AJL97's avatar


66 points

One of the reasons to XJ QQ-JJ is to deny equity (fds etc), and the risk of it going XX is a comprise for a higher EV strategy i.e. not leaking EV when checking. QQ-JJ just selected as they are easily value & suffer less from checkbacks then say TT. Part of your nutty hands are better XC as they retain their equity well, or don't need 'protection' and make your defence easier vs C/B/B lines.

Even against bad players you'll be leaking EV to them with a poor check range.

Sept. 6, 2018 | 5:32 p.m.

Obviously want some value too, QQ-JJ is what I mostly XJ. I'd have look at your checking ranges because from what you're saying atm you seem to defend them pretty poorly.

Sept. 6, 2018 | 7:47 a.m.

Jam it. If the SPR is any bigger can 20% turn.

Sept. 5, 2018 | 6:46 p.m.

Always checking, getting shoved on is awful with the equity we have vs range. Then we should just X jam.

Sept. 5, 2018 | 6:46 p.m.

Comment | AJL97 commented on 100NLz+ Study Partner

Got a couple questions, messaged you.

Aug. 4, 2018 | 10:54 p.m.

Post | AJL97 posted in NLHE: 100NLz+ Study Partner

Hey RIO,

I'm looking for 1-2 people who play at 100NL+ with fairly good poker knowledge and vision over the pools, who are willing to collaborate efforts with myself to essentially half the work that we would do individually. It would be beneficial to both of us as we can motivate each other, reduce the workload required to crush and hopefully move up the stakes quickly. I had thought I'd create a weekly plan for each of us to go off and complete, then reporting back to each other the results but we can discuss details later.

FWIW I've been at 100NLz last 2/3 months winning 3bb/100 (I'd argue my edge is much larger now) and looking to knockout tons of studying in the next 2 months, making some progress towards 500NLz.

Send me a pm if you have any interest whatsoever and I'll fill you in with more information.

Aug. 2, 2018 | 10:58 p.m.

Thanks for the lengthy reply. So I've looked into it and this seems to match with the PIO ouputs where the equity changes more drastically on J73m (B flop) than A96m (X flop) (albeit in two different lines, so OOP range is more condensed on J73m since they have a folding range otf, but equity still changes). Left is A96, right is J73.

So looking at the same flop lines as above, then OOP checking I've found something interesting which might give us a better explanation. IP can't value bet AK (non-spade) still (!!) and I think this is because IP folds 60% on A96m (TTsx is a fold and AQ at some frequency!), compared to 45% on J73m, which is crazy to me. I initially thought it folded 60% because on J73m OOP range had already been condensed otf so on A96m they had lots of junk still, but on A96 they fold A5s nearly always so this can't be the case. I just checked IP equity, on A96 on the turn after OOP checks IP has 62% whereas on J73m IP has only 43% equity, which may explain why OOP can overfold so drastically. And maybe the EV of betting flushes + leaving X range destroyed > protecting by XC/XR more flushes. So that kinda explains why we can't vbet AK OTT and maybe that's why we bet very little otf although it seems we should with such a range advantage, along with good equity retention as you said. Good luck making sense of that ramble haha, let me know if you have any thoughts on what I said :)

July 3, 2018 | 11:48 a.m.

Haha cheers!

July 3, 2018 | 11:19 a.m.

I was wondering if anyone can give me understanding why PIO plays so drastically different on two monotone boards. On A96m it checks range and on J73m it bets range, although the equities/nuts in ranges would suggest the other way. I think it is similar BTNvBB SRP, that A high monotone are bet less also. I've looked at how ranges condense on turns/rivers and they both seem to have the same proportion of flushes/sets/top pair calling turns/rivers.

I can't seem to get more than one image posted so I'll sum up what's in them and leave gyazo links too.
BTN 3Bs CO with a mix between linear/polar range.
Nut Range = Two Pair+
IP: 12.8% nuts (8.5 flushes)
OOP: 14.8% nuts (7 flushes)
IP at 52.5% equity advantage.

IP: 11.3% nuts (3 flushes)
OOP: 14.5% nuts (6 flushes)
IP at 55% equity advantage.

