konselieri

Pretty sad you didn't go over PIO river play

Are you gonna explain your flop categories a little bit more?

cool video, tho did Ben grim at the end ? :)

part 3 please:)

When you try to pick the right amount of bluffs the simplest way to do it is by choosing the hands that are closer to your bottom range. Otherwise it could be hard to control your bluffing frequency.

Great Job

Hey, guys. It was awesome experience to play against Ben, glad I had this chance.

Ben, excuse me for my fast playing, I didn't realize that I put you in bad spot this way.

Once when Ben x/back the turn, he removes most of this hands by his perceive range. I am calling the flop with plenty amount of Ax, Kx, Qx, so I end up having stronger range on the river in terms of equity in my opinion.

Also I defended the bb a bit tighter, so I didn't had so many miss draws as I probably suppose to have.

I agree that Ben could raise me huge and I probably don't have what to do, but this is just one time play. If he continue to put so much presser on this types of boards I will adjust either start calling ligther this overbets or slowplaying some stronger hands pre.

Tyler, do you think that your conservative cbet strategy could be a good reason for developing donkbet range?

Hi, Tyler, great video as usual!

I am curious about AQ hand in 29min. If you don't think you could valuebet here, is that mean that turning Jx into bluff becomes very profitable? I believe he lead with 7x almost always on the river, because if you doubt that AQ is valuebet, then he can not check raise 7x for value and as you said you don't have many miss draws on that runout to bluff with.

Very good video, keep up the good job ! :)

@KQ2 In my database, its been a consistent money loser for me in this spot whether I 3-bet or cold call. You certainly can play it. It's probably user-error on my part. I tend to pay off too often with it (and not get payed off in return).

Hello, Tyler, nice video as always. I have a questions regarding your statement. I see you often talk which hands are good or bad calls preflop using statistic analyse from your HEM database. I have done that too with few of my poker buddies, but I think variance is a very,very big factor and we can often be "fooled by randomness". There are a lot of factors, like player pool, your skill postflop and opponents skill which are not constant. I think it's better to look at hands as groups and see some overall patterns and maybe we can ask for winning poker buddies to do the same and share the results. If you run bad with KQo SB vs CO, this will show negative result but it can still be +EV call/3bet. What are you thoughts on this ?

gratz for SNE :)

28 min - lol @ K10 revealing 44 :)

33 min vs ninja:
Flop - how often do you slowplay w JJ+ the flop to protect your / what % of AQ/AK do you XC ? on those (seemingly) tight ranges.
- how often do you bet 88-TT on the flop for protection/1 street value ?

River - What is your bluffing range OTR ? 88-99 seems like the only candidates, but they are hands that block his bluffing range that gives up OTT.

Overall seems like a spot, we won't vbet much given lack of bluffs, but still QJs looks like the a good call, given the lower PP we have in our range.

Comment on Ninja Gapper randomization PF ? Flop no BDF / BDGShot randomization :D ?

@ 38 - KTd vs Gogi - given his cbet size indicating more linear/depolar range, we should like to raise here. How do you randomize your non A 2 overs + BDF ?
- given flop size we can assume he has 88/87s in his range and we can't overbet very effectively, but surely a bigger than 1/2 bet will be higher EV, now depenind on the bluffs we have :), but seems like we have enough Ahi that play this line.
BIGGOGI outplayed you for sure :P

Good video, Thank you Nick.

About A2hh 6cc hand. Played around a bit.

Warning:
My first intentions were to just check the spot quickly, and even tho I have tweeked the ranges in the process, I haven't build proper flop models.

http://gtorangebuilder.com/#sharescenarioHash=de7b434b8f648ee74c11048ac29df4aa/rootv=26 -
this seems like a reasonable strat to me. 1-2.5 VBR Flop XR.
OOP (Hero)Value region has over 80% vs IP's PFR flop calling range.
And Hero 'Bluffs' have over 36% vs calling range. Which seems huge.
The EV of Hero is 11.78 vs 10.22.
If we input more polarized XR range for Hero (http://gtorangebuilder.com/#sharescenarioHash=56de124defb9402a35d881a90d84657a/rootv=26),
hero's bluffing region has 30% equity, tho GTORB EVs are 10.33 vs 11.67
Which are not very sound.

Anyway, you can see my assumptions in the model - I haven't worked on them a lot but they seem reasonable.
One of the obvious things we can see is that Hero bets less being polarized (48 vs 65%).
And in the X tree, the polarized range is defending (by calling) more vs IPs bet (which is consistent as %),
which make sense since his betting range is relatively small. We can see that Hero XR % is higher with the balanced/stronger range (because he still wants to protect his X range which contains relatively high equity hands).
Which brings me to the point, which is that GTORB is not betting a lot of the highcard FDs OTT (even those /w GS like 43 and 53s - and which prefer to XF/XC(!) vs IPs bet ).
That leads me to the conclusion that GTORB always prefers the higher equity (pair+draw, rather than HC draw, even if he wants to have a X range - as Nick's QJo hand on K92ccT.
We can see even in 1-2 VBR (http://gtorangebuilder.com/#sharescenarioHash=7e9aa7566c820bf1731d94565c0fff2d/rootv=26), that they're FDs(+GS) that are being XF.

