ctrlplay

Very nice video, thanks! I learned a few things that I should be doing more when studying with the trainer and those were some good spots to study.

Btw you can enable rng in the trainer under configuration > GTO Trainer
as long as you don't have the older 2.0 version.

Are you both talking about 23m K62fd CO v BN 3bp?

I have somewhat similar Monker ranges but for a higher rake structure, for a 2.5bb BN open SB 10bb 3b, although the 4b jamming range isn't 'heavy', it's all mixed with the combos you mentioned, but the combos are mostly NOT jamming. It seems odd that your ranges are mostly jamming those combos.

I've done the math + Flopzilla equity calculation for mine. Basically the 4b jam gets ~72% fold from the SB 3b range, and against the ~28% of that range that SB calls the 4b jam with (99+ AK AQs+, 88 mixed), the BN has ~41.385% equity. So 28% of the time BN is getting back 83.18bb from the 201bb pot, or put it another way 28% of the time BN is down about 16.82bb (including the 2.5bb open) from the exchange on average, and 72% of the time the BN is up 11bb by picking up the 3b + the blinds, making the play profitable by itself.

11 * .72 - 16.82 * .28
= 7.92 - 4.71 = 3.21bb.

Likely, thinning the ranges of these combos helps to make the other 4b and call 3b range a bit more balanced too.

What if villain only calls off TT+ AK? Villain's previous range was ~58 combos. 58/.28 = ~205 combos in SB 3b range (205/1326 ~ 15.5% range). TT+ AK is 46 combos. 46/205= .224. If villain only calls off 22.4% of their range, our equity is 36.5%. We'd be getting 73.35bb back out of the 201bb pot when called, or we'd be losing 26.65bb on average when called.

11 * (1-.224) - .224 * 26.65
= 11 * .776 - 5.97
= 8.536 - 5.97 = 2.56bb

What if villain's 3b range is only 13% and calls off TT+ AK? 1326 * .13 = ~172
46/172 = .267
11 * (1-.267) - .267 * 26.65
= 11 * .733 - 7.115
= 8.063 - 7.115 = 0.948bb

There were a lot of interesting spots here, great video!

37: A3ss CO 2bb vs SB 9bb
8d 5c 3d SB b66/call
Ad turn x/b47 "gonna obviously get the money in on this runout".

I thought this comment was interesting so I tried to sim the spot. I don't have exact ranges for this sizing so I'm not going to post any screenshots here, and A3ss indeed does bet some of the time and call it off when it does. I thought it was interesting how the solver chooses sizings, preferring to mostly check the A3s or b25, and bet more often with A5s and mix b25 and b50, but still check half the time, and with A8s pure bet and mostly for half pot. I think this betting system is very nice in this spot with these types of hands because A3s unblocks 88 and 55 and is actually worth significantly less of the pot than A8s when SB x/jams the turn (explaining for the turn b25 line, since A3s isn't in the b50 line). Maybe if you always b50 with A3s there also, the villain can start jamming A8s (this already happens infrequently in the b25 line).

I agree with all the above, great format.

Great video! That J high call down was superb!

(Viewpoint of villain after the cards flipped over)

If you're trying to play optimally vs the player pool, how much does rake factor into these types of slightly negative pio calls that are profitable vs overzealous regs like with the AQ hand?

HJvBB 3bb open Jd6c4c 5o Ao
flop x/x
turn b150/c
river jam 4x pot/f

I've noticed in these types of spots, that if you subtree the turn, pio prefers 200% pot turn or larger, but with both sizings T9cc gives up river, because it is blocking a large portion of villain's folding range (TT, 99, 97cc-A9cc, T8cc-ATcc). It's better to bluff a portion of the missed straight draws.

(slightly different spot because it's with 2.25bb ranges vs 3bb)

(BB 225% pot turn)

I second SoundSpeed s comment, really enjoyed this one.

Interesting how the BB raises almost as much as calling here. How much is that affected by the size of the IP range, and if it's significantly tighter, would OOP use a similar ratio even though continue ranges would also be significantly tighter? Will you be looking into 3b pots as well with these ranges?

oops my mistake, timestamp was 11:
I fixed the post, not sure how I got the wrong time there, sorry.

