I had a question about the deep stacked strategy that both Phil and Cory seemed to immediately agree upon. Cory mentioned that when stacks get deeper, IP player is incentiviized to play a strategy focused more on equity preservation, and therefore a more polar betting strategy. Then you mentioned that OOP, as a response to IP's polar strategy, is to employ a more merged one. I don't get this second part. Wouldn't OOP be incentivized to play an even more polar strategy than IP for the same reasons?
Jan. 5, 2018 | 12:34 a.m.
I mean, what is the bottom of your value betting range on the turn that intends to go for three street game?
Dec. 27, 2017 | 2:30 p.m.
TIL that there is apparently another way to tie your shoes other than the bunny-ears way. A lot of your posts have inspired me to make a change in various aspects of my life, from working out more, to spending less time doing ineffective and inattentive study. Thank you!
Dec. 25, 2017 | 4:34 p.m.
What do you consider as the bottom of the range that wants to play the 3 street game?
Dec. 24, 2017 | 2:29 p.m.
@2:12 What is the purpose of choosing the 3 street game with TT over a 2 street one? Don't you have many hands in your SB 3b range that are incentivized to play a 2 street game?
Dec. 22, 2017 | 8:50 p.m.
Thanks for some clarification. Now that you have assigned Villain to a range that is primarily straights, 88 and 8x bluffs, with very few sets, I think I can begin to ask real theory questions. You also state that you don't think Villain should be folding many if any 8x straights to our river pot sized raise.
- You have assigned a very polarized range to Villain. What is the purpose then, of bluffing with the combos you originally mentioned in the first comment? with hands like AKT or two pair combos. If Villain is never folding any 8x straights, wouldn't the EV(jambluff) <<< EV(fold)? Clearly, at equilibrium, Villain must fold some bad 8x straights, but since you mentioned that the player pool doesn't very often, doesn't this mean this should be a spot where we go full explo and never bluff?
Also interesting, is that in this exploitative framework, if we are never raise bluffing, which hands do we bluff catch with? we obviously call 8x straights ourselves. If Vilain is almost always bluffing 88 or 99 here, which type of hands make it into our calling range?
Edit: Forgot to ask one more question
In the original response, you mentioned that the type of bluffs you would like to choose to raise with are AT8/KT8 without hearts. So, now going back to the discussion of which blocker qualities are important in villain's perspective when deciding which 8x straights to call and fold. If Hero is bluffing without hearts, wouldn't 8x straights with hearts be Villain's best bluff catchers to our raise? His 8x straights with hearts unblock your bluffs, whereas his 8x straight without hearts blocks some of your bluffs.
Dec. 6, 2017 | 4:28 a.m.
Just a random question, why do you like short or medium stacking various games? Is there some exploitative reasoning behind this?
@4:20, you fold K4cc in the CO, which I normally open, especially on Ignition. Does it have something to do with the rake?
@15:53, at equilibrium, how would you compare the EV(jam58ss) with EV(fold) on the river? From my experience, these types of bets on ignition are like 90% overpairs that do not end up folding ever, so I think in this player pool, folding is 100% correct.
Also you mention quite often that certain spots the player pool (or most people in general) underdefend overbets. In these spots, do you ever go hyper exploitative and just overbet all your bluffs and size smaller with your value? I always hesitate to do this, but it seems like the MES to this.
Dec. 6, 2017 | 1:35 a.m.
Going to preface these questions with the statement that I almost never play PLO and I'm trash lol.
For the AA89 hand, I think your sizing is 100% correct. You want to extract maximum from 8x straights, which I think you are almost always stacking. But this leads to some interesting lines I think. What do you assume Villain's basically pot sized river bet means? Again, I don't have access to PJ or Monker or anything like that, so I can't really assign an accurate range. If you could estimate it, what percentage in the straight hand class, and what else? I'd assume it'd be massively 8x straights betting for value, but can sets take this sizing too? Next, do you think people are ever folding 8x straights to a raise? Should they? And if they should fold 8x straights some time, theoretically speaking, which kind of qualities are you looking for to bluff catch?
I think I agree with everything yous aid about this.
Dec. 5, 2017 | 7:42 p.m.
@~2:40,when you raise with AA89, what are your main bluffs in this spot? Do you have enough to justify the pot sized raise?
