Joe Sham

Well Altshuller is one of the top players playing Zoom PLO100 (semi)regularly.

Here is a link to a recent podcast with him: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwIndyo_Ij0

He talks about the challenge and then some random stuff, its long but its fun.

PLO is less explored than NLH for sure, so if you put in a lot of work, you probably can achieve decent winrates.

But:
1. Rake is worse in PLO, because as equities run closer, more hands are priced in to pots, so the average pot is bigger than in NLH and so more rake is taken on average, when the rake structure is the same.
2. Last year there was a thread on 2p2 about rake and winrate in some NLH and PLO low to mid stakes games. The results showed, that the average winrate for a regular was actually slightly smaller in PLO games than in NLH games. Especially so in the Zoom games.

Conclusion: I believe there is a bit more potential in PLO games for a good, hard-working regular, but dont expect to find easy money there.

Edit: To give you some actual winrates: Dont know about PLO200, but most PLO Zoom100 regs make between -1 to 3 bb/100 pre-rakeback. There are a very few who make way more though, like 9+ bb/100, which I believe no one makes in NLH anymore.

Solid vid Phil, thx!

Hand question: AhAdKd7d in bb, 3 way, flop JsTd5d @ 50:30+
You lead, which I like. In the actual hand you get it in on flop being a slight favorite. But, I am quite interested in how you would have played it if you get a caller or 2 and turn came
a) a blank (like 6h)
b) a weakly board-changing (like 7h)
c) a strongy board-changing non-flush card, like Ks, 8h, ...

I think most winning regs have pre-rakeback winrates between -1 to about 3 bb/100. I have aprox. 1.75 bb/100 so far this year over some 180k hands and its been a while since I last did any off-table work on my game. Hope to put in some more time into improving again now that school is over.

But bigger winrates are definately possible if you put in the effort. Check CharlieBumBum for example, he has been beating Zoom100 for like 8+ bb/100 for the last 2 years.

And btw, what vpip do you play? My HEM says the rake is about 8.1 bb/100 actually. I play tightish, like 24/16 or something, but still.

Very solid video!

Just one small note:
@ 37:30 - 43:00: There is a small mistake in your calculations, because of the way Odds Oracle views ranges. If you type in 99%-100%, it is not the worst 1% of hands, but the worst 2% of hands (5414 hands). For the worst 1% you can use this syntax: "100%!99%". (There is still a couple hands mistake, it counts 2724 hands instead of 2707, but the difference is negligible, I checked it in my own program.)

So, just to make the calcs right, the results are:
Top 60% vs bottom 1%: 67.5% : 32.5%
Top 10% vs bottom 1%: 75.7% : 24.3%

Computerscreen wrote:
2) i propose the complete liberation of poker in a decentralized fashion with an asymptotically rake free structure.  Something nearly every single one of you has the religious belief that it is not possible.  VERY difficult discussion ducy?

Try to be a bit more specific. You dont need to go into details about the technical aspects of the implementation, but say a bit more about what you propose. Like for example you say "in a decentralized fashion" - do you mean something similar to how Bitcoin works?

Computerscreen: 

If you are actually not trolling, but really trying to say something interesting, then it might be good to:

1. Stop being arrogant and start a polite and to-the-point discussion

2. State your goal and the summary of what you propose

3. State why you actually created this thread and what it is you are hoping to achieve in this discussion.

Well PokerIsHard, you can achieve unlimited bb/100 if you want. Just play a homegame and set the blinds super small and set your max buyin as unlimited. For example in a HU game with blinds $0.00000000005/$0.0000000001 and a buyin of $100,000, if you win an allin in your 1st hand, your winrate will be 1,000,000,000,000,000,000 bb/100.

Gj C-BET, keep it up, variance will even out.

Btw, how does your red line (non-showdown winnings) look like?

Right now I think that vs a float-happy oponent the best play is to bet flop then check turn and not fold too much to further aggression.

If we check flop, we are pretty much in a bluffcatching mode. How do we decide how far we wanna go with it? What if we check/call flop, turn comes blank and villain bets again? I find it very difficult to make a good decision in that spot without good knowledge of villain's tendencies, which I rarely have in zoom.

