Worm

Tend to agree on recreationals and triple barrels; they will double barrel a lot, but in general by the time they fire the third barrel they're pretty value heavy. They just don't find many river barrels in general as they're scared to value bet anything but the effective nuts and they're scared to fire the third barrel with air.

Of course this varies dramatically based on the actual rec who's sitting at your table at any given time, what's been going on with him during the duration of your play together, and what type of mood he's currently in (very common for recs to play tight and to their best when winning and things are going well, and even more common for them to go on monkey tilt and look to force money into every pot when they've taken a bad beat, got stacked, have had enough of you three betting their face off and aggressing them, etc.).

The best way to beat up recs maximally is to play exploitative based on how you've seen them play, showdowns, their current mood, and so on. Having hard and fast rules against recs, or trying to play too GTO, will just leave money on the table if you're a good exploitative player. We should just use some good old school hand reading, table dynamics, note taking, player reading, etc. - you know, play some poker.

Battling regs and logging a ton of hands against other good players at a given stake - while also being there for when the games are good or a particularly large whale sits - is also one of the best ways to quickly improve and climb the stakes.

I was super happy to see you make this river call for the exact reason you stated - he has no value in this line and the river three bet made no sense. I tend to think/hand read my way through hands very similar to you, and despite the fact that the river three bet is severely under bluffed and it's very hard to think of what part of his range or what specific combos he might be bluffing with, if I determine he can't have value with his line then I'll just click the call button and make him show it to me.

What's kind of hilarious in my experience in these very weird and random 'bluff' spots is more often than not they show up with a hand with showdown value that you never would have guessed. Very often some type of third/fourth pair or a pocket pair of similar strength. Sometimes as strong as second pair. Then those same guys will knuckle back the nine high missed draw on the river over and over lol...

Intro was fucking hilarious and unlike anything I've ever seen and I've been watching poker training vids since their inception! Innovative and entertaining.

I don't know, I think I disagree with the premise of the video and therefore the strategy. While there are some regs in this pool who will be making exploitatively big folds (like me) in certain spots where players want to put all the money in, by FAR the majority of the pool is made up of fish and reg-stations who are overcalling most spots by a wide margin.

IMO the way to make money in this pool is through relentless and thin value bets, and through finding the spots where the pool actually overfolds vs aggression (for instance: turn barrels in single raised and three bet pots where the turn card is neutral or better for our range, turn and river bluff raises, attacking small bet sizes/weak ranges, and using very large river over bets to bluff when our opponent can't have a very strong range).

That said, still enjoyed the video and the idea behind it, I just don't think it's the best strategy to use in this specific pool.

Great video and overall concept. Would love to see many more videos in the future following the same theme: here's what GTO does, here's what pool actually does, here's our response to maximally exploit. I'm actually surprised by the lack of this type of content as this 'style' of play is clearly the most +EV when implemented correctly. It's almost as if there's a negative connotation to being labeled an exploitative player by some in the online poker world, and it's trendy to try to be some GTO bot. The reality is, humans play vastly different than solver in many predictable ways and spots and to not adjust is simply leaving money on the table.

Agree with your analysis regarding C betting. Sauce checks range in multi way pots as PFR.

Also will second your props for posting a video where every decision we make seems to be incorrect vs opponents actual hand. We've all had these type of sessions many times and they can be extremely tilting and cause one to question their game/strategy, so it's good to see even the best experience this from time to time.

That's all well and good in solver land (and don't get me wrong, I always appreciate your comments and the solves you post), but it's a pretty well known fact that humans under bluff rivers almost universally. I'm very confident these river calls vs humans (unless you have a specific read) are losing substantially.

T3s hand was RFI not limp raise fyi. River seems like relatively easy fold IMO. It's really hard to even come up with any hands that bluff this line. Sure, the value range is fairly narrow as well, but this spot in general has to be severely under bluffed by pool.

Live play videos are generally the most popular format for the masses. They may not be the best learning or training tools, but they're definitely the easiest and most enjoyable to watch. There's a balance and mixing up video format is probably best.

