belrio42

Nice video. I like the thought process of exploiting recs to the maximum.

One thing I notice is that while you're giving your thoughts on some hand on one table, you tend to forget about the hand on the other table. For instance:

Around 23:00 hand on right hand side, where Hero iso A5c and triple barrel jams a bluff.

Around 31:30, there's a hand on the left hand table where Hero takes a weird line with 62s.

Hi Pete. Sorry for commenting on a very old video, but I really like your theory videos.

I agree with the goal of simplification. However, one of the comments early on has a mistake in the presentation / calculation.

When you say: a 0.23 bb / hand (or 23BB/100) EV loss is not that big of a deal. You mean 0.23 BB / 100 actually, not 23BB/100 -- the latter would be a very big loss.

I think this is just a mistake in presentation -- this is confirmed when you look at solver outputs.

Say in the K3s hand at around 21:00, the pot size is 1000 chips, and the EV loss in overbet with Q5s is 2 chips (or 0.2BB). You say that this is a mistake, correctly.

I think it's just a calculation error, so I thought it might be good to correct.

Hand at 11:32, top right, hero has JsTs facing a 3bet.

Calling 3bet against small size against rec seems good.

However, flop float against cbet with JTs only BDFD and BDSD seems quite loose. We have a lot of K-high, Q-high BDFDs, pairs, Ax.

colosk1 If I understand correctly, Pete doesn't recommend betting K2hh on the river. He points out that check has strictly higher EV than betting, and there's not sufficient evidence of overfolding by OOP.

The bet recommendation was for flop and turn.

Nice to see bouncing back.

You're right that one month is not much in the big scheme of things. But the human mind is not built to understand variance properly, so it's always nice to have good short-term results to improve mindset.

Tough to go through a downswing.

A comment about volume: I see from your past graphs that you often play at least 50k hands per month, but 70k seems a bit high?

It's only natural to play more when you're running bad -- at the end of the day, the way to get out of a slump is through volume. But perhaps it will be useful to reduce volume somewhat to counteract the natural human tendency to play more when "stuck".

One alternative is to study a bit more and play fewer tables to try to apply your training more deliberately. In a theoretical sense, when your hourly is lower (due to mental game, tilt, confidence whatever), it makes sense to focus on the longer-term aspects of the game. This is because of smaller opportunity costs of building up your skills. Also, studying always gives me more energy, increases freshness and improves motivation.

As they say in cricket: "form is temporary, class is permanent".

At around 42:00. The 4x overbet with T9s is interesting. I don't really use that sizing ever, so I don't know how it's supposed to work. I am not sure that T9s is a great bluff combo -- my reasoning is as follows; see if you agree with me.

What's your value range there? Sets and straights, right? That's about 9 combos of sets (66-44), somewhere between 2 to 4 combos of straights (assuming you 3bet 87s some of the time pre). So somewhere around 10-12 combos of value.

For bluffs, I would guess that you want to block the nuts (87s) when you make this huge overbet. So, I would prefer a hand like 98s and 97s instead of T9s. Also, you blocking JJ would be nice because top set is a good hand for IP to check back flop. So, J8s and J7s (if you have it pre) seem good candidates to bluff. (Not sure if these hands would overbet turn though, and not sure you wouldn't just use these hands as bluffcatchers OTR).

I guess you still have more bluffs to choose from because of the huge sizing. Maybe a hand like 76s/75s would work well because it blocks the nut straight and also blocks some two pairs like 65s and A5s which could check back flop.

In your experience, what are you getting called by?

In general, if you put in more than a third of your stack preflop, it's better to shove instead. You're usually getting the right price to call a shove in that case, so it's better to shove yourself. A 4bet to 280 would be 40% of your stack. I don't think it makes much sense to use such a size.

Also, with AKo you don't really want to take a flop. Better to shove and get the fold equity right there.

It's hard to assign hands to Villian when they min limp-reraise and then check-jam flop.

Why do you assign him 16% of hands, which take this line? I think that's extremely optimistic.

I would mostly give him a range of sets, overpairs, AK and FDs. Folding is fine against that range.

Loose is not necessarily better than tight. It's best to start with a TAG strategy and branch out from there. Good players are loose because they're good; they're not good because they're loose.

That said, you stats do look fairy nitty. Low VPIP/PFR. Pretty high WSD, low AF. Pretty high fold to 3-bet.

Loosening up preflop is easy, just find preflop ranges (RFI and 3-bet) and follow them. (Almost all preflop ranges you'll find are looser than your stats). You should try them out and see how you fare. Pokersnowie preflop advisor has lots of ranges.

