eggsnmaple

Is the strategy in this video a bit dated? Are you still using similar sizings in these spots or has your approach changed?

Hi ian,

I liked the theoretical side of the video helping me conceptualise spots I’m in quite frequently where I got to admit I’m a little lost sometimes. Either deciding to flat or 4bet and by that time I’ve got way less time to think about sizing as the shot clock has already diminished and started flashing. One thing I notice in my games is that when I’m facing a fourbet it’s often a ridiculously large size and there’s just no point continuing unless I’m very nutted. So that’s leads me to think I should be more observant of my opponents and construct a 3betting strategy around their tendencies.

I also got coaching with you about four years ago, I have lost your contact details and recently tried to find your YouTube channel again with no luck. Good to see you’re still kicking about the coaching scene

I imagine it’s very similar but you just pretend that utg folded their hand.

Awesome content, at first my impressions were that this all that sounds familiar and like I’ve already known but going into details in the trade offs between strategies and player tendencies it made me realise that I am too strictly relying on default strategies and in tougher games it’s made me aware that in some spots I am very predictable. I’ll be looking forward to hitting the tables with these considerations in mind, especially since I’ve been focusing a lot lately on other players at the table but without considering too much deviation preflop. One thing that I certainly don’t do enough is trap and I can see this working out really well in some spots. I’ve provably been burnt in the past when it’s gone four handed to the flop and I’ve gotten married to my overpair but with a bit more knowledge and experience under my belt I think I can navigate these spots and capitalise on over squeezy regs. Thanks.

Hands like AA KK go down in value or strength preflop and hands with good implied odds like 56s, 89s, A5s, QTo etc go up in value. I think its to do with being able to make nutted hands and being able to put lots of pressure on OOP players while deep. Many players either do or dont feel comfortable sticking more than 250bb with a one pair hand, other players will. In both instances it gives you options when deeper stacked in terms of being able to bluff and get paid off.

If you're going to bluff I guess it makes sense blocking the nuts. You are able to bluff catch but it seems better to win the pots he is willing to bet/fold river with 2pair+. .

I assume he means he would be more thrilled to gii when villain shoves over his turn raise rather than him re raising

Have you started playing live in Sydney by any chance?

I'm really curious about what people think here because I've just spent a week playing at the star in Sydney and this type of dynamic is heaps common and confusing.

Giving up seems weak, spazzing off a stack seems spewy. Betting and hoping to take it down or spike an A or K later seems like what I'd do most of the time. I feel like a shove would look weaker and yeah you'd get called by JJ TT even 88 because "I put u on ak"

Those reasons for not betting it were going through my mind and taking that into account its something I think the players in the hand should be aware of. So i figured betting here can kind of disguise my hand and potentially get folds if everyone is just in a completely different part of their range that doesnt connect. I figure im risking less to win a bigger pot and my plan was to fire once and give up unless I hit a K or Q.

OTT I was thinking about what river cards I might be able to value bet, x/c, and x/f to. The ace was one of them. There were lots of safe river cards I can play, and on that flop I think there are a number of different run-outs that will enable me to win the pot unless someone is slow playing a monster or has a monster draw.

Also over-all I think betting KQ in a 4way pot is probably not part of an overall winning strategy. Its just something I do very rarely if im feeling i might be able to win the hand to some specific action or run-outs.

this is one of those "fold and dont tell anyone" spots.

I'd probably call and say "i just had a feeling" or "he seemed fishy enough to shove 66+ Ax Kx" then wheep when i see AA

The way it played it looks like villian has AA, he doesn't care about what you have on the flop and the turn jam he's hoping you have AK. That being said, i always feel cautious about 3betting UTG open with QQ. If he flats, you're probably in 50-50 territory vs his flatting range. Unless stacks are deep and its multiway, then it can include a lot of other hands. Possibly even JTs, and small PP.

I probably play QQ a bit weak but i always seem to find myself playing big pots with them vs AA KK and winning small pots against other hands.

They do say that strong cash players often make great tournament players. Often this just comes down to the volume of hands and situations that theyve been in. Most notably they are strong because of the experience they have playing with different stack sizes, generally 70-300BB deep.

About 100NL, im by no means good enough to be playing at that level, give me a big enough bankroll and sure I can probably win over a small sample. I just have a feeling regs there would adjust to my game and exploit me over enough hands.

I would take this approach. Take 40 buyin's for whatever stake you want to start at and just as an experiment I would start a lot lower than what you would normally want to start at. Say 2NL or 5NL, get yourself 50 000 or 100 000 hands at that level first. Look at your graph and winrate and if you can say you can beat those stakes over 100k hands. Move up to the next stake and have yourself 40 buyins to play with.

Its quite a conservative approach although the way I see it, If you can't even beat 2NL over a 100k sample whats the point starting at 25NL or even 100NL.

Did you consider 4betting TT vs a sb 3bet?

Kinda hard to tell whats going on there. Looks like value most of the time, could also be a solid bluff. I'd just make the assumption that villian has you beat a solid 70% of the time or more.

if you want a polarized 3bet range wouldn't it be best to pick hands that can flop well / play well post flop. 56s 97s ??

the way i see it whenever you 3bet smallish PP (lets just call them all small PP from 22-99 vs UTG 3bet calling range / 4bet range ) you're basically drawing to 2 outs most of the time unless they have AK. Even if thats the case if they're good tough opponents you will be putting yourself in really tough spots and my idea about poker is to reduce the amount of tough decisions you're in, or at least remove uncertainty as much as you can.

Dont like the idea at all. Maybe in some circumstances although I would view 3betting small PP as turning your hand into a bluff.

Im a big fan of overbetting turns and rivers although it seems a bit bigger than it needed to be. my only concern is that mathematically over time if you OB this spot, it needs to work a higher % of the time than betting say $2.85 for the same result??

how come we dont know what villian had or who won?

im going to go have a look at it, can you link me to any videos i might find interesting? Ive basically heard about pio solver but never used it. Im not at the level where playing a perfectly balanced game will have its benefits over playing a little bit exploitatively at the micros. Just interested in learning about these more advanced concepts.

its also one of those spots that i like to bet 1/5 1/4 1/3 OTR to induce a re-raise from flushes and a bluff jam from air. Not something you do all the time but to have that in your playbook, you'll find you will get their whole stack if theyre prone to spazzing out. anyone else thoughts on doing this 5-15% of the time in this spot?

You ISO, flop comes low cards and they hit a pair and back door draws. Call cbet and put u on Ak. Seems like a common theme for limpers

Interesting.. Can you give an example of a spot where two strata would have the same EV? Mathematically or hypothetically

Thanks guys, after reading comments I should've known that. Guess I got blinded by the "I've got aces get it in" mentality

why xc instead of cbet?