Corgi

I got you Ryan Henry

After seeing a few comments on the 40% turn bet with 1spr back, I want to back Ryan up here as a random Sim runner. Not this exact situation, but I've seen so many simulations where the solver prefers a 40% bet with 1spr on the turn. It's hard to digest.

You're right. There's just so little back it's a higher EV to put the remaining $ in against the entirety of their check/raise range.

Excellent video, thank you.

Nicely done.

I've always enjoyed this part of the game. It's the easiest in my opinion to figure out a baseline and make adjustments. I used to loveeeeeeeeee 30bb in turbos 3betting lp vs ago 2.2x, mp flat. You'd get called 100% by the flat and then they'd defined 30-40% of the time. Easy way to print money 2.5x-ing and then cbetting 25% flop.

forCarlotta Thanks for sharing. I was not aware taking insurance was a requirement for some clubs/unions. I am familiar with the 30%/50%/etc.+ VPIP requirements, but frankly I've never had an issue hitting this. In loose passive 6max games, most player types will hit that.

Wild West mentality regarding monetization. It really reminds me of home games where 2 runners pump up the action because they share the rake and likely the same business roll. You have to do your best to do some quality algebra to figure out if you're getting enough from your pool.

As a data scientist, I would approach it this way. If you know you're losing 5% to your club owner, include that in your ev calc. Just don't mass-apply it, since if you don't get called your club owner doesn't remove an additional rake. Then figure out which hands your opponent would gii, and decide where the minimum is. If you see them do more, play ball. That's the MVP. You can put in a lot more work to know approximately what you're EV is in the games, but I think I'd just stop once I know the minimum.

I've never seen an insurance is mandatory, but there should be no reason to accept a lesser EV when you have a full bankroll. You're paying them rake to lower variance. Unless the rake on it is INCREDIBLY small, don't touch it.

Thanks for doing a live video. TBH 96o feels like an open bvb 150bb deep. Do you normally fold this?

If you make assumptions about the small blind and big blind calling ranges facing a shove from you, you can do this pretty quickly with a calculator. Put a few different kind of professional poker player's EP opening ranges. There are just a few more pieces of algebra.

Great, I figured it was something like that. I suppose it is easier to multi table this way than it is to swipe between screens.

Thanks, Darren. I'll look into Blue Stacks. One last question - do you represent a union? My network has dropped and I don't trust my agent as much as I would a RIO coach. I'm especially interested because of the card visibility on your app. Pokerbros does not have this feature.

Darren,

Firstly - thank you for making this video.
Secondly - can you speak on emulators? on one app, I could use the app on my desktop as if it were a phone. on another app, I can't. I recognize that the lack of snap accessibility to easy playing is a contributing factor to the player pool, but I'm not gonna stop trying to make it easier lol.

I've read on 2p2 about the card visibility for anti-collusion. Which app (or apps) use this measure? The two I know of do not do anything like this.

An explanation here would make me feel a lot better about my decisions to play on these networks.

If you or anyone would like someone to do this (writing scripts to solve for multiple inputs) for you - I'm a trained data scientist. AWS is a pretty complicated subject.

I don't know of a way at this moment, but I'll ask around to see if I can put it all through a deletion of screen names and treat it as all by position etc.

However, unless you're playing professionally (earning your income, debt payments, savings) and have reason to be concerned with someone learning of your pool (small player pools, small differences in strategic capabilities), anonymous data isn't as big of a deal. It won't be published, it'll be presented in front of 20ish people who don't play poker, and the chances of your competition coming into contact with the information is basically 0%. I think I'd be concerned about the safety of someone's income if it were easier to capitalize on the information and they were playing a dollar value high enough to drive bad actors.

is red line player code for people who are making a lot of money on nonshowdowns and losing on showdowns?

on the last paragraph, i didn't agree with your first sentence until i read your second sentence. it kind of sucks for players too lol.

LOL a few hands later. Defend bvb 42o, ck back KJ8ss bomb 130% Jx I love it. There's the first time I KNOW Pio isn't suggesting that. Maybe it would if you nodelocked their strat to being too passive.

When you got ck/raised with top set KK on KJXhh, I totally understand your sentiment of "clicking back will probably net me more vs this player type"

Nick Howard had a video or series on following meta and exploits and changing from what you've learned or estimated equilibrium to be when you expect someone to be going way too far in a certain direction. I think he got ck raised with trips on a paired flop, and he said the same thing. Basically, if they're opening themselves up to getting punched with their nose out, they're likely to still have that mindset if you reopen their decision making into a part of the tree that doesn't exist at equilibrium. Flop 3bet with crappy trips and he stacked off vs highcards or a gutshot. Calling would be standard vs a pro because it's equilibrium, but if the villain is saying fuck it by going that far out, give them the ability to do it again.