@25:00, if both stacks were deeper, would you continue as a call or xr? or to a smaller bet? I don't think 3357 is not strong enough as a call.
@28;13, are you planning to turn you Q752 hand into a two or three barrel bluff? I haven't used any PLO software, but I'd suspect Q752 does very poorly as a "one and done" flop bet. It blocks 0 of Villain's continues, and you will expect to get called here a lot.
Dec. 5, 2017 | 6 p.m.
I'll start a new comment since it doesn't exactly pertain to the Game Theory thread. in the same Q6 hand, in my sim, pio recommends folding hands like T7ss and other weaker fds to the turn bet and favoring pair calls with Q5. Is this what you would expect? I gave IP 3 sizing options, 40, 75, 150. to the 75% these fds end up playing a pure fold strat.
Dec. 3, 2017 | 10:57 p.m.
this is on a separate note, but whenever I nodelock a complex strategy over multiple streets, i'll get this random combo in the nodelocking screen that plays super strangely that is not in equilibrium strategy. I will always turn it to 0, nodelock again, and it will always reappear. Have you had this happen to you?
Dec. 3, 2017 | 6:54 a.m.
I don't get conceptually why air would favor leading. For the same reasons as you pointed out that JT8 is a board that is easy to over defend, wouldn't that be even easier for the Btn? To be honest, I haven't revisited this spot, so I will probably do that tomorrow morning if I remember. I'm guessing at equilibrium, the EV gained by air hands folding out your better air evens out the times you raise and get BB to fold a pair by worse....if that makes any sense.
Dec. 3, 2017 | 6:45 a.m.
I nodelocked a really rough estimate at what Ben's leading range might actually be in this spot. I led at around 25% (of the combos that arrive here), his K/Q high straights, a few combos of A3, 44(that doesn't raise flop/turn), some 5x, and K4/Q4.
Also, for what it's worth, my sim had Q6 basically playing a pure strategy of raising turn, so I had to nodelock that, and a few combos from what I could tell from Ben's video on the turn.
Range breakdown of the river lead. Do you think we have too many bluffs in this leading range?
Villain's response is to basically raise every K and Q high flush, all boats/quads obviously, and every Ksx blocker, primarily in KJo and KTo.
And finally, when facing a raise, it seems we will always be calling our Qx flushes, and mixing call/fold between Kx flushes. I assume this is because Kxss block 100% of villain's bluffs but still beat some of Villain's Qx value raises. We also call most of our A5, as Ben pointed out, with priority given to having the 5s, and not having clubs. I assume not blocking the backdoor club draw is very important.
I also realized after I had looked at this, that I have left pio's original flop split for the smaller 30% and larger 75% sizings. Therefore, piosolver has villain arriving to this river with an extremely narrow range (as pio doesn't bet flop very often for the larger sizing). Perhaps Villain employs the larger sizing at way higher a frq than pio suggests so this could skew what he arrives to the river with.
Dec. 3, 2017 | 6:03 a.m.
@~8:30, Oborra leads on JT8r, and I remember running a sim on these types of textures months ago, and trying to figure out why pio likes donking these flops (before I simplified my studying and eliminated flop donking). I also remember messaging a bunch of people more experienced in pio and most people chalked it up to not being worth studying so I forgot about it. Do you have any ideas on why pio might like these types of bets? From Oborra's hand selection, maybe hands that don't like check calling 2 streets and don't have a high expectation from check raising?
Nov. 30, 2017 | 3:39 a.m.
@~3:44, Pokerfan decides to choose around a 30% sizing on the river. What do you think is the bottom of his value bets for this sizing? Hands like QT? Maybe T9? Also, because of the board runout, most of his missed flush draws are now pairs, so, as you pointed out, his bluffs become hands like 84s, 74s type hands. Do you think he has enough of these to justify splitting his range into an overbet sizing here as well? His range should have a huge region of straights on this river (I think more than us? since we cbet a decent amount of Jx). What I gathered from his sizing is that he doesn't think he has enough natural bluffs (?) on this river, doesn't want to turn pairs into bluffs, and sized down. Not sure if this is correct thinking though. Also as a side note, what hands do you think are good to turn into bluffs for our river raising range? I think in this spot, I normally turn rivered Kxdd and maybe Qx into bluffs, but not really sure how many we need. Especially hard for me to figure out in game and will pio this tonight.