Listening to Luke smack and struggle his way through the AJcc hand while eating and or drinking something was unbearably annoying - I had to fast forward. Other than that, good vid.

There's probably some good information in this series, but I have very hard time making it through any of the videos. They're just too dull and boring, and I think that can be observed in the number of likes per video in this series compared to the number of likes in your previous videos.

I think I speak for the majority when I say I'd rather see you reviewing a session, playing live, practicing spots in some GTO solver, or doing a video on theory. I thought your live play videos were extremely good and informative, and it seems that's what the RIO pop thought too as they're your most liked videos.

Can't lie, I found this video pretty boring since we just watched you play this session the video before this one (I believe) and there was very few interesting spots. Would much prefer to see you play a new live session or review a session we didn't already watch you play.

Big fan of yours in general though and find your live/in game commentary absolutely hilarious.

Two different players. Reg checked back KJ and folded turn. Fish 3 bet KQ, potted QJ9, half pot 8 turn.

Of all the railing type videos I've seen posted by various RIO coaches, this is by far the best one yet (though Tyler had a great one too). Your live, on the spot analysis of their ranges, sizes, exploits, and what each player was likely trying to accomplish was so incredibly sharp and insightful.

You hand reading and breaking down ranges 'on the fly' so to speak >>>>> long, boring, intricate dives into Pio where we're overloaded with information and a strategy so mixed and complex only a computer could execute it.

Great questions/analysis and fantastic, in depth answers. Appreciate the discussion, gents.

A few preflop questions:

UTG (MP) raised to 2.2x and you were UTG+1 (HJ) with 88 and folded. Seems way too tight. Is this a standard fold for you?

CO raised 2.2x and you flatted on BTN with 88. Was surprised you called here but folded one position earlier in the 88 hand above. Was also surprised you didn't 3 bet as I thought I recall you saying you don't play a flatting range from anywhere but the BB, and this hand is plenty strong to 3 bet. BTW, I think having a flatting range is good and I'm fairly certain I remember a video where Sauce says having a flatting range increases the overall strength/EV of your strategy, though it might be a bit more complicated to execute.

CO opened to 2.2x and you folded Q9o in the BB. Is this a standard fold for you? Seems plenty strong vs sizing.

CO opened to 2.2x and you called 89o in BB. Was surprised you defended 89o but not Q9o. Pretty sure both make it into calling range in BB vs 2.2x?

HJ opened 2.2x and you called 77 on BTN. Again a little surprised at calling here but folding the 88 one position earlier, and that you didn't 3 bet. Seems you have a flatting range from BTN and BB only?

At 33:37 you bluff raised river IP with 10h10x after checking to river on AhQs7sKh8h. Though this does seem like one of your best bluff combos, and clearly isn't strong enough to call, do you worry you're repping way too narrow of a range and if opponents do any sort of hand reading that they'll sniff you out? The ONLY hand/combos you can credibly rep for value with this line are QhXh.

Other than some of the preflop stuff which appeared a bit convoluted, I thought you played great this session. Your multi barrel bluffs, choice of combos, and logic seemed very strong and most or all of your bluffs got through. I thought your preflop 4 betting was spot on; timing, choice of combos, and exploitation vs fish. All of your bluffs with AJ/KQ type combos seemed to get through, and both times you expanded your 4 bet shoving range with 1010 and AQ vs fish got through.

I find that when opponents x/r this flop and check when bottom card pairs on turn, they almost never have us beat. Given how many draws there are and how much protection we need, do you think betting 3/4 pot here on turn is a better line? Betting turn also allows us to check back many rivers and not have to face a huge bet or guess/bluff catch on one of the many bad river cards (spade, K, Q, J).

That said, a turn bet does blow him off the few 8c6c type combos that have very little EV and would bluff river, but I feel like there's many more OESD, flush draw, and overs + gutter that we need to charge, plus 8c6c type combos may bluff us on spade, K, or Q river.

