GiveUntoCaesar

Would love to see a double board bomb pot video as part of this series.

Great content, as always. I was wondering if you would post a working link to your HUD. All the ones I have found in previous videos have expired or aren't working. Thank you for your great contributions.

Hi Tyler,
25:00 You mention that you like to XR flop with a diamond because it gives you a better bluffing hand to barrel off on runouts containing a diamond. The obvious flip side of this to me is that it is worse to have a diamond in our hand on non-diamond runouts when we barrel off (the perfect example being this exact hand). Since the diamond will miss roughly twice as often as it will hit, it seems like we are actually choosing a hand that has undesirable blocking effects when preparing to barrel off on a (likely) blank runout (blocking his missed FDs). It would seem like we would only want to have a diamond in roughly a third of our 3barrel candidates when XRing the flop. Is this splitting hairs to finely or is there another important variable I am not considering? Always a pleasure watching your videos. Thank you for the fine content.

I've played around with the formula in the spreadsheet a bit, and one thing I noticed is that increasing stack size makes the optimal bet size decrease. Is this because villain's traps are assumed 100% equity and he can just shove vs our bet and add the appropriate number of bluffs to make us indifferent? Apologies in advance if the question is nonsensical as much of this material is over my head. Thanks for another great video.

7:45 - You XC 99 on JT5 after calling a 4bet OOP - Even for this sizing I thought our playability/equity was low enough to fold, also, this is pretty close to the bottom of your range as least in terms of playability to me. You mention that it's close, but seemed like you regarded it as close but standard. How much bigger would villain need to bet for you to want to fold this hand?
Thanks for the great content.

How has no one commented the best line of the video?
15:40 - "...It's halloween night. Fortunately my wife is under the weather so I don't have to go anywhere." As an introvert married to an extrovert, I understand your position fully, but it still made me lol.

19 mins: You mention that this hand is one the worst hands in our range, outside of missed draws (which cannot bluff catch and won't have many anyway). Given his bet size (%50) it seems we will have to defend %67ish. My question is whether it is more relevant to have a bigger pair, say TT, QJ, K9s etc, or to be unblocking all of his most obvious bluffs(Tx,Jx,Kx, cc,)? If the latter it seems likely that A2 w/o a club will end up as a top %67 bluff catcher. Let me know if I'm thinking of this incorrectly. I always enjoy your videos, thanks for so much great content.

Great work as always, I really enjoy your content. My question is in regard to dividing up our bluffs into the 2 different bet sizings in hand 1. What would be the primary considerations when putting some of our bluffs in the 2x pot size turn bet, and the others into the smaller size? Is it a high equity vs low equity division? Or do you need both at a certain % in order to have proper coverage on all runouts?

29:50 - You mention betting an Ace or 5 river but with a smaller bet sizing. Which of the more nutted hands would you put into this range and why? Or, would you simply have a ten as your strongest hand with a smaller bet size, and just bluff catch vs a raise the appropriate %, perhaps based on the blocking potential of the card in your hand that isn't a ten?

+1 for the hole cards up format. It's really a terrific learning tool for a multitude of reasons. I'm looking forward to the rest of this series, as well as other games to come (hopefully with the same format). Great content George.

Hi Ben,
At 28 mins, you mention having to turn some pairs into bluffs because the runout is so good for you that you will run out of bluffing hands. Can you explain why you would choose a large bet size, and turn hands with SD value into bluffs, instead of just decreasing our bet size and putting only unpaired hands in our bluffing region. Great content as always.

Is anyone in favor of just sizing down here when we run out of "natural" bluffs? Seems like a reasonable way to approach this spot to me if we really want to answer FBB's question. Betting 5.5k seems like it would be approximately balanced given his estimation of value hands and bluffs, and given that the villain has a small % of nut hands. Additionally, the fact that he is uncapped adds merit to sizing down in the first place. Thoughts?

12:45 - BTN opens to 2.1 and you 3bet to 6.2 w/AKo, ~100bb deep w/antes.  This is a spot I wonder about a lot as a primarily cash game player.  The sizing is definitely pretty small as I think the smallest  normal 3bet in a cash game at this depth with antes would have to be 7-8bbs.  Why does your strategy change in tournaments vs cash game even against a good player with this sizing?  Same question for min/miniRaising Pre in a full ring game early stages where many good/great players seem to raise too small vs what is GTO in a cash game whenever stacks are deep.  Thanks for the great content.

I can't help but agree with Mr Thomas.  When members are paying a premium price for coaching, they need to be able to trust the information that is being given to them.  I can't afford (literally) to take a coach's advice at face value if it can be so devastatingly wrong. This is not a small error no matter how badly Peter wants to turn the argument around and make Mr Thomas look like the bad guy.  I found nothing offensive in Mr Thomas' first post, and the growing tone of anger seems to be due to the fact that Peter began by insulting him and ended by ignoring him.  

I have never complained about an instructor or video on this site before, and generally think highly of the content. I also know that everyone can occasionally misfire with a video or misspeak about any given topic, but this strikes me as very different.

I am also a little shocked that no staff or management has stepped in to address this issue.  Having any instructors, let alone elite, that make egregious thinking errors, address legitimate questions by ridiculing members, and making sweeping and non-confirmed statements of their poker supremacy are exactly the reason that I and many others, have cancelled memberships on other training sites.  I don't want to see RIO end up the same way b/c of how much I have learned from, and value this once small and honest community.  To RIO management, please do not lose track of the quality of your instructors, as that is what sets you apart.  

Thanks for all the feedback! To Lewis, Excellent analysis I think. And to respond I have a medium sample and he had been known to peel pretty wide and then get aggressive on wet boards. After looking at the hand a bit more I almost certainly agree that C/C'ing the river would've been better. Also I feel I should have increased the size of my Flop/Turn bets. But that's obviously hindsight.

bdon I semi-agree that all of his worse hands fold from the average player. Since this player is a bit more aggressive and had been known to raise air on boards like this it's a bit different but still probably true that C/C'ing is the better play here.

Thanks again everyone for replying. Much appreciated!

First off, I really enjoy your content and format. Very well done. I wanted to point out, however, that a lot of the comments on your videos, including Mike's first comment on this one, and "TheDoors" comment and relevant thread post on the last video, seem to be assuming that to find the % of total defense of blinds, we add the % of BB defends and the % of SB defends. I think even in the last video there was a slip up in one of the slides indicating this is the formula. In reality it seems like we need to multiply the % of hands the SB folds and the % of hands the BB folds. The fact that we can't add them seems obvious if you think of a scenario with each blind defending %50. You don't add %50+%50 and say they defend %100. you multiply the times they fold %50 * %50 and come up with %25, showing a defend of %75. If I'm wrong please correct me but I feel like I've done this right and if so a lot of people are doing it wrong (and if I'm the one who is wrong I'd also very much like to know that :-)