Meistras

4beting 4beting 4beting... 4bet shoving with 25-35 bb's! All about it!!! 

So how much we should add to the pot when we cover opponent? 3k or 1,5k?

So myster son of a beach, where is that thread? Drop the link, please ;)

My idea is couldn't it be that the style to play a tournament should depend on how big the field is in a given tournament. IMO you should play more TAGish in small field tournaments where you have a bigger chance to get in the money (cause lets say you just need cooller or few to go your way, to win one flip or two and so on so then you have huge chances to make it) and just getting in the money will affect your ROI much better compared to later payjumps (I mean late payouts for ex. Final Table payouts) which will not affect your ROI as much cause these money isn't so big (compared to buy in) and hasn't near close enough impact as late stage payouts of huge fields MTT's (where it's hundred times x your buy in) where in those your mincashing means sh*t to you ROI and you should not play for mincashing at all and ONLY focus your play to get to the Final Table for exz.

So my point is does these assumptions have any corealations when choosing playing styles (TAG or LAG) and if so, might it be that style should switch (what I think at the moment) to more and more TAG'y (unless you can exploit someone pretty hard) as huge fields tournament gets closer and closer to it's end.

For practical exz. Scott Seiver plays more small fields, bigger buy ins, tinny field highroller NL and other games MTT's so his mincashing has bigger impact on his ROI so his style should be based on TAG'y side cause he needs to reduce variance at the early stages (as we asumed that LAG's might bust out earlier more often vs TAG's) and should be more concentrated on geting in the money at first while if we take some other guys who plays mainly sunday huge fields majors they need to play more LAG'y since the beginning of the tournament and they should concentrate ONLY on making it to the Final Table (taking all even barely +EV risks along theyr way) and not focusing on mincashing at all also not waiting for "huge" hands, which would be pretty hard to get cause they'r way is much much longer than Steves and you need to be at the top of your variance if you are realying your win on big cards, coollers, etc. to your side.

And looking from one more perspective, lets take a critical exz.: you are deep in huge field tourney and lets say you are there 10 times in such a spot so (as I told exz. critical) you CAN or SHOULD 9 times out of these 10 oportunities take a risky spot to get your ships in making even barely +EV play and lets say you HAVE to (or you are) sacrifice(ing) (or just LETS you sacrifice) these spots that even if you get to the Final Table 1 time out of 10 where the biggests payouts that one time it will still be for you (and for your ROI) so +++EV that it will ransom your risky plays given how many times you will multiplicate your buyin. While on another hand a guy like Scott Seiver cant afford such an oportunity to bust out 9 times out of 10 (and he doesn't need to) cause that 1 time when he gets to the top his bustouts won't ransom his huge risks.

Hope I made it clear. What you think guys? :-)

P. S. No. 1. It might be just an imagination that LAG's are doing better cause theyr wins are more often made in huge field tournaments where prizes are very big itself so they are much more "noticeable" when somebody wins them. While TAGs are winning smaller prizes itself, but does it more constantly than LAGs do.


P. S. No. 2. Can anybody advice/talk/discuss how to play top pairs in MTT's? Question can appear silly or some of you might laugh, but I'm asking seriuosly :-) Cause if you think deeply enough it might be the hardest range to play with (ofc we need another thread on this one).

Hi Paul, have few questions..

What do you think about leading the turn w KT where you turned nut straight w possible flush on board? It's a spot where opponent gona check back a lot of hands including his value, semi marginal value hands (which you can get value from), and also he can easily take a free one w a flush draw, so there you are missing on a lot of value I think + giving too much for cheap away. If you do not agree would be nice to hear reasons. If you agree would be interesting how to react if he raises our lead.

The AQ hand where you called a huge 4bet shove from PKaizers 77..

First mind when I saw it was that I could see myself folding that, cause it is a huge huge portion of our stack and if we loose we are loosing a lot if our future equity, which comes from playing a big stack, bullying table, seeing flops, making 3bets, applying pressure by barelings and so on so on (What you think about that my first mind of laying it down?), but as I thought a bit deeper right now I think AQ is just simple too strong to fold there. I think AQ is a cutof ant if we had worse hand like AJs that would be a fold for sure, agree? My reasoning that AQ just dominates a lot of his 4bet shoving hands like Ax's KQ's maybe QJs's and also fliping a decent amount, but AJs is not dominating as much and if it doesn't we are just racing for too much where it is too unnesecarry. Do you agree? If not then I would like to hear your calling range and reasons.

Thanks, gl and see you at the tables ;-)

Hey Todd, enjoying your videos! Could you make some videos about folding/making lay downs? Thanks

Dave, everybody knows you suck in turbos :-) so maybe you could record more and only reg speed MTT's? Also 9 or 12 instead of 6 tables would be better. Much spots we could see. Gl ;-)

Hi Espen,

1. How you define what range you can get it in pre with diffrent stack sizes, like in 7:50 you with AJ on BU telling you can get it in here easily with AJ, but I want to know what other hands we can play for stacks here and what profit shows our different holdings by doin that. So how you know it? Maybe there is some program to count on that. I know Short Stacking Calculator is a soft for similar spots, but I didn't use it, but maybe you do? If not tell me how you define that.

2. 16:00 You ch/c w/ J9 on 97x Flop. Question: What scenario should be to get it in on the flop compared to check/calling? I mean it's a common play to ch/c in these spots, but I think (correct me if I'm wrong) it depends only on a stack to pot ratio? Like if the pot is big enough (but I don't know what the size is "big enough") we should take the risk of sometimes runnning into a better hand (still having a decent equity) but more often taking down it right there and 1. not giving oponent a free card on the turn 2. not giving a free card on the river if he decides to ch/back turn. 3. not letting him to barrel us of of the best hand on variuos turn card and so on. I think it still should be done versus opponents who has wide opening ranges. But what you think when it comes more profitable to ch/raise then ch/c? And how much we can win taking this line vs hom often we are losing using most common ch/c line?

3. I really want to see all of your hands. No need to play every hand from start to end, but just to see what hands you have folded would be great! Cause I have a trouble by playing too many of them I think so would love to see some laying down in some spots :-)

Thanks

Here you are: http://www.boomplayer.com/en/poker-hands/Boom/4418177_9F6A657D00

Hy Grayson, could you explain more widely in 5th minute w/ KJ checking back the AAx flop? Isn't it better to cbet just to take down the pot? There are many aces in your range and pocket pairs KK-88, so imo he shouldn't be peeling to many hands accept Ax's. Are you saying that you would and it is good to peel in his shoes? Also by beting you discourage him from taking stabs and stealing the pot away from you or are you willing to call him down if he bets turn and river w/ K high w/ high frequency?

Also on the turn in his shoes imo I wouldn't stab in this spot too cause your check back looks like you have some showdown value and he can't bluff you off very often. And how he should play if the pot was 3 way?

It's just my opinion and if you think I'm wrong I would like to know it and listen to what is right.

Waiting for your respond, thanks ;-)