Nice video!
11: SB v BN 3bp 8d8c2c

Running this spot in a solver with half pot raise size vs 30% cbet it never does it as the whole range prefers call (villain is calling 86% range here), but if you give the solver a smaller raise option like 2.5x (28%) then IP does have a raising range here.

Yeah the script uses pio text interface to run jobs; I'd put new pio scripts in a folder, sometimes single hands in a script, sometimes a few hands in a script for standard 6 max spots like BN v BB, and just start up the automation after I finished adding one. After finishing 1 pio script it would move it to a processed folder, and the pio solution files would get put in the corresponding spot on the directory tree for 6 max 100bb spots, and would run until no scripts were left.

This reduced the manual load to about 20 seconds worth per standard spot, so I could set up all the spots I'd want to study then step away from the computer while they ran, before which I'd have to wait after every hand finished to start the next.

Very nice video thank you! I don't mind not having a webcam up as you need a lot of screen space to review stuff in pt4, to have pio sims, and notepads open for thoughts.

These types of reviews take a lot of effort; to make it less rote work I had built up a powershell script to run pio hands in a queue after they were marked for review in pt4 so that I wouldn't have to run a dozen or so hands manually, although that's unnecessary now that PIO 2.0 is out with its built in queue. However, even with the script I still ended up doing this once every month or so because of all the effort and defaulting to just simming a few hands after my short sessions and trying to study them in detail. Although as you said, getting tons of reps in with this approach will definitely make you a better player.

Is this something you do very regularly (reviewing lots of hands after sessions), or is it something that you use more tactically for a specific purpose, and what's a good balance with your reviews these days with all the other stuff like building/grinding through training sessions?

Yeah, looking at those hand histories it seems that some of the regs are hard exploiting the pool by overfolding in a lot of river spots.

38: COvBN 3bp (3bb open) 8c7d4d 4c Td

This spot is interesting.. Adding in some extra preflop combos for CO since T7o is pretty loose, it's actually a 2bb mistake for the villain to lead the turn with that hand. On the turn, equities are close but just flatting the small flop cbet puts villain's range slightly behind.

But on the flop, villain has a decent equity advantage and should capitalize on it by mixing small leads with their whole range. After checking, this is a spot where I'd use a large bet or check strategy, although having a narrow small bet range is fine as long as you're checking 57% of hands.

Here I nodelocked villain to lead turn using the expression
toppair+, combodraw, set, trips, flush_draw
set to 25% for the hands in the range

and this is our response:

Villain is supposed to call off T7cc on the turn!

The bet sizings here are suboptimal however. 2/3rds on the flop with your betting range followed by 57% on the turn sets up a nice 2/3rds on the river.

Nice video. Exploitative live videos are always welcome, especially if you enjoy making them.

Nice video, thanks!
...
looks at comments

96cc 7c5c3d 5h Th

yeah I ran that spot, 96cc ~7% raise on flop (other combos just flat), 0% turn, and river mix between 100% and 125% when given multiple betting options (even though you'd prefer to have any other combo of 96s). You'd rather raise a hand like T6s-K6s (not with diamonds), or 4xs or 98cc (pure raise).

Probably you don't want to see a 3b with that hand because you'll basically be forced to 4b/call 5b against higher flush draws and overpairs with a club, combo draws, straights, and sets if they 3b, ruining your potshare.

Vs 3b: 98cc mixes call and 4b, calling ~2/3rds, T6cc-J6cc flat 3b, Q6cc-K6cc mix 4b and 4b all in, with a touch of flatting. Interestingly, villain should pure 3b 96cc.

sb 3b range

spot after flop sb 3b

I solved that one with Pio. It's not a pure flop cbet, checking 40%. AK on the turn as played is 0ev. Pio calls 0% of A high on the river, -3bb with AsKd, but bluff jams instead about 15% of the time. Ad pure bluff jam.

(River subtree solved to 0)

Your river calling range bluff catchers includes weak flushes (54s 32% equity), .1 combos of 87s (at 32% equity), overpairs with a diamond(~30-40% equity except for AAdx which has 57-64%), 88 and 77 (30% equity). You can meet your optimal defense frequency by choosing bluff catchers with a balanced calling range of paired hands (hands like 76ss or J9s which block boats), or with pair + flush blockers.

