Andrew Whelan

(6.19) in the bottom right, u flat KTo to a 3x CO open, is this your standard or because over a small sample villain seems loose, if this is not your standard, then against what type of opponent would you say this would be a profitable defend, just seems like a fold to me

(27.30) in the top left with AQ, not sure i like stabbing once and giving up, was that your plan or were there any rivers that you would continue bluffing...i guess just a K?

in the bottom right on 25mins the AT hand, if u had A high on the river, would u have called? (not saying u bet the turn with A high, say he leads turn and overbet jams river or something just if u had gotten to river with A high)

good video also, thanks

you say 'if people don't notice what you are doing', what am I doing exactly, playing exploitably? definitely not, if I decide to open more suited aces in earlier position or ATo or KQo that i may not on a normal table or fold A2o on the btn, people can realise this all they want, my theory is not personnel based.

you also say 'nobody passes on a plus EV situation in zoom' well i do all the time, i may fold the small blind with JTo instanly because i've decided against this particular opponent its only going to make me a couple of cents per 100 hands...or in fact save me a couple of sense considering the blinds, if you are not adjusting at all to zoom tables you are leaving money on those tables

a database can be useful when considering how differently the games are playing, but it isn't nearly as helpful as you might it would be. for example I fold K7o on the btn on a zoom table, not because I don't consider it a profitable open in this spot against these particular blinds, but because in the time it takes to fold to me and the chance it may get opened in the 3 positions preceeding me, i've passed up slightly plus EV open in favour of getting a new hand straight away where I may have a more profitable open, in order to maximise my hourly rate and not my winrate. I agree that it would be a nice concept video though

who said anything about 30%? I'm talking about slight differences between zoom tables and normal tables not completely rethinking opening ranges. e.g. regardless of personnel, is opening ATo UTG in 6 max a better open on a normal table or a zoom table? and why? say there is the same people at a zoom table and a normal table, and you've decided that if it folds to you that T9o is a profitable open against these particular blinds, is it more or less profitable on a zoom, table when considering in the time it takes for people to fold to you that you could already be playing a hand that is possibly more profitable, or is this outweighed by blinds defending slightly tighter on a zoom table, there is zero doubt that zoom plays differently to normal tables, if that is a fair assumption, then we can agree that adjustements need to be made, what are these adjustements? that is all I'm talking about

the JJ hand in the top left around 56mins, you say that you dont like your play for jamming turn, but you say you would prefer to call turn and fold river instead because you dont think he'll bluff the river, if you don't think that he'll bluff the river surely that strengthens the argument for jamming the turn not weaken it, if his turn betting range is wide enough to allow you to do so which you conclude that its not and I agree.

Then if he's likely to bluff river you should call call (on some rivers), surely this is a spot where villain is likely firing one or 3 and if closing your eyes and calling on a diamond or a spade river isn't the play then jamming turn is the next best option. I always default to my range in these spots, and seeing on the turn as JJ is near the bottom I would fold, but say you had AQ here, how would you play it? i just don't see the argument for calling turn and folding river, is there a gap in my logic in this spot? I feel I'm missing something

alot of people have made small adjustements when playing zoom tables, and I'm just questioning these, for example there maybe be an added incentive to fold a more marginal spot in an earlier position in favour of getting a new hand straight away where a more plus EV decision can be made, but is this incentive outweighed by other factors like ppl more likely to fold behind you which should cancel out the original adjustement, ie readjusting, nothing to do with playing exploitably or stats or regs outside the micros, thats all irrelevant, its game theory, its not based on situation or stakes, I could well be wrong and considerations ive made may be negligible to an overall game plan, its just not something that i've seen discussed

i think you're missing the point, its about hands that were now considered marginal in zoom that were acceptable in normal games, eg. some ppl advocate that ATo is a more marginal open UTG on a zoom table, but considering soom other factors that could be taken into consideration, that this may not be the case im talking about small edges like 16% opening range instead of 14% for the UTG example, the game is about pushing small edges, at no point does it say opening wider UTG than on the BTN, im talking about small adjustments to maximise hourly

i think the play is very borderline at best, is 3 handed SB vs BTN so ranges are relatively wide, wouldn't shock me to see KQ or KJ here, havent done the maths but would say your play is only good if those hands are never in his range, his flop raise seems decently big, not sure if you have much FE with you jam you prob need some to make this profitable even against only draws your not doing great, and i think thats the best you can hope for here, but hey you won all the monies

if you do that you have to bet this hand because is basically the only hand you are bluffing in this spot, are there any other hands you are bluffing here? if your rarely bluffing in a spot you should not be value betting thinly and if you have alot of bluff combos you should be value betting thinner in proportion, this goes hand in hand with if your range is strong you should be bluffing as much as you can, but if your range is weak you should be wary of your bluffing frequencies, does that make sense?

ok with this turn betting range, how do you play the river? with JJ KK AA say on a blank? does this mean when you check the river you are always c/folding, do you have a check calling range here?
say you have AA with a spade and a spade rolls off, are you jamming river? if so are you ever bluffing in this spot? seems unlikely

tell me if im wrong, but these are my assumptions:

1. when you bet a blank river you have Qx and flushes and are never bluffing, unless you follow through with this particular hand.