As for not being a nit postflop, it's hard to give general advice. Post some hands for more concrete advice.

A simple tip is the following: look at your hand history and find a spot where you didn't get paid when you were value betting. Now think about whether you have any bluffs in that spot. If you don't have any bluffs, find a few hands to bluff with, and try it out the next time you are in that spot.

A pocket pair flops a set about 1 in 9 times. So, roughly they need 10-to-1 odds to set mine. With 100 BB stacks HU, that translates to them putting in 10BB preflop (to win potentially 100).

However, I do not think that the way the OP is phrased is a productive way of thinking about ranges. You make money in poker by doing two things: getting people to fold their equity, or making them put in money with the worst hand. Whether you get stacked in a particular scenario by a set is neither here nor there.

Assuming Villain always has an overpair (QQ+) (an assumption I don't agree with), KhJh has 17% equity, while AJs has 19% equity (heads up). Is this enough of a difference for you to fold one hand and call the other?

Your terminology is confusing. You called a preflop raise; so you can't c-bet flop, only Villain can c-bet. If you mean that you could lead flop, you should definitely not be leading this flop because it hits UTG's range quite well; X/C or X/R are both fine.

Turn is fine.

OTR, I think folding is fine. Against this big a size, you don't have to call much at all. You will have a fair bit of Kx in your range. You can call your Tx with better kickers. The FD is somewhat but not super relevant since Villain "should" not be triple barreling his FDs.

Hands in NLHE hit flops about 30-40% of the time. If you c-bet 1/4 pot, it only needs to work 20% of the time.

The key is to have a strong range preflop (which you have: ATs is in the top 6% of hands).

I'll just talk about hand 2.

A short stack on the BTN "should" be calling a lot of offsuit big card hands, because at this stack depth, the reverse implied odds are not really important. This range includes a lot of hands that you dominate, like JT, KT, QT, and random stuff like Axs. And passive fishes will call even wider than that.

So there's a lot of value in keeping the fish in the pot. Calling is therefore fine.

Squeezing cannot be bad either: the LAG player in UTG might find it hard to call your squeeze with the short stack behind, so you can often take down the pot immediately, or with a small c-bet OTF.

I don't understand the flop play. If you fold top pair second kicker here, what exactly are you calling?

Also, putting the Villain on an overpair is way too tight. People can go nuts with AK for sure. If you really think the Villains are so tight, just fold this hand preflop and call instead with pocket pairs.

I think you have to call flop at least. You are IP and have to put in 5 to win about 20 plus some implied odds, so you only need 25% or so equity. If BB keeps betting a brick turn and UTG calls again, then folding is reasonable.

If Villain has a 20% overall squeeze freq, I would say that Villain has something like a 10-11% squeezing range here vs an MP open and a fairly tight player flatting in CO. OOP vs this range, I'd 4-bet something like JJ+, AK, A5s, and then sometimes A4s-A2s, ATs, KTs, A9s something like that. I'd call with TT-55,AQs-AJs,KQs-KJs,QJs,JTs,T9s,AQo.

As his squeezing range becomes wider, you can 4-bet more of the suited Aces, suited broadway, maybe more AQo (good blockers) type of stuff. If he does not fold to 4-bet, you can 4-bet a more linear range rather than the more polarized one outlined above.

It's hard to give advice because it's not clear what your ranges are. You say "low frequency 4-bet" and "high frequency check", but it's not clear what hands you're 4-betting pre and betting on the flop.

I would just fold pre. If I 4-bet, then I'd check/call flop. There's no value in betting with this hand.

River, you should just give up. In general, triple barreling with FDs isn't a good idea even vs regs, and a fish is mostly not going to fold enough here to make it worthwhile, given that all the draws missed (except 43s, which you probably don't even have in your preflop range -- I tend to limp behind with such hands instead of raising).

For advice as to how to think about these kinds of spots in general, the main idea is that you should think about your range, not just your hand. You will have a lot of suited connected stuff without a heart, and hands like JT or AJ or AT without a heart. Bluff with those hands first, instead of using this hand. You can also use a hand like A4s because it blocks the straight (it's not unheard of for fish to take this line with 43s).

Preflop is kind of marginal, but I think it's fine to call the 3-bet.

I think you should probably bet flop. When Villain checks on an Ace-high monotone flop in a 3-bet pot, he often has some kind of SDV. Your 6 is mostly not relevant for SDV, so it's good to turn it into a bluff.

I'm not sure betting turn makes a lot of sense. when action goes check/check flop, check turn. Villain likely has some kind of weak Ax, Qx or something like KK or JJ-99 with a club. I think you're not going to get many folds here, so you have to follow through on the river. That said, your SDV is likely even more worthless now, so I think it's good to turn this hand into a bluff. You don't block stuff like JJ-99 which will likely take this line. I think this hand is a better bluff candidate than KJ or JT, for example.

