One thing is for sure and that is you DEFINITELY² don't reraise preflop vs an unkonwn IP 4b from OOP 250BB deep with AKo
Thats very likely a huge blunder and money burner
As played I think flop is fine but the turnbet I feel is way too big and has no place considering the ranges that are playing against each other here..
You really just hope he has QQ and puts you on a picked up flushdraw on the turn
On the river your only hope is he turns QQ into a bluff or is a huge spot and now somehow bluffs a busted turned flushdraw...
maybe you won, who knows but I think pre is the real lesson here and the turn is too big too
Nov. 5, 2017 | 2:40 p.m.
So, Solver does bet here, but choses a smaller sizing and plays a mixed strategy of bet and check on this board with all its Jacks, Overpairs and Gutshots (QT) leaning towards betting everything that has a backdoorflushdraw or blocks the backdoornuts
After betting small on the flop it then wants to bet small again on the turn with
and checking only JJ and 88
Overall it's always gonna be a tricky spot when gettting raised anywhere in the hand.
Overall I feel the hand is played fine
Maybe there is something to be learned about the fact that the solvers rather "blockbet for information" (highly inaccurate statement) even with AJ and go from there and only "induce" w the absolute nuts
Nov. 5, 2017 | 2:19 p.m.
So a solver wants to definitely check your hand on the flop
from the turn onwards betting your size but maximally POT on the river is ok with ~20%ish frequency..
You definitely can't do this all the time "because you block the A hi NF"
Nov. 4, 2017 | 2:10 p.m.
Hey, I thought about two concepts for applying overbetting and "finding spots" recently and I would like to discuss them...
The first approach that I also feel is the one that any solver would take is sort of
- "overbetting when it is dictated by position, board structure and the subsequent strength of both players ranges"...
What you find for example in Pokersnowie is that on certain boards in a certain spot his recommended betsize for the entire range would be 2xPOT which it then does with a polarized range and then he checks a lot of the hands that any "normal regular" on typical stakes would usually bet 1/3 to 3/4.
- The 2nd approach, that I feel is most usually used by the "average reg" is the sort of approach where your own hand gives you
a) an information advantage and/or
b) a strong incentive to overbet the pot for certain
which CAN but usually IMO doesn't overlap with a general analysis of the board structure / equity distribution of the ranges.
So an example for 1 (in Pokersnowie) would be:
UTG open 1/2 POT BB flats
Flop: AK6 rainbow
Snowies proposed betsize is now 2x POT and he does it 100% with:
AA, KK, 66, AK, 55, QJo, QJs, QTs, JTs, A6s
and then >70% with: 77, 88
and checks: A2-AQ, any K, TT-QQ
whereas "general population" would probably
with any A, some Kx, Gutshotdraws etc.
A sort of typical example for 2 is lets say:
HERO Bu opens 33, BB calls
FLOP: T37 rainbow
check, bet 1/2 POT, call
check, bet 1/2 POT, call
check, Hero now "overbets because BB can never have TT, some draws bust, he can herocall with Tx and because he is greedy with quads" whereas a solver (Snowie again) plays 1/2 Pot river w Tx, 7x, 3x, JJ-AA and some bluffs simply because the range distribution dictates a 1/2 POT betsize.
Sometimes on the felt I am torn apart between these two concepts since in general I feeld concept 2 is largely overused by most players and therefore allows for a ton of betsize-based hand reading...
it is usually much harder to be alert and clairvoyant enough to always be spotting spots for hard polarization as seen in example 1 and then execute with the right amount of especially air (because the correct amount of air is usually not just the most obvious combodraw/blocker etc.)
But I can obviously also see the upside of simply looking at the information advantage of your own hand (e.g.: unbeatable) and then pound on a likely weakness of villain of calling too much bc of herocall tendency or whatever.
Soo... what is your approach? I at least feel I way too often use my cards to determine wether or not I want to overbet instead of the positions and the board texture.
Oct. 27, 2017 | 12:23 p.m.
UTG: $100.00 (Hero)
Oct. 24, 2017 | 11:40 a.m.
All depends on assumptions,...
maybe he is a sicko and is shoving K of club blockers ;)...
He could be "whatever" and shove AT, TT, 99, A6 that he for some reason "slowplayed"...
overall after we slowplay and super underrep our hand maybe we should just reraise on the turn
Oct. 22, 2017 | 10:10 p.m.
DEFinitely at least 1/3rd this flop
dont reverse lvl yourself,
there are spots to check topset (A72r after sqz vs 2 opponents etc.) but not this one
turn is fine but could be bigger I guess and the reason to reraise is probably actually to not kill your action vs him thinking that his 66 is no good anymore bc the flush/straight comes in etc.
His range will probably be 78, 66 and then combo/picked up flushdraws
I guess you post the hand bc you lost to a flush ;)...
and tbh there is a point bc with the flush coming he probably won't shove 66 anymore
The real mistake is the flop
Oct. 22, 2017 | 6:09 p.m.
Preflop can be a mix of reraising and calling
turn is actually more often a check for overall range "stabilization" (according to snowie)
bet is obv fine though
but then it's a crying call, not that +EV but probably > fold
Oct. 20, 2017 | 1:58 p.m.
#2 for stabbetting this flop
as played in theory it is a check/call, yes
probably a highly volatile spot and mb you can flip a coin on the river
if stab gets called flop check or stabbet diamonds again and vbet half on blanks
Oct. 20, 2017 | 1:42 p.m.
I am looking into buying a new monitor.
I usually only 3 table so need nothing fancy!
Which ones are you using and you can recommend?
I read a lot about "eye care" monitors that are flicker free and have built in blue light reduction etc.
As far as resolution goes I want something that fits up to 4 tables without overlapping and any resizing.
Right now I am looking into these ones:
I am totally unsure wether or not I should take 24" or 27" or even bigger
I have my laptop as machine attached and a monitor there too
Oct. 19, 2017 | 4:22 p.m.
You should sort of "overall" decide wether or not you want to have a donkbetting range or not IN GENERAL.
It was very en vogue for some time but, if you want to play very good with your range in general it is a lot harder to do that when you also have donks and now need to have draws and weaker hands in your donking range etc. pp.
OVERALL "most" "good" players play a 100% check game and this is not a bad spot to do this also, you have all options in the world after seing the action.
as played turn is obv standard
for the river: he will never have flushes that "he can call" because he bets them ott for the most part
You cant really have a lot of bluffs but you have a good hand and villain might be bad enough to call with an ace or a 6, call a bad flush (sometimes) etc.
but in general check or bet ~2 PS instead of allin is also ok
Oct. 19, 2017 | 2:56 p.m.
Pokersnowie says well played
On the flop snowie prefers a 25% potsize bet for 100% frq
For your size its a mix of check and bet of 50/50
turn is again a mix of 2nd barrel and c/c for 1/2 PSbet
and as played its a fold OTR...
obviously these are its own assumptions of a very balanced BU player who plays at equilibrium but I doubt that this player is more agressive than optimal