thecheshire

I got (and could continue getting if I kept playing) 100% plus rakeback playing on Run it Once poker over a 500k+ hand sample ;)

Check out RIO people!

Really appreciated the overall approach and video. I am an old hand from the way back days. Was interesting to hear the new takes/spins on things. Though some things/many things never change for sure xD Loved the novel bits about consistency, thats great advice and hot take

The QTs timeout was one kind of unfortunate. The un-noticed KK time out pre as pulling up a HH at 16:12 is "better"

Great video

The other strategy here is to have a HUD which has the filters on and one which does not - I only ever really use it when deep in something and playing short handed/specifically a 6m tourney. I don't think you lose much by setting your main HUD to exclude <8h play for when 8+ players and showing stats for all hands when <8 players and only filtering out FR hands when it really matters and you may have a sample by just switching your HUD to a specific short handed version of your regular HUD

I like a fold there over agressive action regardless, but if we were to 3b is a mid sized 3b committing btn if he wants to continue but giving us room to fold vs a cold 4b from bb not much preferable to shoving? I doubt btn's gii range is all too elastic there to whether we shove or bomb 3b him; which would appear to make it strictly better than shoving unless we think their ranges are expanding to the non-shove 3b. I just wouldnt think you're getting cold 4b that light anyway or gaining much extra FE by shoving over raising.

Loving the video and at the 29 minute mark atm. You're talking about the self-aggrandizement aspent of the game (which, admittedly, I need to work on). That said, and excuse me if you cover it later, as far as the updating aspect goes//that making you make possibly tighter or less spewy looking plays, I actually only let people sweat me/update frequently when I feel im going to be more prone to making overly agressive spewy plays (most often in SSMTTs where im apt to out-level myself//just be a spazz where they really aren't 4betting light). I guess that feeds back into the non-standard styles segment you had at the start...but for someone w/ that set of leaks updating etc can keep you in line while still making the marginally +EV agro plays for sure.

Regarding pocket 2s hand at 39 minute mark; do you think there is any merit to a 13.5k 3b/ fold to bb, call btn 4b rip? It's a size he's not really going to want to flat and it looks very strong -- esp given this is the villain w/ the weird raise sizings and the MR utg he r/f to our UTG+1 rip (so loose assumption that his m/r are weaker)

Is anyone else getting "Error Loading Media: File could not be played" on this?? 

I think the first line of your reply is why it's a shove...b/c even IF he does as you think is bad and plays QJ by leading a third, is the person who leads that size really calling a shove? given the reasoning behind the betsize.  I'm fairly sure the answer is no now.

"If he bet/f QJ is a big leak on his strategy. Did you pick anything on his sizing OTR ? "

Disagree w/ that first part, imo people simply aren't bluffing this river often enough to make that a b/c, and people are checking back their entire calling range that you'd beat and betting only hands that you lose to or bluffs, so unless your opponent is double floating air IP then bluffing river QJ is a b/f > x/f > x/c imo...until he bets river my AK was for value//ahead of his leading range

and I dont have all that many SD floats that dont hit or have a pair, Backdoor FDs there are only a few select combos of that go w/ suited SDs and AK.

And yeah, the third pot sizing looked like he's doing what I described above 

"He's not straight bluffing that river ever w/ me flatting IP, since my range is heavily weighted towards hands that are calling him...since my range is so weighted his b/c value range isn't just going to bet small, it's a terrible spot to induce and value cuts him, therefore in my mind this just screams a rivered J (of which there are a LOT of combos as compared to any other hand which may take this line)"

Trying to get the vast majority of my weak calling range to call another bet w/ the third pot bet.  It doesn't look like a great spot to be inducing, and if I called two streets I clearly have some piece of this, so even if you have TT or 88 or AT or AJ he should be betting out a bigger % of pot as described.  Third pot looks like thin, weak capped value, and I don't think it's ever strong value hands like the previously listed.