I do try to factor timing tells into my analysis. But they're often hard to apply.

The problem with tells is that one can justify any decision by saying that "I had a tell so I did X". Like all tells, one should tend to use timing tells to make marginal decisions. I think here QQ is too high up in our range to be considered a "marginal" call.

FWIW, I have run into extremely tight players who bet a ridiculous amount on flop/turn with AA, trying to stack overpairs here.

That said, I think that the way to use reads is to make decisions on the margin. Do you 4-bet KK preflop (I'm not familiar with 8-handed ranges)? If so, QQ is the best hand you can have here, so it's not a close decision to call here. It's dangerous to make some very out of line play based on your reads. Your reads can be wrong.

I'd just call it off. Calling is probably a smaller mistake (if it is one) than folding would be.

To see how much equity you need, you just calculate: bet size / pot size after you call. So you need 2.73 / 15.24 or about 18% equity to call. So if Villain is bluffing 30%, you will profit.

Also, keep in mind that Villain could be value-betting worse. It's not inconceivable that Villain is raising a non-nut flush here. If there's even a small chance that he's value betting worse (in addition to the cases where he's bluffing), it's pretty much always profitable to call.

In general, when you have the second nut flush, you typically should not be looking to fold.

While MP might be overfolding to 3bets, K5s is way too loose to 3bet against an MP open. Think of it this way: even if he's opening something like 25% of hands in MP, that would correspond to roughly a "normal" CO open. Would you 3-bet K5s against a normal CO open?

In general, while it's ok to take Villain tendencies into account, don't go overboard with trying to exploit them. The way to use your reads is to decide between marginal decisions. So, suppose it's really close between 3betting and folding this hand, then you can 3bet based on Villain tendencies.

Anyway, postflop seems well played. You could even 3bet the river, but calling is probably better. Min-raises on the river are usually nutted and rarely complete air.

Keep in mind that this was a 4-way 3-bet pot. MP led into the preflop aggressor and two people who cold-called a 3-bet, on a fairly dry board which is great for the 3-bettor's range. So, it's hard for MP to be bluffing here. I doubt that he pots the turn with AQ/AJ, though I suppose it's possible.

That said, it's very hard to fold TPTK when the pot is already so big. I'd say that folding is probably a bigger mistake than calling, but not sure.

I would tend to check flop.

Rest of the hand seems ok. I would probably look to fold river, but calling is fine. I would maybe bet A9s, maybe K9s on the flop with small size, so those hands would make better calls on the river. Having an 8 in your hand is not great, but not super relevant either because 87 will likely bet turn. That said, it's hard to find better hands in your range to call. Maybe something like QTs could take this line.

Why do you think Villain doesn't have AQ in his range? Btw, Q9s and 98s also make straights by the river.

I would find it very hard to fold top set. If you fold KK, you're also folding TT, 55, KJ, KT, AK etc. That fact doesn't really matter if Villain is never bluffing here. But it's hard to say for sure that Villain is never bluffing. It's also not inconceivable that Villain could be value-betting a worse hand (like JT or KJ or TT or 55).

OP seems very vague. "Every pot gets 3bet" seems rather excessive. Are you sure it's not just confirmation bias?

Assuming you're not exaggerating, if every pot gets 3bet, it just means that the blinds are mostly irrelevant. So you just play super tight and wait for good hands (and 3bet/4bet yourself with a linear range). There are also many other strategies possible, depending on how comfortable you are postflop.

Can't really think of any videos off the top of my head, I'm afraid. You can look at the "bluffing" section in Learning Paths for some ideas.

Your range on the river is probably Tx, flushes and some trapped overpairs and some trapped boats. You probably raise most of the trips on the turn.

You can fold JJ-KK and all Tx (except AT). If you only call with flushes, boats and trips, you probably don't have enough calls. Since both As and Ts are on the board, it's not possible to have AT with a spade.

He's representing 33, T9 and flushes (not sure that he'd donk full pot on flop/turn with all FD). So he probably has something like 10-15 combos of value here. If he bluffs QJ with a spade, that's already 8 combos of bluffs. Other reasonable bluffs (like 87) are also easy to find.

Against LAG player, I would try to avoid overfolding. So I would call.

The question is way too vague and broad. Give some details of the sims you ran.

As for videos on solver outputs, Diego Ramirez's videos are good. For a broader selection, you can look at the videos here in the "Tools for Online Play" section and "GTO strategy" section.