galfond . I kinda went on a RIO binge after watching Joey's podcast featuring you and thinking about some game dynamics. So when I realized your points up to now are undisputable and what you are doing with the site is hugely +EV for poker in the long term I kind of started defending it.

I did have some questions regarding the anonymous table dynamics and worries about the avatars that I wanted answered so if I had a goal it maybe was to get your attention. Also I had some thoughts of my own so here I go:

When I first heard about the dynamic avatars an idea different from yours came to my mind - a one similar to live poker or video games where you create your own avatar and you can't change it much. It would be unique or randomly assigned to you if you are too lazy to create your own. Then I could remember the fat guy with a cigar and a hat plays a certain way and not have the long term dynamics be thrown out of the window while at the same time detering bots (I mean are the bots going to have avatar recognition). It would really have brought online poker closer to live IMO. I'm just interested if you have any arguments against this idea.

So after I familiarized myself with what the dynamic avatars truly were I started asking myself how to even play at anonymous tables without a HUD and will the avatars be misleading. You did mention on the podcast they would serve just as a rough guide but I hope there's at least a training video on how to play at such tables :)

The last idea I had was offering a RIO subscription in the store that would be redeemable with points (for maybe 85% of the price). Also offering free month's subscription as a sign up bonus is just something to keep in mind.

To finish it off it all seems kind of new but it's unexploitable and good for poker so good luck ;)

First of all sorry if I came too strong on you.

1) I am the living proof that people still play even after losing. My winrate is -5bb/100 over 150k and I'm still grinding that 10nl (although I did some math on rake recently and I might have found the cause). But rationally I should have quit poker because pursuing programming might be well higher EV career. You seem very rational but if we were all like that poker would have been dead by now.

2) I also started playing with friends and we said the same thing. We didn't know we were going to win for certain or knew anything about the variance, winrates, edge etc.
One of the friends is still a rec who wins a tourney and plays 100nl with 400$ in the account - he is also a guy who plays roulette and says "hey, sometimes you win, sometimes you lose". The point I'm making is the recs don't think in/about EV. You can still win money and nobody is saying you can't but don't tell me you didn't think you were a king when you won that first homegame. Don't say you didn't overestimate your skill at that moment.

3) Sorry, I didn't mean it like that. We actually agree on that. I might have I missed the line where you were dissing the Disneyland comparison and agreeing on the idea that fish will still exist?

Yeah I do too. The things I listed also appear online.

I think even many of the pros are mislead by the nature of the game and overestimate their abilities in certain lineups. That goes more for the fish and even if you put up a sign they are gonna be losing players the wouldn't cease playing.

It's much more to that than rationality. It's the feelings, the adrenaline, rush, competition, passion, improvement, love... whatever you might call it poker gets you addicted in a way and as said in the Post #3 a lot of pros like you think the recs are mentally inferior to them but I can be quite sure you were no different when you started out.

Plus he's not saying who's winning or who's losing. Quite the oposite he is leveling the field in a way.

I would say fairness, advertising, sponsored pros. game integrity and awesome design. Phil as a lot of outreach and he could exercise it at any point like going on podcasts, Twitch, Poker Night In America, LATB...

Also the other sites don't bring in the fish with casino games but take them away from poker.

First I thought nice point but who really does that.

If you go to a live game and buy in for 100, go busto do you just go home or do you either:
a) withdraw more money from an ATM
b) bring enough money for 2 buyins to the casino

Also - probably deal with it to program in an exceptional case to be allowed to rejoin the pool with lower amount for a period of time in case your bankroll is insufficient.

Awesome Rounders final hand at the front page. Hope the interface is similar. I instantly got the idea that a site looking like this could bring the recs to it.

Hello Bradley,

I want to use this video to comment on all of your videos and give you props you deserve.

While re-watching one of your videos you mentioned: "even if we don't go to the Olympics, that's fine because we followed the process" and it shows that you practice what you preach.
Although you attributed that mistake to yourself you still managed to stay rational and shown not a moment of self-pity which I would find hard to believe had I not watched your videos. Even more remarkable when know you've not followed the process in full. Same as in poker when I make a bad river hero call after a long streak of bad plays I can't just stay calm knowing it was me not variance. But yet again I watched your video and you told me the process is repeatable and only thing I'm losing is time. You could say in turn I gain experience from that bad call which is probably what the Silicon Valley saying implies.

I still am really sad for you that your couldn't go to the Olympics but I'm sure a man like you will be just fine.

So the other part I wanted to rant about is how well you described concepts in your videos. A thing I only noticed when I wanted to use this approach to help my girlfriend with studying and motivation.

Keep calm and follow the process,
Citvej

#NoWhiteMagicRequired

But let's say I'm playing a tight range already (11-12%) what would be the next step? Seems like playing more hands that are +EV instead of changing the sizing would be slightly better.

Also another question I had was regrding opens was when I play on a fishy table and I want to exploit the fish I have an option of widening my range or increase my open to 4x. Which should be prioritized. Seems like doing both wouldn't be acceptable because as far as my understanding goes bigger sizing prompts tighter range (the case here is an exception because of exploitation)

Thanks for your initial reply