Nope doesn't sound harsh at all :) It's a great critique and, yeah, I do need more math in my posts, although w/ this one I guess I thought it was less needed since combo math can be done roughly/quickly in one's head...but yeah it would make a clearer post.

Fwiw, and its an excuse, pretty sure there was a LP player not dealt in and I thought I was more MP, didn't notice until I posted the hand.  That said, I still probably flat AK ~ half the time there depending on specific stack setups etc...idk, I flat AK a lot IP, it plays so damn well post vs ppls perception of your range.

Imo he is cbetting a range that is nearly all his hands that aren't now just total undercards to the board or K7s crap (if, for some reason that time he was opening very light).  He's also 2barelling nearly his entire cbet range, although may start x/c 66-99, and I can kinda rule out most 88, 8T, TT b/c of timing tell/betsizing, wasn't a spot where this player would take this line with hands that crush the board leaving me w/o hands to call.

Vs a competent player cbetting imo the AK is still a call, as we can fold to river bets (as was the plan before his line got weird) since he is simply just never ever straight bluffing river imo, and we are good well more than half the time (and that half the time we almost always get to SD unless he hits river).  I like you're reasoning why not, and I think vs other players who ive flatted AK IP w/ maybe i should be taking a line like you suggest instead....vs a competent non-crusher MSMTT reg in this setup Im not quite convinced, although think it's pretty close.

Hes not folding straights on river imo, but he is folding any J except maybe AJ, but even that may fold, and his 8x has to fold if he for some reason was betting there (I doubt it though).  The thing I run into is, and what I was trying to get at, is his nutted value isn't playing his hand this way (I don't believe, was one of the questions in the OP, not sure if that's right, but I think it is).  He's not straight bluffing that river ever w/ me flatting IP, since my range is heavily weighted towards hands that are calling him...since my range is so weighted his b/c value range isn't just going to bet small, it's a terrible spot to induce and value cuts him, therefore in my mind this just screams a rivered J (of which there are a LOT of combos as compared to any other hand which may take this line)

EDIT: Just to make it clear since Im a rambling poster, imo any hand hes betting here is > AK, may be sometime turned into a bluff, but I dont think hes turning his overcards that were two barells into a bluff on this river.

 We don't have any serious river bluff-raising dynamic in our history is worth noting.   imo he folds a jack to a river shove when I made the play, since when I shove I have 88 or Tx (not even a straight usually) pretty much, and he's more than competent enough to know my flat IP, flat IP, shove over river lead range is crazy strong making any J worse than AJ a complete bluffcatch. 

Fwiw I got a slight tank-fold, I sorta presume it was a J, but that's only consequential in that it tells us he can b/f a hand like that on the river.  Im more worried if it's at all possible Im misreading his hand ranges drastically.

Loved the feedback Raphael, I may slightly disagree over this specific spot about the turn play, but you touched on a bunch of stuff that is endemic to my game that needs work clearly.  Time to study :)

Agree w/ Raphael, also, as far as choosing a hand to 4b/fold here TT is pretty much the worst, b/c we have amazing value from flatting and playing post to his kinda small for 40bb deep 2.5x 3b and TT has no card removal value if we are 4b/folding it, better to do this w/ KQo unless you have a crazy dynamic w/ a guy and youre getting it in against some crazy wide 5b range.

I see the argument for a 3b pre here, I often do, gameflow, stack setups and the fact that he's not calling me w/ worse Ax as often as bad players and paying me off post makes me like a flat better here.  My overall gameplan probably has a higher flatting rate w/ 'premiums' than standard midstake reg in certain spots.

If one is flatting AK pre vs a reg who cbets a fair amount flop is a must call IP...his range hits that rarely enough and he's going to be cbetting that board 80% or more and expect me to be floating him a fair amount as well.

