it's in the limping range at 100% frequency instead of the open raise range. I didn't put square size proportional to weight so that's why it looks weird that a random combo is missing, but some other hands such as K6s are limping almost always as well, but are opens like 5% of the time hence the reason they are showed in this sim.
Oct. 20, 2019 | 2 p.m.
it's bvb and this is the sb opening range. it's mostly limping with 97s and only opening around 10-15% iirc.
Oct. 18, 2019 | 9:15 p.m.
Oct. 18, 2019 | 2:36 p.m.
great video again!
with regards to the K9 hand @9:46, you say that A9 should strongly consider folding on the river to our x jam because we very rarely have bluffs to this line, but what is our value region? sets are going to x raise on the flop close to 100% of the time, 88 should mix between 3bet/call pre and 52s is 4 combos which should also be a very high frequency flop x raise because it unblocks all pairs. 99 is probably pure 3bet pre, and even then is only one combo when he has his A9.
so if our value region is 44/33/88/52s then that is 16 combinations max. 44/33/52s are going to be close to pure x raises on the flop, so perhaps we have 1 or 2 combinations of these as slow plays and then 1.5x combos of 88 (if we mix between 3bet/call pre evenly.) so we may have 3 or 4 value combos, we only get to have maybe 2 bluffs. let's assume that you mix/call fold with your K9 combos on the flop, you get to the river with 4 combos when our opponent also holds 9x in his hand. we may again mix between x/bet small on the river, so we hit that 2 bluffing combo region on the nose with our K9. BUT that is assuming that we are slow playing flop with our value region at some none negligible frequency, that we are actually mixing call/fold on the flop and again mixing x/bet on the river. I think it's very easy to end up over-bluffing here and that villain has a fairly slam dunk call. and then we are gonna be bluffing with some other combos at > 0% frequency as well.
also, we can easily have A9 that mixed in to our smaller river lead sizing, so he chops with some of our value region. A9 can easily jam cos it only loses to 1 combos of AA and 1 combo of 99. and he will have to bet/call some 98 and some other Ax 1 pairs that went for the thin river raise, at low frequencies.
interesting hand. fwiw I wouldn't even consider folding A9 cos of how few combos, if any, beat this hand. 98 I would start to consider folding and would use either a player read (which isn't applicable in anonymous games obv) or an rng to influence my decision.
Sept. 12, 2019 | 1:56 p.m.
it's common on these boards where the run out has a made hand on the board. for example there is a 5 card straight in a 3bet pot where neither players has a ton of the straights (45678.) probably doesn't happen if you check down in a 3bp to the river, but when the pot is fairly large then you just jam as OOP and IP always calls cos you are chopping so often and you don't wanna check to IP to let him polarize and check back a bunch of chops and then bet 9x/chops at balanced frequencies. cos then your call becomes much worse as you lose 2/3 of the time, or whatever it is based on pot odds/bluffing frequencies and the other 1/3 you chop or win with whatever 9x you have.
Sept. 10, 2019 | 3:18 p.m.
great video! one of your best ones imo, and always nice to stack the Baron. I really like how you discuss the hand and your thought process and then immediately refer to PIO afterwards for clarification/to be corrected. I think PIO is underused in most RIO videos and this is the best way to use it. Sauce does it similarly by reviewing a couple interesting hands at the end of his session in PIO as well.
Sept. 9, 2019 | 3:40 p.m.
also props for sharing your results for the year so far, we need more transparency like that. and even if your WR is a little lower than what you are aiming for it is still better than what the vast majority of poker players would achieve.
Sept. 2, 2019 | 1:56 p.m.
nice video. it is refreshing to see a coach making a video of the stakes that he actually plays at and is beating. there needs to be a clear out of coaches on this site because why would I want coaching from somebody playing a stake that they can't even beat?
Sept. 2, 2019 | 1:52 p.m.
I recall watching Charlie play a hand on Twitch bvb where he had something like A5o no draw and tripled off on a QJ9xx type board because he said that players will call too often ott with pair +sd type hands and then end up over folding with them on the river, so he just massively over bluffs this line. so jdstl analysis is bang on imo.
I've never seen him doing any randomising before and if you are a player who likes to bluff (I do too) and do not use one it is very easy to start being exploitable when our frequencies get out of wack and we over bluff a ton of spots.
Aug. 27, 2019 | 10:23 a.m.