As played, I was really hoping you weren't going to fold on the Ac river. Despite the fact that we do block some draws with the Js, we also block value with the 10d and there's just soooo many draws that missed. Really, when he takes this line, the only combos I'm worried about being beat by on the river are AsXs. Well played.

I could not believe you folded 10c6c in BB for basically one more blind when UTG 2.3x raises and the fish who had just stacked off J9o on 863r calls in SB! This has to be too tight, right? There's no way getting 4.2 to 1, needing less than 19% equity, WITH position on the massive drooler, and a hand that can make flushes and two card straights (not to mention two pair and trips) that this is a fold. Seems like even hands as weak as 56o, 67o, and basically anything suited would be an auto call for one blind given the odds and position on the player who we want to be playing pots with more than any other player in the entire pool.

Thought you played the JJ hand extremely well. It can be easy to want to overcall the SB 3 bet because that's generally a tight/strong range, you want to keep the fish in, and it's a disaster when you 4 bet and the SB/reg 5 bet shoves forcing the fish out and forcing you to call off vs a range of AK+, JJ+. However, as demonstrated in this hand, there's just too much value to be had putting the 4 bet in, hoping to get HU with the fish, and forcing more money in when we have his range crushed. I also really liked that you chose to C bet flop and not fold to any action as fish will often check/jam all of their worse pocket pairs 55-1010 vs this 1/4 pot C bet when they're so pot committed. I bet when the fish chose to check/min raise you were feeling a little more sick than if he had check/jammed! The way things were going in the session I figured here we go, fish has KQ or AQ lol. But, can't fold either way and I was glad to see you call flop and call turn shove. Well played.

Also thought you played the AK hand (when fish had KK) and AA (when CO had 78s) extremely well.

When the fish min 5 bets - particularly in these positions - bottom of their range is KK and it's usually just AA. This is one of the rare times where I thought changing the original plan (4 bet and call it off) was absolutely the correct play. Seems obvious but I loved the flop check as well.

Min 5 bets aren't a thing because, as all of the coaches you mention have stated, it's impossible to balance. You cannot include any bluffs for 42% of your stack (you mentioned you'd make it $210). By the time you each put in $210, there's at least $420 in the pot and only $290 left in stacks (assuming 100 bb effective stacks). There's no room to barrel as you mentioned above because we only have 69% of a PSB left. Stack just aren't deep enough for it, it's too expensive to do as a bluff, and therefore it's impossible to balance. It's also just unnecessary as I'm sure it adds 0 EV over a balanced 5 bet shoving range.

I'm always very surprised at how incredibly wide you open in the SB, but I think what I find even more shocking is how often you check flop after raising in SB, despite the fact that in general as PFR you're range C betting for 1/3 on most textures.

For instance:
At 12:18 you open J4cc in SB, flop comes Kc9c4d, and you check - seems like a perfect spot for 1/3 C bet as this board is good for your range, your hand needs protection, you have a ton of equity when beat, and you're opening so many hands in the SB then C betting 1/3 that it would seem to me this hand needs to be included in that range?

At 25:05 left table you raise Jd4d in SB, flop Qc2s2d, and you check - seems like another perfect spot for your 1/3 C bet. Very dry board where we have a range advantage and he's likely to miss, BDFD, and most importantly you have J high and can't win if the pot is checked down or if he bets when checked to. Checking here just seems like it gives IP too much incentive to place a small bet and force you to fold, which then begs the question why are we raising the SB so wide if it's not our intent to take many pots away from BB and certainly win every time he misses?

At 25:05 right table you raise Qh9d in SB, flop Ac5c2c, and you check - this check I can understand somewhat, but then the turn is 2d and you x/c 1/4 pot bet. Seems like turn can't be winning, and if we're gonna call the turn there, it has to be better to just go ahead and C bet our 1/3 on flop?

At 29:25 you raise Ad5h in SB, flop As7c3s, and you check. Turn 2h and you check again. Once more, if we're raising super wide and presumably want to be doing quite a bit of bluffing on textures such as this, it seems this hand should make it into our flop 1/3 C bet range and, if not, certainly our turn betting range?