If that is right he's 2barrelling me a ton here, and his turn cbet stat in my large(ish), <1k hands, had him turn cbetting a fair amount.  That said, I do not expect a river bluff from him into me as my range is fairly uncapped and its not a good 3barrell board OOP, whereas his is going to be heavily tilted towards broadways and 1p type hands as opposed to tens w/ that bet sizing (slightly large flop and turn gets his stack in by river easily).  

I called turn w/ intention of folding to river bets on most any river and betsize.   There are a crapton more combos of broadways cbetting twice than Tx in his range...esp w/ only two tens left (8T, 9T, JT, QTs, KTs, AT), that makes turn a call as im good more than 50% of the time and he's betting less than half pot.

The most interesting part imo still is the river, operating on the above hand reading he still has very few Tx's, some 8x, definitely a lot of Jx, he should be expecting me to have 66+, Tx, 78s,89s, and maybe some FD's...but he should know better than to think i have a FD no pair there.  So when he leads river small it screams, call me 8, PP or worse J.  B/c Im fairly sure hes not bluff betting this ever, and our range is entirely value hands except for the odd AK value float (as our other floats fold turn a lot) he should expect our J calling range (which is small) to be calling big bets, Tx to be raising and the vast majority of our range, which is now an underpair to J, probably has to fold that river to a bet over half pot (they probably should fold anyway, but there's his reasoning behind the small bet I'd guess).

That last part is super speculative, and I couldnt figure whether hed go 1/2, 1/2, 1/3rd with a hand like 88, TT, JJ or AJ, I dont really think he would...I elected to shove in game fwiw, but if his range for that line is entirely those hands its a terribad shove, that said Im fairly certain thats not the case.

Looks like you should be IP here as UTG opener and bb caller, no?

250 in the pot and ~1350 behind on dry board vs fish, when checked to on flop there should be a bet as he's calling you w/ any piece on that board, so extract value, I think a lot of his range will call 80-95 into 250 to make a 410 pot on turn that you  can get over half pot that he may call with a vast majority of his flop calling range that you beat.

Then either thin river value or check behind.  That said, as played he is never raising river as a bluff there w/o  a lot of history imo....and if he is kudos to him, he's a sicko.

If you can comfortably beat the micros at those stakes the b55 and 11c/22c should be good learning/proving grounds for you where you are also probably +EV.  The latter two are more reg filled and play deep (but are cheaper than a SM entry) and you get to play deep in a slow structure vs regs and fish which is a good barometer of your game and helps you improve imo.

b55 is soft enough, esp on weekends, that your exploitative play vs fish you know so well will bring you far often enough I can't imagine a very +EV micro grinder is -EV in the b55.

That said, yes, the regs who play MSMTT/HSMTT BIs as their main game are that much better than the SSMTT regs, and they exploit bad/SSMTT regs very well by playing solid and owning them in spots where most SS/MSMTT bad regs are out of balance or are running silly bluffs or calling way too wide or folding too much etc.  You need to consider your whole range vs regs and come up with a solid default gameplan.  Imo watch some of the amazing vids here, im new to membership here but I've binge watched alot and these MTT vids far surpass the quality Ive seen on the site I used to have a membership on.  I just watched Sam Graffton's 22c vid series today and it was well worht the watch, I'd recommend it for your situation (and near everyones)

If you're mass tabling HEM is a must, Ive always used HEM so got HEM2, no idea really about functionality of PT4.  At this point imo SS is just overkill, its fun to use, but definitely not necessary and is too large a chunk of BR at micros, just use OPR and your 5 free searches.

Those 3+rs are an amazing starting spot, train one well for MTTs and have a lot of value, especially in off-peak hours (even though they load slowly).

Im new to RIO, and so don't have any immediate recomendations for 180 mans, although I think Sam Grafton's 22c vids are solid, and its a tournament that provides a lot of varying spots w/ an interesting mix of reg and fish play.