That wasn't a timeout, it was a mucked cards timer because HJ folded

Starts video with comment about forwarding through dead time, gets fireworks on multiple tables throughout the whole video.

That QTs timeout was unfortunate.

More 200 reg please! More time for hand discussion is great.

AsAcKc 9s 2d

This spot was pretty interesting in that you can learn a lot from studying it with a solver. It's almost a range cbet but not quite. Hand regions like QQ-99 check back often, KQ checks back 40%, Qx mostly bluffs favoring higher kickers, Jx and Tx also checks back pretty often with middle kickers, and some low kicker Ax and Kx mix in a bit of checking.

Turn strategy is a mix between 75% and 150% pot, with all Ax overbetting at some frequency, a bit less with lower kickers (A2o mostly preferring 75%), and choosing bluffs starting with JTs semi bluffs and QTs with a flush draw, add in some Qxs-Txs fdfds favoring lower kickers, and a splash of back door flush draws, and then a ton of air mostly 8 high and worse in a gradient favoring suited combos and lower cards.

And then on the river, jam AJ+ at the right frequency (~30% with AJ, 50% with a club, ~75% AQ,60% without spade or club) and follow through with a jam with the complete air 8 high or worse ~25% of the time with hearts and diamonds. This bluffing approach makes calling with A8o and lower indifferent but still mostly calling, and everything else needs to fold except for KQ and K9.

If you have seen the solution, it should be fairly easy to replicate a solid bluffing frequency, since the frequencies mostly work within a smooth gradient and your suit selection, and you're generally not concerned about blockers here except for suits.

I notice these things a lot when I explore runouts and the hotness chart diving deep into a spot, but then when playing lower stakes games I try not to barrel with A2s or K2s ~0 ev type plays to make the villain indifferent to folding a certain region of their draws or bluff catchers in such a spot where I believe that I'll get called more often than I should anyway. However, it seems to work better bluffing an offsuit flush card and low kicker when a flush hits since even recs seem to be much more sensitive to that scenario than the straights hitting.

So I keep grinding Pio and trainers to improve my theory while attempting to make exploits I think make sense at my stake such as overfolding turns where villain doesn't bluff enough enough air to make me indifferent to calling vs their bet sizing or under bluffing turns where they call way too wide to big bets, while trying to keep it from becoming an ingrained habit that's hard to get rid of when I move up.

Great video and welcome!

Testing hypotheses on notepad is a very nice approach. I think Sauce recommended in a video a while back to practice Pio by trying to build into a nodelock what you think a range should be doing in a spot before viewing the results of the sim and then seeing what differences there are and how the EVs compare.

This approach seems to be able to get similar results but maybe helps you formulate your strategy into something concrete and usable a bit more efficiently, as long as you're forming hypotheses that result in you gathering enough information to improve your knowledge. Obviously you could be missing something important with the rest of the range if your hypotheses are too focused but that's the trade off right?

1:00

Nice video!

What adjustments could we potentially make in an anonymous pool where maybe 25% of players are range checking a lot of spots CO after BN flat, 50% are cbetting too much, but 90% players aren't x/r enough?

Awesome video! It's nice to see the breaking down of the hands and really getting in the weeds to find the exploits.

"My head is currently exploding".. That's how I always feel after studying for an hour with Simple GTO Trainer.. Find a few leaks, afterwards run them in a Pio script and study the spots. It's efficient at least!

These 200z are great! I'd be fine with some 200 reg too.

18: AQTr I ran a sim for this spot. Caveat I use different ranges so there are going to be slight differences.

On the rainbow turn 7, villain has to overfold and also has less of a raising range, but to compensate calls more QJ and KT. On the river we have to give up some of the time with our Kxs because villain's range is quite a bit stronger than on the missed flush draw board. This seems to be mostly from the differences to the rainbow board river because there are no draws to fold out except KT. Another noticeable difference is that weak Jx bluffs much more on the rainbow turn than the bdfd turn because it'll get more folds so they become the preferred river bluff, contributing to Kxs giving up more.

All that said, if villain overfolds Qx on the turn I'm sure overbluffing river is a fine play. They actually get to have a small donking range on the river which allows them to mix folds to a jam, probably saving some chips and allow them to win the pot sometimes when bluffs mix jamming and folding.

BD club draw missed board for comparison, this looks like the missed flushdraw board.