Grouchy

There is a 4th type of people. Those who don't own a solver, or own one but their PC is too damn slow to solve a BvB spot in the foreseeable future :) :)

Hi Max,
Great video!

When we simplify to one sizing, the strategy changes like you said. Ideally, I guess, you have access to simplified “cleaner” sims, but if I don’t have access to those, and it’s not practical to run them myself (It will take forever I think), how do you go about it? Run sims for a subset (probably feasible) and extrapolate, or is there a better way?

So aggregated reports are useful to build heuristics about our entire range. A video on how to build heuristics for range composition, especially on turns and rivers, would be cool (Maybe not :), I’m new to solvers and trying to figure these things out).
Thanks

Hello Peter,
Thanks for the video.
I play 10NL and 25NL and all my learning right now is based on watching videos and taking notes. I want to start working with solvers. Would you recommend starting with something like Pio / GTO+ where you have full control over the input, or a web based one like GTOwizard, or maybe Deepsolver which from what I understand is kind of a mix between the two, or both?

You can do it by using different filters in Holdem Manager (I guess it can be done in Poker Tracker too) if you had a large enough database. And it will reflect more accurately the games you're playing. For example, I play 10NL and 25NL and a spot that occurs a lot and doesn't happen that often if you're using GTOwizard ranges is raising and getting called by an IP player (Like EP vs. a caller in the CO or the Btn, not SB vs. BB).

Great Video! Very clear explanation. Thanks.

Hey Peter,
Thanks for the video

A few questions:
First, I understand that focusing on value from an equity advantage perspective when choosing a 3bet range is ambiguous because there are multiple factors involved like position, implied odds, skill advantage… However, according to the definition you gave to the linear 3betting Hero is 3betting “only a continuous procession of hands from AA down to where we decide our hand is too weak to 3bet”, and too weak to 3bet is also ambiguous I guess because it is also related to equity and the other factors like position, implied odds, skill advantage... I mean how do we know a hand is too weak to 3bet? How do we build reasonable default ranges, and is it possible to make reasonable deviations from them at the table according to certain guidelines?

2nd, how much fold equity should we expect to use a polar range? Like 55% or more? Or does it depend on other factors too like position and skill edge? And to use the linear model (less than 50%)?

3) You recommend using a polar range against early positions as default unless we know we do not have enough fold equity. My database shows that my 3bet success percentage against EP and MP openers is 31%, so I guess I should be using a linear range as a default unless I know otherwise right?

4) In the range you gave when we are in the BB facing a 3x open from the HJ, you used hands like A8s, A5s-A2s, 76s-65s.. as 3bet bluffs because they are too weak to call. I have seen other coaches flat these hands and Pokersnowie preflop advisor does the same. Any thoughts on this? Is it because of the high rake at the lower stakes?

Sorry for the long post and thanks again.

Hey Iain,
Thanks for the video.

You say that 1 of the reasons we should not over adjust based on opponents’ stats and try to exploit them to the maximum is to avoid messing up our own stats and become exploitable ourselves. I have heard other coaches talk about this concept too but I'm not sure I agree with this. In fact, I think having messed up stats that do not actually represent accurately how we play as a default might even be beneficial in many situations if not all, because Regs will see these stats and try to exploit us without knowing they are not accurate and that against them we have different frequencies (assuming the players we are exploiting to the max aren’t going to adjust or they would not have these stats in the first place).

To illustrate my point I am going to assume an extreme scenario. Suppose the player pool consists of 100 players, 90 of them fold from the BB against a SB steal 80%. Against these players we are going to open 100% of our hands, whereas against the 10 players who defend enough and 3bet aggressively, we will open our default range which is way tighter, and defend properly vs. 3bets. We will end up with a very high RFI in the SB and a very high fold to 3bet because we are folding a ton when the tight players 3bet us. So, when the Regs see these numbers, they will defend even wider vs. our opens and 3bet more aggressively trying to exploit us, not knowing that against them we are opening tighter and defending properly against 3bets. Therefore, they will end up defending a weaker range than they should and folding a ton to 4bets which will make us even more money.

This applies to lots of situations.

Not sure if I am missing something. Would love to hear your thoughts about it.