2. When you bet a spade river you have JJ+ with a spade (which is thin) and you are never bluffing.

3. When you check a blank river, you have JJ, KK or AA which are not calling - so i would shove 99 or TT here, against you.

4. when you check a spade river, you have JJ, KK or AA without a spade and are not calling - same as above.

im not saying im right, but im interested to see how you balance

didnt read your part on 2nd hand properly, against a recreational player with a read that pot is strong, folding is prob ok, against a reg i would not

1st hand: i only ever check back to give up or if im comfortable calling on any turn, is ok but dont particularly like it with this hand, would only do it if villain c/raised alot, which is unlikely as u said he hasnt been 3 betting which is a fair indication, would prefer checking like KT on KJ7, as played would call river, not hugely profitable but is basically the top of your range, prefer bet folding flop though, or bet 3 betting flop if you get raised and folding to a jam is pretty good a i think is a hugely underutilized strategy against aggressive opponents, would take too long to explain why now, but let me know if u want my thoughts on it, keeping your range uncapped is the key to any situation basically.

2nd hand: would call also, is a little closer though. you've capped your range on this flop is highely unlikely you can have a flush, would make his bluffing frequencies go up most likely, looks like he's trying to get you to fold a hand like AT, KT which i would also call because its the same hand as QJ here when he pots it, KJ and AJ a little different, once again prefer betting flop though, your UTG range is very protected here, villain is highely unlikely to be c/raising light, the crux is if u think he's c/raising alot in the spot checking top pair is pretty good, im not convinced that they are in either hand though, do you?

how would you play your value hands in this spot, AA with a spade? AA without a spade? Qx with and without spades? that will help to construct your semi-bluffing range, as this is a better card for your opponents range, i would check my entire range on this turn, including Qx, ie would check call check fold AA unimproved and check call Qx twice unless a 4th spade hits and we dont have it. When ppl have AA without a spade here they tend to bet for protection from hands like TT with a spade, but your range is protected if you construct it properly it doesnt matter if you check and a 4th spade comes off. i think checking this hand and betting pretty much any river if he checks back is a fine play to balance when you want to bet AA if the turn checks through a similar strategy would be to bet hands like this on the turn along with flushes and check call Qx and hands like AA or KK, as played is close but would consider jamming any river, if i knew a little more about villains tendencies

agree with preflop 3 bet would prefer it, flatting is fine though, i think raise folding flop against either opponent is better than flatting flop though, marginally

his wwsf seems about average... as played would jam flop, is far from a slam dunk tho, just saying he is aggro and you want a linear c/r range against him doesn't seem like an ideal strategy unless you know more about his postflop tendencies, if he is a non-believer it makes more sense if he's not going to give you credit in this spot, would construct a far more polarized range in this spot myself without very specific reads, capping your range on this flop is not ideal, without dynamic to me it looks like you have a polarized craising range here and have alot of fds in your range when you just call his flop 3 bet, otherwise you would just stack off on the flop, so me may check back KJ in this spot or even a set, not saying he should but if your hand looks like a draw and alot of the draws come in, its possible he could think he was way ahead or way behind, easy river fold also, if he's very aggressive he could mess with your CB a decent amount on this board anyway, other lines that could be considered are bet calling the flop and check jamming on blank turns, if you think he follows through alot, or bet 3 betting the flop

seems nitty but would prob fold flop, cant really have sets maybe TT but unlikely plays this way anyway, j9 prob doesnt play this fast either and 2 pair def doesn't, as played easy fold on turn, his sizing doesnt look like the nuts, but i think your gonna see a small flush here like 90 plus percent of the time 56hh 79hh 78hh, whatever

would also bet fold flop, then check turn and fold to river bet, as played fold river, if he was bluffing he would have done it earlier in the hand, unlikely is ever worse for value, would call AJ, QJ is close JT is a fold

On the last hand of the video, you say the call in the SB with 88 is probably not good vs a typical MP opening range eg. 12-18%, I was wondering how you constructed your continuing range against a relative unknown, would you call 99-JJ and some of the better suited BWs and 3 bet call it off with QQ+ and AK mixed with some SCs or suited Aces or AQo or whatever, this would be my typical strategy, so I was wondering if yours deviated significantly from this?

One more question on zoom strategy, you seem to fast fold decently quickly but open very wide from the BTN in some spots, eg i think there was a J3o hand or something, this could well be fine although is only ever going to be slightly plus EV. My question is this, you advocate to steal more in LP because ppl fold more to steals which is a reasonable assumption, but the time it takes for it to fold to you and the chance it could get opened by the 3 positions preceeding you prob between i dunno 30 and 70 % of the time, then would it not from a zoom theory optimal perspective (ZTO) be a better strategy to fold more in LP and to open slightly loser in reverse proportion to position which would be the complete opposite of what seems to be the widely adopted strategy. Ppl seem to think hands like ATo or KQo are now marginal UTG opens and should therefore be passed up in order to avail of a potentially more plus EV spot in an instant new hand. Would it then not be safe to assume that if ppl fold more in the blinds to steals, that they also fold more in every position making it from a ZTO standpoint, better to open loser in reverse proportion to position because the action comes to you more quickly? (of course with all this relating to hourly and not to winrate).

Sorry for the long post and I realise this thread has not been active in a few weeks, any thoughts on this would be appreciated, if you don't see it, i might try and repost it in one of your more recent videos if that's ok, also thought the video was very good, cheers.