On other hand, Villain's range is defending vs bet way more than 1-A, which indicates really strong range, but it's overall a very strong run out for the BTN's range.

In the X tree we can see that IP is betting most of his top range, betting like 75% of highcards FDs, prefering to bet non-broadway kickers and less Highcard in general. OTR is betting the rest of the highcard FDs, and IP is carefull not to overplay Ax hands, facing a XR from OOP's slowplays.

I won't comment about IP's calling vsCbet Ax combos and IP bet vs misscbet Ax combos, because it's getting to long and there's a lot of nitpicking.

General Takeaways:
- OOP Raiser seems to prefer betting hands that we might think are good for a X range (pair + draw),
then X range is defended mostly by % of the nut portion/strong made hands of the range. Which is not true for IP.

General Questions/Guesses:
- BTN high defend % OTT is due to the general range distribution on Ahi boards ?
- OOP should barrel aggresively this turn since his XR flop range is strong (I can't say purely polarized, but in terms of nuts, it is) and the turn doesn't help BTN's range. So we should expect Hero EV>Villain's.
- OOP is XF FDs(+GS), Is there a mistake ? It might be OK to XF naked low HC FD, but XF some FD+GS seems a lot, even on this drawheavy board.
1) If our bluffing range is more polarized, we are betting FDs but not as much, and our EV is < IP's EV. If we lower VBR less than 1-2, Hero is dominating the EV, which can't be right and still XF some FD+GS (43s).
2) Villain's range is too strong (which might be the case).

p.s. Seems long enough for a thread on it's own, but since it's kinda random, it should ok in the thread and see if there's potential (doubtly around NY but w/e).

The young Ethan Hawke.

Keep it rolling.

Hi Ben, great video as always!

23min - the 4bet pot with KT, you said that his call pre with 66 is very loose but he has 29% pot odds. He will flop the nuts 12% of the time. So he needs to show down his hand vs your AK or give up type hands 17% of the time, which seems possible? And if the case is that he has great implied odds with his nut hands, he don't even need to win the pot that often for his call pre to become +ev?

Also if he has all combos of AQ and KQ for value, it seem hard for him to find enough bluffs on the river, when the flop is so dry and he doesn't need to call cbet very light, since he hit this bord very well?

If you don't like Tyler's videos just skip it! He constantly gets more likes than every other pro here, except Phil and Ben, that shows enough!

Good video. Insightful thoughts. Keep them going.

Thanks, and also for the Josh Waitzkin interview. I really enjoyed "The art of learning", and definitely it's a book worth reading multiple times.

p.s. I can't see no gutters on Q72 :) (absolute vs cumulative).

Very good concept ! Looking forward for the merged examples :)

I'd like to see faster pace for the CREV examples. :)

Hey man,
Thanks for the detailed response.
About Hand1 I said:

"Just my point is it seems to much to justify exploitative plays with a hand which probably does not belong in ones range from previous street(s):"
while you said:
 "you can't make this exploitative call with this hand cuz it's at the bottom of your range" "Also, there is no "limits" to exploitative play"

While it seems true, I think that the likelihood for an exploitable play to be good on multiple streets (because I think 87s it's likely an overcall OTT [On The Turn] for most ranges) is lower than exploitative play in a street vacuum.A draw some similarities (based on vague logic) with Phil's concept  in Thinking out Loud where he talks about rationalizing making multistreet bluffs based on 1 street frequency exploitation.Which I realize it's NOT the case here (just food for thought - I hope it's not spoiled ;) ). I obviously know and understand why you called there,but as I pointed out in my first comment, I don't agree with your assumptions about his frequencies OTR and your weights PF - mainly about him 3betting all of the potential bluff combos with Ah that you assigned him OTR.
Hand 2:
Kinda makes sense but I'm still confused and want to find more clear cut answers.Put some work in CREV tweaking frequencies.With the assumptions you've made we bet all GS+ Bluffs and all MP+ for Value OTT and OTR. (given brick run out).For simplicity I constructed his range with only bluffcatchers and air and compared EV of 172.5 / 667.5 bets vs 250/590 bets.Tried models where BTN is under defending turn and correctly calling river (brick as I said),one where he have near optimal (given bet sizes) calling frequencies.Also one where 1st option is bet 50 and then overbet shove OTR.
All have equal EVs given assumptions,and haven't constructed optimal betting ranges at this point because it will take me some time to tweak it, since I'm usually a button clicker and also poorly educated in theory and math.But obviously betting 100% of our range OTR can't be near optimal.
Hand 3:
Yeah, as you said, makes sense.Probably not used to setting sizes like that and seems odd.
p.s. are you CREV user ? I'd love to see a video about this hand/concept and      will gladly provide my semi useful model if you are willing to involve with CREV in this one,    which may attract GT sharks :)
p.s. 2 "and people must understand that everyone will have things to be exploited in their game (even Sauce for example)"       Sauce is explo beast under-GTO-cover ;)