I also noticed you are 3betting larger than standard OOP. Example: 12bb SB vs. EP 2.5bb / 13bb SB vs. EP 2.5bb and Btn call. Any thoughts on this.

Sorry for the long post.
Thanks.

Hi Phil,
Thanks for the answer.

I’m opening from the CO to 2.5x with a 25% range. My steal success percentage is 42%. I’m getting 3bet 20% overall (Btn is 3betting me 8%).
My winrate with hands outside the default 25% is 20bb/100, but I usually open these only when the Btn defends less than 15%.

Hi Phil,
Awesome video. I would definitely like to see more of this.

I don’t know if opening bigger and tighter from early positions is better due to the high rake, but I think that from the Btn, and probably the SB, opening wider and smaller is better because players in the blinds not defending enough and especially not 3betting enough is a bigger factor.

I play 10NL Zoom and stats from my database (big sample) show that my steal success percentage from the Btn is:
47% when I open to 3x and I get 3bet 16% (both blinds combined).
45% when I open to 2.5x and I get 3bet 19%.
43% when t open to 2.1x and I get 3bet 19%.
So opponents are not adjusting enough to sizes, and I am not sure if opening bigger is lowering enough the numbers of flops we see to be worth it.

I am also opening from the Btn a 70% range whenever both blinds combined 3bet a Btn open less than 20% regardless of their folding frequencies. My database shows that I am opening hands outside a 47% opening range (my default opening range) with a 16% frequency and that my winrate with these hands is 14bb/100 hands. So maybe I should even open these hands with a higher frequency (maybe when both blinds 3bet less than 25%).

I would love to know your thoughts about this.
Thanks.

Hi Steve,
Thanks for the video.

You 3bet 55 SB vs. an unknown CO. I play 10NL Zoom and my database (big sample) shows that my 3bet success % in this spot is 38% only. Do you think it is +EV to 3bet a hand like 55 when your 3bet success is this low? If not, do you think I should have a flatting range from the SB or else I would be folding too much? Against a Btn open the success % is higher but it is still 44%.

Also you 3bet 95s BB vs. an unknown Btn. How much the population should fold vs. 3bets for you to start 3betting a polarized range against unknowns?

You use the cbetting your whole range with a small sizing on favorable boards OOP; I’ve heard some coaches say we should only use this strategy when IP unless it is a 3bet pot. Any thoughts on this?

Thanks.

Ace

I did not read all the posts but here it is (I guess :) ):

As u said when he 5bet bluffs he gets back around 60bb from the 200bb pot, so he's risking 31bb to win 31/(31+20+9+1.5) = 50%; our 4bet range should be 1/1 bluff to value ratio .

Also 9/(9+4.5)= 66% not 63% so we should defend around 34% of our opening range and 4.2% of a 12.5% range, so we could 4bet for value QQ+/AK and as bluffs AQs, AJs, ATs, AQo and AJo.

Actually the smaller 3bet and smaller 4bet is beneficial to the opener in this case because when villain decides to 5bet jam he's risking more money to win less; if he instead raised to 10.5bb and we 4bet to 23bb he would have risked 29.5 to win 35bb so his 5bet jam to breakeven has to work 29.5/(29.5+23+10.5+1.5)=45%, so the opener's 4betting range should consist of 55% value hands.

This is actually surprising to me; I knew that the 4betting range should consist of 60% value/40% bluffs (this is true when opening is 3.5bb and 3bet is 12bb) but I never realized that a smaller 3bet will let you defend your opening range "easier". However, if the 3bet is much smaller (7bb for ex), i think it gets to a point where u need to have a calling range OOP.

James Hudson has a video on Dealing w/ Small 3Bets in NL, u could check it.

Hope one of the pros gives us his thoughts on this.

Thanks James for the vid;

When talking about flop cbetting%, you said that people have done a poor job at creating check-calling and check raising hands as the preflop raiser, and it's true (i know i did :)), and it's a big leak because most of micro and small stakes will fold to a bet whenever they check 70%, 80% or even more, so usually villain could bet any 2 and profit.

Therefore, it would be awesome if you could a video on this subject: how you construct those ranges, what kind of hands, board texture...; Probably there is not a lot of videos that deal with this, if there is any.

Thanks anyway.