At 37:55 you raise Jd3d in SB, flop 10s9d2d, and you check. Seems like you're actually skewing your checking range to hands with a lot of equity or hands with SDV. The former which would like to deny equity and win the pot now, the latter which would like to protect/deny and get value, all of which seem perfect candidates for a strategy that includes raising a ton of SB and should include a lot of range C betting for 1/3, no?

Now, I understand mixing all of these hands in the SB in general. I guess my point is that when your strategy is to open extremely wide in the SB, and your strategy overall as PFR seems to be to range bet 1/3 on most textures as a simplification, doesn't it make more sense to range C bet 1/3 in SB and include all of these hands? Certainly the ones where we have good equity and no SDV, or where we have zero SDV but the board is extremely favorable to our range?

I was quite surprised at 14:20 when you raise call a 3 bet BTN vs SB with Js9s, flop 8h7h5s, OOP checks and you check back. Seems like the perfect combo - with two overs, double gutty, BDFD, and no SDV - to start with a small bet, fold out some better hands immediately, start setting up a multi-street bluff when cards that are excellent for your range come out (like in this hand when turn is 4s), and start setting up stacks for the times you hit your double gutty or backdoor a flush. Did you just roll incredibly low on the flop here (or hi, however you do it lol)? Because it seems like this combo could just be a pure bet on the flop as there's so many good things that can happen on later streets. As played, turn is the 4s and you semi-bluff when checked to. River is a blank, but because you didn't bet flop and can't very credibly rep sets and straights, plus stacks are awkward (252 in pot, 362 in stack), you're almost forced to check back river and thus essentially maximize your losses. Had you small bet flop, seems like you're winning this pot a ton on the turn or river even when you do miss like in this hand, let alone the times you hit your 8 outer on the turn or 15 outer on the river for the effective nuts. Thoughts?

Loved your call on river at 16:14 with 3s3d on 10s7s7d6hQd vs almost 1.7 pot overbet. What's he really trying to say he has with this bet, exactly 1010 or the one combo of 77? He's really not repping much and your hand does do a good job of unblocking bluffs. Nice call.

At 19:22 when breaking down the JJ hand SB vs BTN on A42r, you state that IP actually has a slight range advantage on this board because he has more combos of 33, 55, and stuff like 57. Did you misspeak? Because those combos only make second and third pair type hands with gutters and two outs to make sets. Neither player really has any combos of 53, you have all the AA and he has none, he probably has a few more combos of 44, and neither of you really have any combos of 22 (maybe he has one occasionally). Considering you have far more AA and AK, a few more combos of AQ, don't we have both the nut and certainly range advantage on this board? Other than that, I liked the way you played the hand and agreed with your reasoning.

As I commented above, loved your bluff shove on river at 28:50 with AdQd on 6s5h5d3d3s. Think this bluff is winning a lot vs field.

Overall, good video with a lot of interesting spots. Sorry for the extremely long reply, couldn't sleep and found myself with too much time on my hands lol.

Agree on table size, especially if the replayer is not going to be used virtually at all (even if the replayer was used a lot, it's better to have larger tables and pull up a smaller replayer as necessary).

Seems AdQd has very close to zero EV in this spot on the river. Like Tyler said, OOP's range is almost entirely pocket pairs. I was really hoping Tyler was going to follow through and was super happy to see him bluff shove this river. I think it likely overperforms as a bluff vs field because it's fairly hard, as OOP, to come up with enough bluffs for IP to call three barrels with a hand like 1010, he has at least 18 (and possibly 24) value combos with the overpairs alone, he has close to zero EV when checked, and it's a spot that's almost surely underbluffed in game. Very well played hand IMO!

