matlittle

Interesting turn XR here from Linus after facing a 1/4 pot turn delayed cbet. Do you think he puts him on a hand like TT, 99 and just wants to make him fold? Is there some kind of merged aspiration, getting those hand types to fold whilst being called by A high draws? Or is it just street poker?

I wondered the same, seems like the threshold is around JX or A9 according to my sim

One last note JTo was close to a pure check back on the turn for this custom Ai, but J9o is barreling off, so it can't be too bad.

Interesting that the J9 bets and the JT checks here. I guess the JT folds more equity if it gets raised, plus it blocks more of the folding hands from SB like AT, JT, TT

Yes I'm keen to know this too. I 3bet linear vs recs, with strong hands only, but I can never work out the borderline for which hands are strong enough to 3bet, so I end up with a low 3bet percentage. Could you give some of the threshold hands here for which you would 3bet vs a rec?

Another mergey play the solver made was with the 33 in your hand on the A82, it was almost pure overbetting turn, expecting BB to fold some top pair, all naked pairs worse than top pair, whilst calling some hands the 33 beats like KX flush draws. Do you think that 33 is better in reality as a check due to BB likely over-calling (e.g. QX, 8X)?

Really interesting analysis on this hand here where you point out how easy the turn defence is for BB facing the overbet. I will try to find more spots like this when analysing hands. Is this spot easy to defend because:
1. A high board brings many top pairs for BB
2. 2 tone turn brings many nut draws
So then the BB can just fold naked pairs that are 2nd pair or worse?
I'm looking at a 3-broadway board of KcQdTd6c and again it's pretty easy for BB to defend on. A meaty board with lots of pairs and high equity draws for BB. Interestingly the solver will still bet some mergey hands on the turn, expecting BB to fold hands like naked top pair. Do you think this is unrealistic in reality and people will call too much of this type of hand?

Its also worth mentioning that if BB turns out to be a fish rather than fishreg, you should not even consider folding. Recreational players will over-bluff this line by a MASSIVE amount. I did some research on this exact line and the results were pretty mind blowing.

This hand was pretty interesting. You were surprised that BB didn't get to range bet the turn after raising the flop. In my sim, SB actually has a small donking frequency here (although we have different preflop ranges of course). I think that the big raise size causes BB to be flush-draw heavy in its bluffs, but also makes SB call mainly the stronger draws too, so that the spade turn brings a lot of flushes for SB too. SB also didn't have to defend flop especially light given the big raise size too. So on the turn BOTH players should have pretty strong ranges here, with both having similar amounts of flushes.

Hey Pedro, nice video! As I get more into studying bluffing frequencies in Hand2Note, do you have any tips for how to group scenarios together in the most efficient way, given that there are so many different potential scenarios to study?

For this 3BP SB vs BB you went for a pot probe size. Are you just playing one probe sizing here of pot? The solver is more-or-less indifferent here between this sizing and a 50% sizing (which allows it to bet more middling pairs). What is it about the pot sizing that you like better?

Interesting to hear that you are cbetting a 233% sizing here. I expected it to be so low of a frequency of cbetting at that sizing that your EV would be low, but it's in fact not. Which other boards are you using this size for here? Do you use this size in any positions other than BTN?

Glad to see you are back here making videos!
Here at ~13.40 you talked about nodelocking turns and rivers to encapsulate player pool tendencies, in order to extrapolate back to the flop strategy.

Can you tell me how you did that? Did you go through every combination of turn and river card and nodelock them one by one, or is there an easy way to do it?

Thanks, will try setting a timer after I first feel the signs of tilt so that I force myself to check in with how I am doing

I saw you went with the large 10BB 3bet on the BTN here and its what the GTOWizard sims show also. Any idea why the 3bet sizing is so large? How do you think people react to such a large sizing compared to how they should respond?

Did you put in a lot of extra study specific to ante games in order to play in them, or did you just apply these broad heuristics to what you already knew from non-ante games and were ready to go?

What did you make of the ISO size here? Do you think this is their standard ISO sizing? If not, then how will your respond differently?

Another thing I found interesting and wanted to ask about was when you said that its ok to be angry in the moment as long as you are able to re-focus and get back to playing well. My issue is that sometimes I am able to get back to playing well, yet other times I am not. Usually if bad luck persists then things get worse and if I get good luck then it can be forgotten. How can we know in the moment if we are going to be able to go on playing well?