RIO admins, please upgrade the posting editor, it is really pain in the ass to try and format the posts :/

You asked for calculations, so here they are:

Ranges:

JNandez: AcKcKsTd

BTN: FI50!(AA,AKK:xxyy)

SB: 3B12o!(AA:xx,AKK:xxyy) - not sure about this flatting range really

Flop equities of whole ranges:

JNandez: 28%, SB: 41%, BTN: 31%

Allin vs SB only:

SB range: 3B12o!(AA:xx,AKK:xxyy):((JJ,TT,88,JT,J8,Q9,97,AKQ,ss:(KQ,J,T,98,QQ+),Ass))

JNandez: 30%, SB: 70%

Pot: (210+2*180=) $570

Allin vs both SB and BTN:

SB range: 3B12o!(AA:xx,AKK:xxyy):((JJ,TT,88,JT,J8,Q9,97,AKQ,ss:(KQ,J,T,98,QQ+),Ass))

BTN range: FI50!(AA,AKK:xxyy):(JJ,TT,88,JT,J8,Q9,97,AKQ,ss:(KQ,J,T,98,QQ+),Ass)

Main pot: (210+3*180=) $750

Equities: JNandez: 18%, SB: 43%, BTN: 39%

Side pot: ((430-180)*2=) $500

Equities: JNandez: 33%, BTN: 67%

Btn will have one of the hands to go allin with in 48.5% of cases (no card removal assummed here, might be a bit less).

So, the EV of going-in is:

EV = 51.5% * ($570 * 30% - $180) + 48.5% * ( ($750 * 18% - $180) + ($500 * 33% - $250) )

EV = 51.5%  * (-$9) + 48.5% * ( (-$45) + (-$85) )

EV = -$68 = -11.3bb

Obviously the result depends quite a bit on whether my assumptions of allin ranges (JJ,TT,88,JT,J8,Q9,97,AKQ,ss:(KQ,J,T,98,QQ+),Ass) are +- correct.

Update: 

I tried to give SB a bit looser pushing range:

(JJ,TT,88,JT,J8,T8,Q9,97,KQ,ss:(KQ,J,T,8,QQ+),Ass)

It changes our percentages from 30% to 32% in the HU pot vs SB only and from 18% to 18.25% in the main pot in 3-way allin case, which changes the resulting EV to -$61.

Seems like a good bluffcatcher hand, but seems like a bad opponent to bluffcatch against.

With a little more hands on him I would like to see his bet-vs-missed-cb stats and his river aggression %. If both are really low like under 25% and under 10% or something like that, I would probably lay it down.

Also I think a smaller-ish valuebet on the river might be a good play. Like 40% pot or something, I think most loose-passive players will close to never bluff raise or raise with less than nuts here and they might find a call with several 2 pair hands.

1. Multiway 3-barell bluffs are pretty daring, so most low-stakes opponents will not exploit you that way.

2. If you think someone particular is overaggro in these spots, just add some KQ into your check-call, check-call, check range to punish him. Ideally add KQ hands that dont block the flushdraw and block pairs (AKQT, ...), so that villain is more likely to have a busted fd with little showdown value.

3. You dont have the best bluffcatcher in your range by far. If you want to bluffcatch, start with hands that block some of the straight cards and dont block any flush cards ideally. Like AQQJ, QQTT, ...

Just to make things clear: The winrates in above posts (like 10bb/100) are way way way above average, or even exceptional. Most regs dont have anywhere close to these winrates. In fact, most regs in these games make somewhere between -1bb/100 to +3bb/100 pre-rb (plus rakeback of around 3-3.5bb/100).

So obviously try to aim for as high as possible (10bb/100 or even more is definately possible), but dont let yourself down if all you can achieve is +3.5bb/100 pre-rb, because even that is pretty good compared to most regs.

If you plan to visit Brno, Czech Republic, message me if you want.

Liked the video a lot, definately wanna see more of these.

In addition to those videos you mentioned you plan on making, I would also like to see a sort of continuation to this video - an oop strategy on turn & river after cbetting flop.

You are quite behind his range on the flop even if he bets 100% range.

Assumming PJ 3B10o range:

OTF you are 38:62 vs his whole range.

OTT you are 42:58 vs his whole range.

OTR you are 35:65 vs his whole range.

Assumming he 2 barells his entire range (unlikely). He has a 

- flush or better 36.6%

- trips or better 39.1%

- unimproved overpair 23.7% (6% overpair with nut flush blocker)

- less than Q*** 24.1%

From looking at the numbers I think your plan wont work often enough. 

I think even your flop call is marginal, probably fine vs one-and-done honest regs, but otherwise it might not even be good to call flop. 

Turn I would probably fold. If deeper, I might try to call flop, raise turn as a bluff sometimes. 

River as played I still think you should just try to show it down, because if you are bluffing with this then you are definately way overbluffing this spot (given your hand doesnt even have a club blocker). Also your perceived range protects you from him easily 3 barelling air, so if you have him beat, he will probably often just give up river.  

Obviously the exception would be if you knew villain's tendencies very well and knew that once he checks river he never has anything better than an overpair or something like that.