I was pretty surprised to see this combo 3 bet bluffing the river as well, particularly for the small sizing as I wouldn't imagine getting too many folds from IP's value region that plays this way (AJ, overpairs, etc.). Seems this combo has enough SDV to just call, and hands like Ks9s, Ks8s, Kd9x, Kd8x, Qs,9s, Qs,8s, Qd,9x, Qd8x would be the small fraction of combos that would make its way into bet 3 bet bluffing the river here.

Really seems like all in would be our only size on the river here, as well, both as bluffs and for value.

By far the highest win rates than can be achieved are HU vs fish. Even if you don't have ton of experience HU, leaving a fish that wants to play HU is asinine and sabotage to your win rate.

Mostly because playing HU vs a fish who is 3 betting far too wide and playing too aggressive in general is literally the ideal scenario - an absolute gin spot. I would never want to do anything to discourage his aggression or play smaller pots. Additionally, this type of player will usually instantly quit if you start to play a very boring, small ball type poker and start limping every hand. As Tyler said, the key is to fold a few more hands preflop as he won't even notice and will continue to 3 bet far too often. Also, be pretty sticky postflop, bluff catch a bit wider, and stack off lighter for value.

lmao

I must say, I used to really enjoy your videos because you played a bit more old school in that you were actually hand reading, willing to exploit and attack weak/capped ranges or play a big pot with thin value against the fish, but ever since you've gone to trying to play a pure GTO/PIO strategy your vids seem stale and much less interesting. It feels like nearly every player in the zoom pool is attempting to play the same defensive, weak, small bet, small pot, robotic style and it's quite boring. I swear many of them have spent so much time playing in the same pool against a bunch of players attempting to play the exact same strategy that no one even knows how to attack, punish, and exploit the fish anymore! I couldn't believe you flatted KQ in the BB vs fish's SB open. Seems like a prime spot to put more money in position, hope to flop top pair, and be more than happy to play for stacks! Or, at the very least, have the fish put more money in OOP with a weak range so that when we don't flop it we can actually rep strong hands, blow him off his weak range, and win the pot every single time we both miss the flop. I don't know, I guess it's just the state of the game, particularly at zoom $500.

Chaps, he was asking about the turn sizing, not whether it's a bet or not. Seems like a pure bet and I would agree with Pressaa that the block sizing used has to be leaving money on the table. Opponent either has draw, occasional strong top pair, or some kind of air. Draws are calling at least 75% pot most of the time, strong 9 is calling 75% pot on turn every time, and air isn't calling regardless of size. I'd be curious to see the spot in PIO, but block on turn can't be optimal I'd think.

I was going to ask exactly the same question. I'm not surprised by Sauce's response and the types of hands that are supposed to be used to balance here, however, seems in practice those hands are rarely x/r and the spot is extremely underbluffed. Makes me wonder if x/c Q10 there (and possibly having no raising range) would play out better in practice versus how people actually play on these boards/textures.

The intention of this video was to examine turn double barrel spots in 3 bet pots, which I'm sure is why Tyler speaks only briefly about preflop strategy, flop ranges, C betting strategy, and sizings in the majority of the hands reviewed. Running sims for every hand and examining preflop strategies, flop ranges in detail, and breaking down correct flop C betting strategies and sizes would have greatly limited the number of turn double barrel spots that could have been covered, thus defeating the purpose of the video.

That said, I agree with some of what you wrote. I was surprised to see that Tyler seemingly C bets entire range for 1/3 in 3 bet pots regardless of positions, ranges, and flop texture. I'd be really curious to hear Tyler's thoughts on this strategy and why he does it - exploit vs pool, thinks the difference in EV is small and wants to simplify his strategy, likes to keep ranges extra wide to create more bluff/barreling spots on later streets, or? I was definitely surprised by some of the turn double barrels as well as some clearly weren't good. That said, some of those loose/-EV turn barrels became good bluff spots when the river blanked and Tyler did take advantage by firing the third barrel all in.

All in all I liked the format, concept, and the spots covered. Having the turn solutions - as you posted above - would definitely have added value to the video and allowed viewers, and Tyler, the opportunity to compare and contrast Tyler's assumptions and the way the hands were played to what solver says is optimal.