At first I thought it was the shift in flushes in both players ranges, however I gave IP on A96m a total of 9 flushes (making IP at 57.5% equity advantage and they are only betting 35% of the time). My only guess right now is that on J73m you can value bet AAsx-QQsx over three streets because they block the flushes that would call and also unblock JX, whereas on A96 we cannot value bet AK for three streets because it blocks worse calling hands i.e. AQ, and unblocks the top of their range i.e. flushes. Would be great just to start a discussion and hear some people's thoughts on the above.

edit: Might also be our bluffs have more equity on J73m and have more potential to turn into a nutted hand.

First Image

Second Image

Third Image

Fourth Image

Fifth Image

Sixth Image

June 29, 2018 | 8:43 a.m.

Fantastic post, some really good analysis in there, sick graphics and I enjoyed how you applied it to practical examples.

Last hand definitely want a big sizing, you have far more 2P/sets/better KX so villain is quite capped, you just want to get max value. If they're overfolding these weaker pairs (which I think you're alluding to?), your bluffs will profit so it's a win-win. Personally I like overbetting these X/X flops, bricky turns, mainly because of how capped villains are. I think PIO would agree with me, or would split its range, overbetting at signficant frequency and mixing 70% sizing for hands like KQ-KT.

June 6, 2018 | 10:31 a.m.

With your MDF calcs I think you're assuming villain has 0 equity when called which is incorrect.
Looking at your stuff quickly, you have way too many 4b/f (I use A5s-A2s only) and are flatting far too tight and using the wrong hands to do so. I'd fold AQo, but flat ATs/KJs/QJs+/QQ-88, others would advocate wider maybe with 77/JTs/T9s. It's also dependent on sizing/your edge/stack depth.

That should help get your % up, also remember other players can help defend that MDF by 4Bing or cold calling.

May 27, 2018 | 10:48 a.m.

Comment | AJL97 commented on Stars NL50 AQo 4bet pot

Pres fine for me, too weak to flat at 50NL imo and works nice as 4B w blockers and good eq vs JJ etc.

OTF, I'm interested in why everyone thinks the flop cbet is fine. Our range is AA/KK (possibly AKs) and SBs range has AK/AQs etc so to me it seems we want to be checking a lot here, as betting doesn't seem to benefit our range too much. AA will rarely get called over 2 streets due to blockers and betting w KK increases the proportion of AX in their range, and seems v thin bet anyways. I might be missing something, but what I've said seems logical to me.

April 2, 2018 | 7:29 p.m.

Yeah, I guess w fish involved it depends on what mistakes they're more likely to make, when we bet or check. I presume it's going to a calling mistake a majority of the time, so betting w fish involved would be better.

March 26, 2018 | 6:51 a.m.

Are we certain they're always raising these hands? Are we certain they are calling multiple streets with those hands? It's a bigger mistake assuming these answers are correct where they're not, than losing a bit of value in one hand. Even if I lose value in this specific hand, I gain value by knowing villains strategy for future hands.

From my experience, minR are often a mixed bag especially so in spots where you are uncapped and appear to be showing strength i.e. betting into 3 ppl.

March 26, 2018 | 6:50 a.m.

Haha yes, I'd call bottom set and prefer to 3B my higher sets here.

March 25, 2018 | 5:03 p.m.

As James says, theres also other reasons they may bet QQ-JJ. It's impossible to say if they will or won't bet those hands, but because you don't need it to happen that often I think calling is okay.

March 25, 2018 | 5:02 p.m.

I'd X turn sometimes.

River is close. I'm going to assume BTN is more likely to be a weaker player due to stack size + stats, meaning they call more JX + draws OTT, but more AX OTR. I feel either is okay, slightly leaning towards bluff catching as perhaps they value bet worse or overbluff.

March 25, 2018 | 1:12 p.m.

4B sizing is wayy too big, I go 2.2X IP.

Flop is interesting because your range is AA/KK, theres AK/QQ-JJ maybe a little wider idk. So I think checking quite a lot is fine, purely because it's hard to get called when you go B/B w AA and KK is thin already. Turn depends what your interpret their range is. Say they have 8 AK combos, they'll need 2 combos of QQ-JJ or bluffs so I think calling is just about fine even vs 10NLz pool.