Ah fair enough, I think I just mis-interpreted you in video as advocating for a narrow band of BI's w/o further qualification.  Glad you agree at least partially on that as it's one of those things I thought I had applied well from my econ/stats background and yet may have screwed up in thinking it was a relatively simple lagrange max notion w/ BR as constraint.  

at the 13:00 mark with the discussion about the value of big stacks, so it is possible you continue on to cover my caveat in the remainder of the video, apologies if so.

A big stack being more able to collect bounties should be phrased in terms of the players position relative to the average stack and some small consideration to their position at their current table.  The reason for this is a big stack from 2nd to 1st in a 1k person tournament does not really increase your EV of future bounties, you have significant decreasing marginal returns to stack size increases the farther above average stacked you are! 

Also, keeping in mind that there is still some ICM pressure in that the bigger stacked you are the less adding chips to your stack will be valuable, and you should prefer not to, as say 10th/1000 really want to be getting it in w/ 11th/1000 in a close spot cEV, as the double isn't worth as much due to ICM, the KO is relatively small when compared to value of possible future KOs given your crushing big stack.

This means there is a dynamic equilibrium that pushes you towards having a strong preference for a stack that is somewhere well above average as compared to an average or below average stack, but only a weak preference for having a top 5% stack compared to a top 15% stack say.  

This changes a lot in PKOs, if big stacks have bigger bounties (as is the case a lot of the time) then having a huge stack is, I presume, always better no matter the size.

Ill watch the video next, however disagree w/ you gametheory.  You're sacraficing a lot of $EV by not factoring in the KO value.  Say its the first hand of a 20$ SKO, 3k starting, your 3k stack has a $ EV of 10$ in a vaccuum, doubling your stack will put your $EV at 19 or something most likely, KO is worth exactly 10$ EV, you get it instantly.  So if you're making an AI or F decision pre just run an equity calc and see which $EV is higher...which means using 3k chips as that is equivalent to 10$ EV, and actually, the larger your stack (if its very very large) the larger # of chips, slightly, that 10$ represents.

Largely agree w/ nogueira.  Based on your sample of him sounds like he's probably a one and done sorta guy too, which is why I like your flop lead, x/c turn, x/f most all rivers unless you think he's capable of value better worse, which I honestly can't speak to as it's something I'd get a feel for in-game and by scrolling through past hands.

This board does hit his perceived range a lot harder than yours, but it also hits w/ a lot of 1p type hands or p+gutterball hands that may get cautious on turns you're leading and either fold or raise (since this is one of those spots fish seem to relize youre on overs or just 'betting AK...b/c they always have AK').  That said, w/ those hands they bet turn a large % of the time b/c theyre 'protecting' vs overcards....why I like the x/c turn, keeps his range wide and you should expect worse to bet...then whether worse is betting rivers I honestly don't know w/o being at the table

I honestly don't know what to make of his river rip after turn bet sizing, although I'd think his flop nearly 3x but just shy raise vs your small cbet is less likely a draw than strength vs an in line player.  If he is raising a flush on flop I'd think he'd bet bigger on turn to set up under PSB river for value or bluff, so would agree with above posters he's probably trying to keep you in.

That said, I'm not so crazy about the OOP sizings this deep, but then again I'm predominantly a MSMTT player.  You're just giving him a great price to be flatting really wide IP vs you with a hand that wants to be getting value, but is only TPTK w/ a backdoor draw for 80+bb you dont exactly want a lot of heat later in the hand.  My bet sizing is going to be much closer to half pot on this flop (not over it, but defo not this small).  And pre 100bb deep I'd think 2.5x from MP is ideal, again, this deep you're just giving IP players and blinds crazy odds.

You sort of set up the answer by assuming that ROI scales to BI size to the AVROI remains constant (in order to underline the change in variation of outcomes I presume).  Which is fair considering the last sentence of my claim, although I should've stuck with the start of it concerning decreased P(<0) as compared to other EV maximizing BI schedules which would suggest higher BIs.  Regardless, if you keep avROI constant by adding lower ROI high BIs and higher ROI low BIs and then compare it to AVBI and AVROI then of course variation in the mixed lottery is higher with no EV gain.

