jponline
5 points
It is not working for me. Could you please check?
Thanks!
Sept. 18, 2016 | 10:43 a.m.
Thank you for the good Video!
I have a question about table 3 at around 7:30. (you flop a straight with J8)
You mention that your range is fairly uncapped, I tend to disagree with that, but please correct me if I am wrong.
From alle the possible "nuts" (by that I mean all very good hands like sets+) you don´t have that many.
I assume:
QQ and TT you 3 bet pre.
99 maybe pre 3bet?
KJ pre 3 bet (as seen at the same time 7:30 on table 2)
QTs sometimes 3bet pre?
Which would leave you with:
J8, QT, Q9 and T9, and some 99, for "nuts".
whereas you are missing top 2 sets and the nutstraight.
Or is that what you mean by "fairly uncapped"?
If I am in a similar spot, and go though my range I tend to think that I am capped here.
Or am I being too strict.
I am looking forward to an elaboration on your side.
And again: Thank you for this, and all the other good Videos. They make me think about my game a lot and do no only improve me, but it is also fun, to solve pieces of the puzzle, step by step.
Regards
JP
May 31, 2015 | 10:01 a.m.
I frequently see people in live games overcalling their monsters in utg+1, hoping for a squeeze.
.
Often players are lost if they 3b AK or the likes, and get three callers. So they hope to get a squeeze, so they can get it in (=easiest way to play and they might not be sure what the best play is if the hand goes any other way)
Apart from that: in the live full ring cash games ive played (mainly 15/30) I had almost never the spot where I'd like to get it all in pre with Ago, given these stack sizes and positions.
If I feel he is very loose pre and I have a good grasp on his game post, I'm inclined to call and go all the way post on a hit. (given your history and what you said about him putting you all in a lot post)
With no ( very Strong!!) read, I'll probably fold.
Cheers J
May 8, 2015 | 3:29 a.m.
Ahhh! right, so thats where all the trouble started: we try to make his bluffs 0 EV not our calling range.
Great thank you! That was the point where I for some reason started to think in the wrong direction.
Sept. 5, 2014 | 6:34 a.m.
Thanks so far guys, for all the answers.
cpau: 1-a is what sean lefort (maybe others too, but i saw it from him the first time) refers to in his video, as "minimum defence frequency" -> Lefort - Advanced Theroy Principles
I did not think about the SD value part of villains bluffing range, but that does not really hit the problem I have. lets assume we are IP, and are facing the Bet & villains range.
We are not sure what to call fold, so we analyze the spot and want to come up with an Idea what to call/fold. Which Option should we use?
ilares: no in game I wouldnt flip a coin, but use the best hands that fit the situation, to bluffcatch. (lets say the ones that don´t block missed draws in villains range)
It´s more a theoretical question, i.e. when you are analyzing a spot like this after the session and want to get a better feeling in game.
I am not sure who can access this and read it, but I´ll post it here: http://www.pokerstrategy.com/strategy/bss/2314/1/
This article would suggest to use our whole range and take 50combos out of it. But my questions somehow remain.
I might have a flaw in my logic, can please someone point me in the right direction?
Sept. 5, 2014 | 4:08 a.m.
yes you are right.
What i meant to say is that we don´t know if he is bluffing too much or not, and we can not use an exploitive approach, as in: "Villain vbets 10 combos and bluffs just one, therefore my calling range looks like:..."
Sept. 5, 2014 | 3:57 a.m.
Hello guys,
I am having trouble with a game theoretical issue.
For an easier discussion I will number my questions.
Assumptions:
Villain bets the river potsize and is all in. We do not know anything about his range
composition.
We get to the river with a total of 100 combos.
Lets assume this:
20 combos nuts (assumption: these nuts beat all of Villains vbets)
70 combos bluffcatchers (assumption: these beat all of Villains Bluffs)
10 combos total air (assumption: these beat nothing and loose to all bluffs of
Villain)
1.1.) Since Villain bets Potsize, our
minimum defence frequency is 50%, right?
I am having
two approaches to this, and I am a bit confused, please help me out here.
OPTION 1:
We call our 20 combos nuts, and 30 combos of our bluffcatchers.
We fold 40 combos bluffcatchers and our 10 combos air.
-> We call 50% of the time and achieve therefore the desired minimum defence
frequency of 50%.
OPTION 2:
We call 20 combos nuts and 35 combos of our bluffcatchers.
We fold 35 combos bluffcatchers and 10 combos air.
-> We call 55% of the time and do not achieve the minimum defence frequency
with our whole range, BUT:
2.) Isn´t the idea behind the min. defence frequency with bluffcatchers, to
make them 0EV? (a.k.a: indifferent to calling/folding?)
My point here is: if we choose option 1, we treat our nuts as bluffcatchers,
although they beat all of villains betting hands.
3.) Therefore we are making our whole range indifferent to calling/folding?
4.) Wouldn´t that mean, that we intentionally make our bluffcatchers –EV?
(Since our nuts are +EV anyways)
5.) Shouldn´t we therefore use option two and call 50% of our bluffcatchers,
making our 70 combos of bluffcatchers indifferent to calling/folding?
I hope you guys can follow me, and understand why I am a bit confused here.
Thanks for any advice on this.
J
Nice one! Part 2 & 3 & 4 please ;-)
Nov. 9, 2019 | 3:51 a.m.