I'm confused why you got ck/raise/fold vs a clickback though. You must be right that he has a 2nd pair type hand and is taking the risk averse move. Flop 3bet with a single heart is likely to be profitable in that spot, which is very interesting to me. Like you can 3bet/fold with the bare Th and snap profit.

Agreed and recommend the Tyler Forrester videos as well. He plays 2/5 Zone on Ignition, or regular tables. His process seems to be record a topic when there's not as much action, which I appreciate. I don't need to see what peak hour action looks like on a soft network. He chooses to record when action is small enough that he's mostly playing 3 handed.

That said, if you're the kind of person who watches a video and memorizes ranges, you're likely to fuck your game up since his heads up hands will always be the opener is out of position.

This guy's video on SPR is what got me the tree I referenced earlier. I ran a few different boards at different bet sizes and stack sizes just to see flop check/raise frequencies. It's funny, I didn't even notice that the 3bet size was only 3.5x, but that makes so much sense.

this comment was so wholesome.

I don't think I said anything about playing a mixed strategy with anything. I just meant that I gave PIO lots of options, and it prefers using the largest sizing here. So I think you should only have one flop sizing, and it should be all larger on this texture in a 3bet pot.

But at any sizing, PIO wants to 3bet shove over a flop raise. Sure they'll have some flush draws maybe, but that's not really your concern. Most of the raising range aren't dominating draws, and you should be happy to get in this many outs if your villain is raising lone Tx.

Pio prefers a larger flop sizing when given 70% or 33% options. My guess why - If you bet small, you're trying to make EV by getting a fold from something that is correct to defend vs that size. ie You're looking for overfolds. Obviously not with this exact hand, but range.

With a 70% flop sizing, IP is raising 17% (sets, two pair, overcards+backdoors)
Then OOP shoves with most overpairs (actually folds some), sets, the nut draws, combo draws.

With a forced 33% flop sizing, IP raises a third of the time, which is overpairs (gave IP 20% QQ+), sets, combodraws, some overcards+gutshot.
Then OOP 3bet shoves the hands you'd expect, but that includes the combodraws.

I'm using DriveHud right now, so I don't have any ignition hands downloaded. Unfortunately, being a zone session, I don't have any hands to confirm if I'm involved. Honestly, that J44 3bet play looks like something I'd do, including the all in river. I'll say there's like a 5% chance it's me, because I can't download the hands and look. Most of my run was at 1/2 and the small field 55-109's anyway, though I did play a few 4-6 handed sessions of 2/5 thinking "I wonder which one of these people is Tyler" despite most of the hands I remember were definitely recreational tables or pro's not near their A-game. It helps being on mountain time. My 2am is everyone else's "I've been playing for 14 hours and I'm down 3k, how do I fix"

Thanks for the thoughts Tyler Forrester

I didn't really think about defending turns like you described (giving us gutshots), though that makes sense. If you tell me that this hand is clearly capable of defending almost all turn and river cards, making the IP opponent indifferent to bluffing with napkins, I'll chalk it up to believing you and leaving it at that.
That said, when a villain 3bets the flop, it's probably really hard to have an accurate understanding of their specific range, and then I'm concerned this kind of defense measure may accidentally be putting us in a spot where villain gets to exploit you. Say they flop 3bet any pair + any three card straight air. If they give up the air that doesn't turn to four and still fire all the pairs, but you are unaware of that, you could be ck/calling vs hands that crush you equity-wise. I don't know if I'm misapplying defense theory in my head when I think about these parts of a tree that don't really exist too often. I wish I too had a database of hands that I could look at to see what this means lol.

12 minutes in at J44:

You snap calling the flop 3bet is very interesting to me. I'm assuming PIO says to do it, but per what you said to me about looking more at turns and rivers, I'm realllly interested in your thoughts going forward in the hand. To me, it looks like you probably have too many hands to defend in a manner that makes your opponent indifferent to bluffing. I don't mean on the river either. If your opponent bets the turn 100% of the time, and you have this many bluff catchers that would then need to defend twice, aren't you opening yourself?

I've run this spot at varying SPR's for CO open, BTN flat, and the ck/raise frequency is really big (23%), the flop 3bet range is really small (it doesn't like it at all with what I gave), and then the call vs a 3bet is 40%, which seems to blend in with what you're doing. But if your IP villain knows that, I'm confused why they can't just autofire (and why they didn't vs you in the actual hand)