p.s.3 not sure how to quote properly, editing options doesn't seem to be optimal either ;]

Hey,

Hand1 88 vs 87 OTT, without crunching numbers, intuitively my range which include SCs (do you weight your SCs in this spot(s) and do you go lower than 87s ?), would be folding 87s, caling 88h.

I was asking what do you prefer having, 88o has more blockers vs 87s better improving potential (as a general approach).

I agree with your latest post about theory application, recent sauce post about that was very insightful :). But I can't agree to use potential turn fold (even PF fold) to be calling the river with given it's at the bottom of our calling range (including blockers), which obviously you are aware and ok with.

Just my point is it seems to much to justify exploitative plays with a hand which probably does not belong in ones range from previous street(s).

Hand2:
"I think that's more importante on the river then on the turn, given that on the river (after calling turn) his range is already entirely bluff catchers, while on the turn he can still have air and give ups (like K3s and stuff). "
I'm looking from more geometric betting view, optimizing value to bluff distribution over 2 streets, as a default.I am thinking about what you said and can't figure out why is it better.
OTR you can bluff more combos (in river vacuum) but overall should be -EV,
because betting smaller OTT you are betting less bluff combos OTT, which should lead to overall -EV of your whole range.I think by betting small OTT, you let his bluffcatchers  gain by getting to SD more often 
and his folding  OTT range will be realizing equitysince your betting freq.% will be smaller and he will have bluffing opportunities.Obvious upside is you get better price for your bluffs and get the same value from your value range, given villain has relatively low equity vs your value range (unlikely to outdraw you).
If you provide some math behind your thoughts will be best :)
Probably time invested in CREV to model this and get answer would be better than trying to pull some random thoughts I can't hardly explain in English.
I hope it makes some sense.Hand3.Yeah, def agree for 2vs3 street depending on board structure, just your turn shove was like a 40% overbet (as I can recall), so I think you should make a bigger XR OTF.

solid vid, 

hand1 since you don't input your range PF, it's hard to determine continuing ranges, but 78s is pritty borderline, do you prefer calling 88o instead 87s and why ?

Also your river call is 100% exploitative given ranges and blockers, and I think you should place some weight on his bluffing frequencies :).

hand 2: nice thought process, tho i think you're overbluffing a lot with AQ/KQ all combos (do you call all KQo combos PF?) even if you add Tx - which wouldn't be smart I think given that you have almost PSB left OTR + he can still X B some weak Jxss (tho for the most part your range assumptions seems right, tho I think your turn sizing is incongruent with your assumptions and you should be more polarized with your betting imo).

hand 3 enjoyed A5ss vs AJss XR :)

It will be interesting to hear your thoughts about constructinga a XR range for 2 streets vs 3 streets.

Given PSR in hand1 after XR he's left under PSB vs hand3 he still can leverage turn+river for around 1/2 PSB, given OTT you're left with a bit under 1.5PSB (and prob should size it smaller to get it to 1.5).

So I like/agree with your thoughts about XR 2 streets, but I think we need a bit more agile range (maybe adding few bdf that would otherwise always cbet, maybe add very few AT combos or 7x,4x)

Just throwing some random shit here, haven't really thought about it but hoping for a fruitful discussion

Nice stuff, man ! I have a question regarding your previous videos too. What do you think about checking all of our range in 3bet pots OOP, same as the single raised pots ? Is it make sense for balancing purposes to you ? Or maybe in 3bet pots we are always with the strongest range, and strongest range do the betting ? 

In the TT hand, what range does he puts you on when you bet this  flop vs 2 players and check the turn when another fd hit ? I think on this kind of flop and turn we will have a lot of draws that we want to barrel and we need a good portion of value hands to balance. If he is thinking, he should check back alot the turn, because we rarely check/fold, mostly c/c or c/r, this is a great turn card to barrel with our backdoor flushdraws when we bet the flop. I think the most profitable line is to bet turn and check the river, regarding ranges and the flop texture.

P.S. For a better analysis of the hand, we have to use software like CRev calculator, make a tree and compare the EV of checking vs the EV of betting turn taking into account a different river scenarios.