Hoothoot

Great videos so far Kevin, I appreciate your teaching style. One thing I struggle with in (live) MTTs is taking antes -- usually BB ante -- into account when calculating stack size. It often effectively doubles the size of the BB. If, say, the blind level is 50/100 with a 100 BB ante, do we simply consider the BB to be 200 when we calculate our stack size?

At around the 19:00 mark, I'm trying to figure out why the solver says KT, KJ, and QJ are calls but AT and AJ are almost all folds. Something to do with unblocking villain's bluffs, I assume. Please explain if you can.

Thanks Peter, fantastic video. My question regards how bet sizing is supposed to change based on range advantage. My thinking was that the player with the range advantage gets to bet larger, however in the hand where you have KK on QQ56 facing a ~1/3 pot barrel, I believe you're saying that villain's range advantage lets him bet on the smaller side. Could you please clarify which approach is correct so I can better understand the proper theory?

Hi Owen,

Random question: When people talk about taking different bluffing lines and say things like BXX, BXB, XXB, do those 3 letters refer to each street or just each players action? For example, does BXX mean c-bet flop, then turn goes x/x? Or does BXX mean c-bet flop (call), x/x turn, x river (then bluff)?

Great video, I've long been hoping for SNG content on ROI. It's amazing to me how fishy even $30 SNGs are; they don't seem much tougher than the $7 level. Now I just need to bink a tourney so that I can get the bankroll to move up stakes instantly lol.

That's a good point. I guess my XR leaves me only with QJs, AsQs, KsQs for Qx on the turn.

In the first hand where you have KK, I'm surprised you give villain all the sets when you two are only ~25bb eff. I thought flatting small PPs is really only a thing when you're deeper -- I don't know what stack depth would be the threshold but let's say like 35bb+. You can tell me if I'm wrong about that.

To what extent does stack size influence minimum defence frequency? You mentioned in one of the hands that hero needed to defend light vs a small bet size, which makes sense. But it got me thinking, what if hero was short stacked such that villain's small bet still represented a significant portion of hero's stack? Does hero still need to defend at the same frequency in that situation as when he was deeper?

Peter do you think opening size matters much? I see you're opening about 2.4x, but I've seen others embrace a larger opening size like 3x at low and micro stakes in order to try and win more pots preflop and avoid rake by discouraging callers.

Also interested by your choice of c-bet sizing in the 4-bet pot at around 25mins. I would think we would want to bet range with a larger sizing on a board where we have not only the range advantage on balance, but the nut advantage.

I hadn't thought of going for the double x/r, but that's an interesting idea. And then if he checks back turn, I could even overbet pretty much any non-diamond river.

Good standard call pre, well played postflop too. His ~ 1/4 pot sizing on the turn suggests he's got a monster in all likelihood, perhaps AA.

My first session playing 10nl on ROI there was an $80 Splash Pot. It led to a 5-way all-in pre and I was forced to put my $15 in the middle pre with like J8o, sigh.

devwil "Obviously, the drier the flop the smaller I bet; ditto if I'm at a range disadvantage."

This is something that confuses me because I feel like I've learned contradicting things about it. On the one hand it seems logical, as you say, to bet smaller when at a range disadvantage simply because we're exploitable if we routinely put too much money in the pot with weak hands. The corollary of course being to bet larger on boards where we have the range advantage.

On the other hand, how will we get value if we're sizing up with a range advantage? Like say in NLHE if CO opens, we 3-bet from SB and CO flats IP, and the flop is A74r, we have the clear range advantage. But I feel like in this situation we need only bet small (hence the popular strategy of c-betting 1/3 or 1/4 pot) because our range advantage compensates for our small bet size and allows us to win the pot very often. Unless we're against a calling station, why would we ever blast it there?

I realize I'm bumping an old thread but here I go. In the 65s hand, it seems to me that we're horribly imbalanced towards bluffs in the range PIO advocates x/r'ing. For value we have 65s, A5s, and 55. That's only 7 combos of value. But then we're raising many of our 7x, gutshots, medium PPs, and even a few A- and K-high hands. Vs a range like that, villain should just ship all his hands 99+ and AJ+, forcing us to either call off crushed or fold a ton of equity.

I understand that as OOP 3-better we're betting more often on dry boards and checking/betting polarized on FD boards since IP caller has more suited combos than we do. What I don't understand is why we're overwhelmingly checking the Axx boards that have a FD. Wouldn't we be giving IP a free card when we have a range advantage, and letting villain realize his equity?

My confusion extends to boards like T9x and JTx, which I would assume is better for IP's range and thus demands more checking from OOP, but if I'm not mistaken I see quite the opposite in your chart.

Yes I've watched that video a few times, it's helpful alright. I'm just seeking clarification on this one technicality rather than watching it again.

If you had bricked the turn on that very first hand with T8cc, would you check or bet again? And if you check and he bets, how do you proceed with such a monster draw against various sizings?

Also, in the very last hand with KJss, how would you react if villain had checked the river instead of jamming? I personally struggle with spots where I need to bluff to win vs his A-high hands and random underpair bluffs, but that I feel might be pretty transparent and that villain is likely to bluffcatch fairly often, so I feel cornered into making a suicidal bluff myself.

In the KK hand beginning at about 34:20, how would you play a value hand like AK or Ax suited (if you ever use those as 4-bet bluffs) that has become two-pair or the wheel straight? For the sake of balance I'm guessing you have to check all or most of those on turn and river in order to protect the times you have KK or QQ like in this situation. I was going to say that the only value hand I can imagine betting river with is like TT because it unblocks villain's Ax hands, except I don't think we're 4-betting TT pre.

Thanks to both of you for your feedback. Upon further reflection I think the best line is actually to check turn. Much of his range apart from Qx and sets will check back and give me a free river, which if I brick I can think about bluffing vs a capped range. If he bets I can call getting a terrific price. I think my lack of SD value is actually less damaging than I first thought. It's my lack of fold equity that really makes betting a worse line, I think.