Hello Jan,

Solid advice throughout and really useful video! Fortunately I have a high enough winrate in my games that I have not had many downswings recently. The upsides of that are obvious, but the downside is that I am out of practise when it comes to dealing with downswings and find them to be very tilting. Do you have any advice for that? Feels like I got used to winning so often and perhaps feel entitled now also.

Hi Gary, nice video as usual!

I'm interested to ask about this hand where you 3x the BTN with KK because the fish is in the SB. I understand the benefits of the larger open vs the fish, but don't you also lose EV from the reg, because they will 3bet you less often? If you opened to your regular size, often the SB calls and the reg in BB squeezes light, which adds a bunch to your EV. If I am the reg in the BB my 3bet percentage there vs your 3x would be super low regardless of what the fish does and I will fold a bunch of the weaker calling hands too.

Do you think the benefits outweight the costs here?

FWIW there are some raises going on in these kind of textures in HUNL so I don't think this play is that weird in general.

In my sim, there appears to be no raising at all. I am using standard GTOWizard HU 3BP ranges. The sim also assumes one cbet sizing. Did you mean that on this exact board there should be raises, or on board textures similar to this there can be raising ranges for IP?

thinks that he will accomplish a lot more by deviating and forcing Linus into unknown parts of the game tree rather than just try to play close to equilibrium.

Both players seemed to go off-piste a number of times in this match so its definitely a possibility. Is this becoming a more common theme for these high stakes HU matches these days; to use alternative strategies to what the solver would play in order to take your opponent to a scenario you have studied and they haven't?

Isn't 2E b50 here? linus will have like 32k left and the pot will be 66k on the river.

Yes you are right, I forgot to change my sim from 100bb stacks starting the hand I guess. They are a bit deeper here, thanks for pointing out my mistake!

This hand was another 3BP where Linus cbet the flop and asianflushie raised on a board where they shouldn't really have raises. Linus 3bet the flop, then it checked down. What do you think each player was trying to achieve with their respective flop raises here?

Another theory I have, as opposed to asianflushie trying to exploit Linus here, is that asianflushie either:
1. Assumes Linus has 2 cbet sizes here, thus allowing them to have a flop raising range as SB, or;
2. Uses sims that have 2 or more cbet sizes, which gives them the impression that they can have a raising range in these spots.

For this 4BP you were surprised to see the 1/2 pot turn cbet. I checked it in the solver and it also likes the 1/2 pot. I changed the 3h for 3s and it goes to a 2e sizing (approx 1/3 pot) instead. So perhaps the 2-flush turns make the BTN size up slightly given that they are more dynamic?

I wanted to ask about this hand; given that the solver plays no raising range here this flop raise from asianflushie is quite unconventional as you pointed out. What is the best way to exploit someone who raises on this type of board where they shouldn't? Is the main exploit to barrel them more often when they don't raise, because their calling range is more capped than it should be?

For moving up stakes I have seen other people recommending setting aside a small number of buy ins for your higher stake, e.g. 10, and then using that as a shot to move up. If you survive then you stay there, if not you chalk it off and keep grinding until you are comfortable trying again. What do you think of this idea? Do you think there are any merits to this approach instead of just mixing in the higher stake with your current stake until you are comfortable moving up completely?

What did you make of the turn probe? Seems like this hand is way too loose to probe into 3 people, 1 of which is uncapped? Luke has 2 lots of flush draws, plus a bunch of straight draws.

Good video! Definitely a worthwhile area of study, especially given that most players are over folding to the raise and under 3betting. Look forward to some more BvB content!

This turn bet size in SRP SB vs BB was a good sizing. If we assume both players use 1 turn sizing here, both should pick an overbet of some sort. If the SB is very polar and has a bunch of AX and 2nd pair in it's range, then BB is only incentivised to bet turn with 2 pair+, AT, or A7+ with a flush draw.

This 4bet pot was pretty interesting. You said that the SB shouldn't shove the turn, but instead should play a 2e sizing. If you look at the solvers play here, it uses the shove rather than the 2e. Even if you give it both options on the turn, it almost exclusively uses the shove option. The reason is because of the flop cbetting range - it is a very low frequency cbet spot where SB is mainly interested in cbetting the lowest most vulnerable pocket pairs, TT and JJ. Those hands are the ones that are interested in shoving the turn given that they are the most vulnerable value hands and want to get their value in 2 streets. Obviously the A5 combo is wild but the turn bet sizing is fine.

Interestingly we saw both players are probably opening any 2 from the BTN. Do you think that they think their opponent is making a preflop mistake which allows them to do so, e.g. folding too much or 3betting too little, or do you think they both assume they have a postflop edge vs their opponent?