Thx for the breakdown Phil. Unfortunately I tanked to the last second and folded (probably also because of losing a close river call a few hands back, which obviously shouldnt influence my decision but it did :/ ). But after going over the hand I came to the same conclusion like you (eventhough I wasnt so sure about the ranges, still felt like he had too few valuehands and too many possible must-bluffs).

Omg I have played with the formatting for so long to make it look nice and it gets screwed again :/ RIO use a better editor pls, thx.

Some calcs:

Main pot = (37.5 + 3 * 17.43 =) $90

Side pot if allin = ((154.51 - 12 - 17.43) * 2 =) $250

PPT calc for main pot:

board: KdTs5hJcQs5sAs 34.91%36%6h:(KK,TT,55,KT,AQJ,QJ9:(K,T,QQ,JJ),KQJ,AA:(Q,J),QJT) 37.41%20%6h!AA:(K,QJ,TT,55,T5) 27.68%
Assuming above ranges, EV from the main pot is: EV = 90 * 34.91% - 17.43 = +$14

PPT calc for side pot: 1. Looser range
board: KdTs5h JcQs5sAs 45.22% 36%6h:(KK,TT,55,KT,AQJ,QJ9:(K,T,QQ,JJ),KQJ,AA:(Q,J),QJT) 54.78% 2. Tigher range board: KdTs5h JcQs5sAs 46.33% 36%6h:(KK,TT,55,KT,AQJ,KQJ9) 53.67%
As you can see, you are actually slightly better off against the tigher range. Lets take the lower equity version and calculate EV: EV = 250 * 0.4522 - 125 = -$12. Total EV = 14 - 12 = +$2. From the above, you have an immediatelly profitable shove assuming villain never folds. Since I would expect at least a tiny bit of fold equity, this should be a clearly +EV shove given the above.
You also said you expect that some of your outs will be dead. I am not sure if this is reasonable or not, because some % of the time the shortie will hold more cards that you need and some % of the time cards that you dont need, which will help you.But lets assume one of your straight outs is a dead card. Lets say it is the Qd. Then your equities change to 35.91% in the main pot and 44.48% in the side pot. That will change your EV to +$15 and -$14 and so TOTAL-EV = +$1. Still a profitable shove assuming 0 fold equity.
As far as comparison to calling. It is quite difficult + too many assumptions to calculate the whole scenario, but intuitively I would expect villain to not make many big mistakes on later streets. If you hit your straight, he will probably just check/fold one pair hands and probably even some weaker two pair hands and will go allin with sets+. Given SPR, he will be making only a very small mistake shiping sets. On the other hand, when turn is blank and villain shoves, you wont have odds to call vs above ranges and will have to fold a pretty decent equity (~25%).The only scenario where I think it might be better to call flop would be if villain will super often bet on your straight cards with all kinds of weaker hands (all two pairs, some bluffs with AA, QQ, JJ, ...).

Right table @ 16:12 (previous action was: hero opens, villain 3-bets small, hero calls; flop hero donks 80% or so, villain calls):

1. What was your plan on the flop when donking? Bet/fold or bet/shove?

2. Is your plan to bet/fold or bet/call the turn here? I assume bet/fold, but just to be sure.

3. What range do you put him on after calling flop?

4. What range would you put him on if he shoved turn?

5. Whats your plan if he just calls on the turn again?

Yeah, obviously. But if only one of the players is playing the equilibrium (shitty word to write) strategy, then the game would breakeven regardless of strategy played by player two, right?

Well it is true for RPS, but I dont know of any other (more complex) game, where this is true. Its (almost) certainly not true for HU NLHE poker. You can check the solution for the AKQ toy game and then try to make any deviation to the equilibrium strategy and see that it means losing money.
A simple AKQ solution is here for example: AKQ game solution

Like in Roshambo (rock, paper, scissors). If we play a NE-strategy - picking uniformly random between the three options - the game will automatically tie. Would this happen in poker to without rake? If in a HU match one player plays an equilibrium strategy, would this force the two players to break-even regardless of villains strategy?

Yes, in a HU match if both play an equilibrium strategy, they will both be breakeven in the long run (in a game without rake).

My next line of thought: The initial pot before our first raise must be the blinds. What if we assume a poker game without blinds and again truly make villain indifferent between calling or folding - where we again assume villain has no other options for the sake of an easier discussion - both preflop and on every street postflop. Then where's the profit of our equilibrium strategy even though villain doesn't play the same equilibrium strategy? How can he make mistakes if we're making him indifferent on all streets?

There is none. Regardless of our strategy they can choose to fold 100% preflop and have a guaranteed EV of 0.