Anyhow, when choosing a schedule our ROI for each BI doesn't scale so linearly and minimizing variation is not our only goal, we also want to max(EV) obv, and when BIs and AvROI don't scale linearly you can be sacraficing a huge amount of EV by not mixing, and it allows you to play higher BI games by mixing, b/c you are not rolled for those games.  So in your BRM there should be an acceptable RoR %, for X size BR (or not if you're on the professional side or nitty recreational side), although I think for most anyone there should be b/c you can move down instead of actually playing it out at higher BIs.  Then max(EV) within that.  Mixing will best accomplish this if your ROI doesnt scale, I posted a version of this below using 11$ and 55$ as the mix in for 5% of the games.  Notice the 6% increase in EV, large upside changes in the confidence intervals for relatively small downside risk.

I definitely phrased my argument poorly, but imo you captured a specific instance of when mixing is bad if you can find all the same games at AV ROI of the mix.  However the tournies ppl are usually mixing in are high BI majors that they have high ROIs in (like Mil, Biggers, Hotters, etc) and thus are probably closer to teh non-linear scaling of ROI that I described.  If you're considering adding in some random higher BI that your EV drops significantly in then yeah, obv increases your variance way to much to be justified.

EDIT:

For added fun, and this I think makes the argument for mixing more compelling, lets say that first set of charts I posted had a 45% ROI if the person wasn't mixing, then by playing a bunch of 50s and having to think about their game a lot more they had a nominal 5% ROI boost to 50% (so the second version of the charts.  Below are the statistics for 1k games of 10+1$ at 45% ROI (unimproved)
That is around a 20% increase from this version of the 11$ schedule to the mixed version! granted if your mixing in higher BIs more heavily the efficacy of this decreases, hence my phrasing about 'a proper mix'.  This clearly only works if thought through....but that effect is too substantial not to be notedLast EDIT, I promise, Also just fwiw

Only at the 4:00 mark, but you are explaining why you think its good to have a low variation in your ABI (a smaller distribtuion range btwn top and bottom BIs).

While it is correct that the higher BI tournies have a much more significant effect on your BR and will be a heavy determinant of your results that is not a reason to have a low variation in BIs.  In fact quite the opposite imo.

Firstly your ROI at SSMTTs should be much much higher than MS/HSMTTs, your variance may be higher due to larger fields, but your risk of ruin and P(ROI < 0%) is going to be much much smaller.  If you are a MSMTT player who wants to be playing some higher BIs, esp sunday majors, it makes a lot of sense to play a wide distribution of BIs, lowering downside variance of playing only higher BIs (which had a MUCH higher downside given decreased ROI).  Haven't run statistics on this, but I'm fairly sure having a wide distribution of BIs decreases overall variance rather significantly.

EDIT: Additionally, by playing a mix you also get to play vs tougher fields and improve. I've been b/e playing a mix of SS-HSMTTs over a year, but my SSMTT ROI has drastically and noticeably increased by playing HSMTTs, and playing SSMTTs occasionally reminds me of some thing i forgot fish are doing (if i forgot and was playing a fish in sunday mil)

W/ a 3bet of that sizing I think a call is pretty far superior to a 4b or fold pre-ante.  

There's 800 in the pot and 3400 in his stack, so you are calling 300 to potentially win 4200, which, at 14:1 is close to that 15:1 rule (granted I am not a huge fan of that rule of thumb tbh, esp IP as we are where his range is undefined but definitely wide in a polarized fashion weighted towards a large % of value or a seemingly more merged gii range at end of rebuy).

This also lets us construct a set of flatting hands to play IP depending on teh reg, my history vs CUat69 has him playing pretty solidly from the blinds iirc so my calling range probably isnt that wide, but I think in game its probably my 77-JJ and some JTs or KQs that I want to play IP and evaluate. Even though he's a solid player I think we print by calling and playing well/selectively agressively IP.