'and then 95s kinda like, i'll check too.' dunno why but I found this really funny :P
great video. I think you forgot to use the 'live reads' feature in PIO, however. so some of the results may be a little off. for example 84o river bluff is neutral EV but with the live reads feature you capture the whole pot 95% of the time. he just ran in to the negative variance of the 5% call frequency.
Aug. 23, 2019 | 11:33 p.m.
Patrick Cronin ah damn that's a shame. as they say, don't fix what's not broken and after your success in your last video which was around 60 minutes, generated probably the highest number of likes of any recent video, it seems like strange timing for them to decide that.
also I believe my comment about my appreciation for the longer video gathered a decent number of likes too.
30-40 mins is too short imo. we are all poker players by profession so it's not as if we lack patience haha :P
Aug. 16, 2019 | 11:53 p.m.
nice video. I normally prefer longer videos but the length of this was perfect as it was more like a game than anything else.
I think one of your biggest strengths is your bvb play, so this work has definitely payed off.
Aug. 16, 2019 | 7:22 p.m.
yeah that's fair enough. I watch basically every video at 1.25x speed (some at 1.5x) and I am under the impression that a lot of other viewers do too. so an hour long video is probably closer to the 45-50 minute mark for most people.
even then, I don't mind longer videos :P anything up to an hour is fine imo.
Aug. 16, 2019 | 10:43 a.m.
really enjoyed this series but this video is far too short imo. 33 minutes seems like the video has barely begun and it's over. I can understand if the video is theoretical content that took a ton of time to prepare but doing a voiceover on an FT with cards up doesn't seem too time consuming.
regardless, the quality of your analysis is never in doubt. looking forward to the next part!
Aug. 15, 2019 | 9:44 p.m.
great video, one of your best ones imo. I think these hand reviews are the most captivating/enjoyable to watch as each hand highlights a completely different spot and really gets you thinking. your theory videos are obv good too but sometimes they can be a little dry and harder to watch the whole way through in one sitting.
villains A7hh bluff @39:00 is pretty sick btw. I think it's a great bluff and puts you in an extremely tough spot as most regs will bluff here 0% of the time.
Aug. 12, 2019 | 11:49 a.m.
ryanspicer it doesn't happen very often tbh, but yeah i'd be using a small sizing probably somewhere between min and 2.5x. anything larger is kinda un-necessary imo and too large.
yeah because if you never have a flop raising range on any boards then you let the other player bet at a much higher frequency as they still generate your air folds and also get to realise more equity with their marginal hands that aren't scared of getting blown off their equity vs a raise.
yeah you could take that line, exploitatively. if you think that you get AK to fold and they pure continue AA/KK as calls then you can raise and get those AK folds and then just x back and folds. you can mess around with node locking in PIO it reacts the same way if they have a strategy of, for example, bet/folding AK always on Txx and continuing all OP's. we just raise for protection with a bunch of marginal pairs and then give up when called/jammed on, effectively.
Aug. 6, 2019 | 2:17 p.m.
Asdfghjkl1 because we are pretty much playing a one street game and not nuts vs air. so we just get it in with more marginal hands and take their equity as opposed to using them as call downs in a polarized call down situation.
Aug. 6, 2019 | noon
ryanspicer cheers man. yeah for sure, and it ends up making your flop raising range extremely strong, and conversely your calling range extremely capped.
the reason that you raise on the flop to begin with is:
1-because it is higher EV to do so
2-so that you can leverage the nut portions of your range in order to get max value
however, when you are shallow stacked both of the points are not true any longer. when you raise top 2 pairs or a flop set you end up blocking many of the opponents continues, as well as not letting him 'catch up' with hands that are effectively drawing dead. such as AK/AQ on T9x when you have either 2 pair or a set. you are also not worried about getting sucked out on cos the spr is so low so even when he does the result will not be as costly to negate slow playing as the higher EV option.
when you are deep stacked, these 2 factors hold true, however.
you need to start building a pot with both value/bluffs in order to try and get all of your chips in the middle by the end of the hand and apply a ton of pressure to the bluff catching portions of his range. we also require much more protection with a hand such as top 2 pair because villains range is much wider (it is not a condensed 3/4 bet range) and we want to reduce the spr for future streets.
so yeah. it's not very intuitive but in 3bet pots it's kinda the reverse of 2bet pots. you will also see in PIO sims that it almost always slow plays sets as the pfc but raises hands such as top pair top kicker. this changes to an extent when we are OOP as the caller, however. or when we are 200 bb's deep.