March 25, 2018 | 1:08 p.m.

Looks fine to me, I like your flop + turn plays and your reasoning behind them.

PIOing this hand is going to be hard to so since it's so pool/player dependent especially when OB the turn. I'd fold river under the reason players underbluff these lines at 25Nlz (not sure vs OBs) and you have got better hands to call to see what kind of bluffing freq they are using. Would rather have a J as it blocks more value range, 9c is meh seems like it blocks bluffs + value.

March 25, 2018 | 12:57 p.m.

Hand History | AJL97 posted in NLHE: 50NLz Cbet Spot in MW Pot
Blinds: $0.25/$0.50 (6 Players) BN: $214.20
SB: $50.00
BB: $86.79
UTG: $84.28
MP: $266.39 (Hero)
CO: $22.36
Preflop ($0.75) Hero is MP with 4 4
UTG folds, Hero raises to $1.50, CO folds, BN calls $1.50, SB folds, BB calls $1.00
Flop ($4.75) 8 7 4
BB checks, Hero bets $3.47, BN raises to $7.00, BB folds, Hero calls $3.53
Turn ($18.75) 8 7 4 3
Hero checks, BN bets $8.00, Hero calls $8.00
River ($34.75) 8 7 4 3 6
Hero checks, BN checks
Final Pot MP wins and shows three of a kind, Fours.
MP wins $33.01
Rake is $1.74

March 25, 2018 | 12:50 p.m.

X range gets incredibly weak if we bet AQ and it's already a little thin on the flop given that it's MW. Being OOP means we need to check much more so this should always be Xd imo.

March 24, 2018 | 8:01 a.m.

I'm checking flop. Agree with what the others said above.

March 23, 2018 | 8:17 a.m.

Cheers, I appreciate it.

Nov. 2, 2017 | 7:33 a.m.

Those ranges were trying to replicate a possible 10NL regs ranges who aren't defending 3Bs wide from what I can remember. If you widen this range with AJo/KQo/A9s etc, equity doesn't drastically increase >53% where you can consider range betting without significant EV loss.

Oct. 29, 2017 | 11:56 a.m.

CO: JJ,TT,99,88,77,66,AQ,AJs,ATs,KQs,KJs,KTs,QJs,QTs,JTs,T9s
SB: AA,KK,QQ,JJ,TT,99,88,77,AK,AQ,AJs,ATs,A5s,A4s,A3s,A2s,KQs,KJs,KTs,QJs,QTs,JTs,T9s,98s,87s,76s
Even if you start widening CO range to AJo/KQo/SCs/A9s etc equity won't change enough to start cbetting range.

Oct. 29, 2017 | 9:58 a.m.

Not sure if you're impying we should bet range otf but I'd disagree. With my ranges (which likely mimic a slightly looser 10NL player), we are at an equity disadvantage with only 47% equity, not to mention being OOP so it's easier for CO to realise equity and harder for us to realise ours.

In my experience, Q high boards often better for the PFR caller when 3Bing out of the blinds so we want to be polarised with a larger sizing, rather than a small sizing with a weaker range OOP.

I take back what I said about turn, a bet does seem slightly better considering you can fold out floats + deny equity along with the fold equity we have vs TT/99.

Oct. 29, 2017 | 9:43 a.m.

I'd x flop. The turn bet has no purpose, this should be checked at a high frequency. You actually need 17% equity, you'll have 20% equity most hands with some implied odds and showdown value also, so yeah easy call

Oct. 28, 2017 | 4:58 p.m.

Doesn't mean I shouldn't be working towards a better strategy, even if it's variance it's still going to be a mediocre winrate at best.

Oct. 27, 2017 | 7:05 p.m.

Thanks guys I'll follow your advice. Totally with you depolarising, you get near nothing out of videos you if you are learning passively. I've scoured through most of the pro videos on here, any you specifically recommend for my level?

Oct. 26, 2017 | 5:05 p.m.

Any recommendations?

Oct. 25, 2017 | 11:28 p.m.

Load more
Runitonce.com uses cookies to give you the best experience. Learn more about our Cookie Policy