ursya

Absolute Gold Content.

A very mature and honest video. Thank you, Patrick. Somehow I cannot watch 30mins RIO videos in one sit, but this one I have and it starts me up. I have always underestimated scheduling as a thing, but you eventually motivated and convinced me. Gonna create it now.

First of all, great session! Thanks for the video.
I remember that in one of your videos and I questioned your reliance on RNG while making a decision. I think that a spot at 33:39 is a great example where your RNG approach hurts. Solver almost never (1%ish) wants to raise set of Ts there against 10% sizing. More conservative and logical approach in this hand that you actually mentioned ('I am very protected', 'should not raise that often') would be more +EV. Villian bets range on this board, and can turn any broadway card that they will play for stack with. But against a raise, what is left out of their range that would not go all in on the turn/river anyway? I just feel like the RNG approach adds a bit of bias that may lead to mistakes, and without it you would not even consider raising there.
Those are just my thoughts, I can be completely wrong :)

Thanks for the video! Definitely should learn from your thinking process structure.
But I am not sure if getting used to the RNG in decision making is a great tool. Of course it can't hurt while playing against GTO, but in the real game circumstances I think that it is much more reasonable to teach yourself to choose between bet/check line based on the exact player type (in the real game) or on the pool tendencies (while studying with GTO trainer). So while training with GTO, we may choose lines that are better against the pool in theoretical EV and then compare it with the actual GTO line.
What do you think about this training process?

Thanks for the recorded session and analysis. Nice format.
3:13 aren't we blocking the calling range of the opponent with our top two? I questioned your decision in my mind at first because of the sizing (I assumed we would have to bet lower size), but solver also wants to bet 75%/125% in this spot with KJ. It also does not really depend on the wetness of the board as it seems in other solves (KJ2r, KJ8r). I guess we just don't have many better hands than this on BB in this spot, so in order to balance our polarizing range, we actually have to bet value hands that block the calling range of preflop aggressor.
17:00hand it actually feels like a very underbluffing line from the opponent. seems like solver also does not want to call kings there that often, but most importantly, the explotaitive logic behind the fold is great. Nice laydown.
19:35 Really tight fold and I definitely would not be able to make it. Reasoning behind it makes sense though. Lekker!
25:00hand I guess that the mistake of checking A9o on the river does not only make us get less value from worse hands, but also places us into really weird spots, where opponent can bet big on the Q, when the board is already 3toflush. Block bet seems like a very right intuitive and theoretical option. The adjustment to the pool makes sense though.

Overall, I am actually not sure if we want to defend on BB that much on GG. Even if we are getting faced with a minraise only, it seems that the rake structure is too punishing for playing wide both on early positions and blinds. Should we actually?

Even for a such long ago posted video, the content is super valuable. I have been thinking about many things said in the video on my own before, but now I have more reasons and arguments for to follow them. Thanks!