Good question and tough one! Basically that's why poker is a game of incomplete information and uncertainty.
If he knew our exact holding he would now know what to do. However, he doesn't. So his job is to imagine the range of hands in his mind that he believes we could play this way (respecting every single decision in the hand so far) and estimate how much equity he will have with his exact hand versus the range he believes us to hold on average. I.e. he will often have much less equity than 30% and often much more (depending into which part of our range he runs). But he just has to accept this and pick the decision he thinks will make the most money in the long run.
Of course if he puts us on a range that is very different from our actual one - this will cost him money. And as you can imagine it's almost impossible to put someone on exactly the range of hands the player holds in a given situation. Often players themselves don't know their own range with which they get to a decision - so how should your opponent know?
But this skill of getting closer to the true ranges and taking the right implications from the information is what good players master through experience and studying. And it's what makes them end up with more accurate decisions than their opponents. And finally print money :)
Nov. 12, 2019 | 1:12 a.m.
Sure. So preflop pot size is 7BB and then there has already gone in another 13.5BB on the flop when the decision is on us. Our stack at this point should be 40BB - 3BB - 3.5BB = 33.5BB
So if we shove we shove for 33.5BB bringing the total potsize to 7BB (pre) + 13.5BB (flop until our shove) + 33.5BB (our shove) = 54BB
Villain needs to call 23.5BB (which is 33.5BB - 10BB that he already invested by his check-raise) thus getting 54BB / 23.5BB = 2.3
So the pot odds we offer villain are 2.3 to 1. You can convert this to percentage (i.e. the equity someone needs to make a call) by the formula:
100% / (pot odds + 1)
-> here 100% / (2.3 + 1) = 30.3%
Nov. 10, 2019 | 8:47 p.m.
Great that you share your questions FlopGoblin and I'm sure Jeremy will get back to them soon.
In the meantime I'd like to direct you to the MTT section of our Learning Paths: Learning Paths -> MTT where you can find lots of videos on Blind Defense in the categories: Small Blind Play and Big Blind Play. In addition, in the category Postflop Play you will find a selection of videos on check-raising next to other concepts. One of Jeremy's videos is even in this category which I'd like to link here directly:
Check Raising (Jeremy Menard)
Don't hesitate to reach out if you're looking for any specific content in the future. But of course recommendations for coaches are always welcome, too.
Nov. 5, 2019 | 1:06 a.m.
Welcome to Run It Once FlopGoblin we hope that you will have many more eye opening moments through the videos from our pros. I bet most of us still remember how watching the first poker training videos by professional players is both an exciting and challenging process.
Nov. 5, 2019 | 12:43 a.m.
Agree I thoght after posting that finding a bluffing range here and also bluffing into a check-raising range on a board where most players don't hold enough bluffs will be very tough. But of course we can't go as far as having 0 bluffs so we need to put in some of those hand.
Nov. 4, 2019 | 8:23 a.m.
I'm strongly considering 3bet - calling the SB flop check-raise. It seems like one of the best hands to do it with.
1) We unblock all his Tx. His SB flatting range can have lots of random also offsuit broadway hands including a T (JT/QT/KT/AT).
2) Our hand is the most vulnerable overpair we can have at this point (e.g. QQ-AA are way better calls)
3) He shouldn't have any two pair combos here which make the only hands we are afraid of the sets.
I don't hate your flop sizing fwiw. We don't bet all of our range here and the board is at least semi-connected so sizing up to half pot seems decent.
Nov. 2, 2019 | 11:08 p.m.
Get inspired by our top members for the month of October 2019 and interact with the community to up your game while finding new poker friends. We greatly appreciate every contribution but for those who make it to the top we go one step further. Members whose name is on either (or both) lists will receive free Elite membership for the month of November. Congratulations! For more information on our monthly leader board and how it works, click here.
Any questions or concerns with this months list - please email us at [email protected]
Nov. 2, 2019 | 10:45 a.m.
Oh yea this changes quite a lot. By shoving with your stack being at 40BB at the start of the hand villain would get 2.3 to 1 pot odds meaning he needs 30% equity. Now it becomes a valid question if you think he will start folding random flush draws.
It also depends a bit on his range construction. If you think he will play like this with A8s and has 99/TT/JJ in his range then it probably becomes iffy and you have stronger hands to pull the 3bet from (e.g. your AA-99).
But if you think his main check-raises are indeed only 78s / 77 / 88 and that's it then by holding a 7 you reduce his value combos from 8 to 6 and making this play with A7 has advantages over doing it with an overpair.
On the downside if he calls most of his flushdraws he will mostly hold 1-2 overcards to your pair of 7s and often also a gutshot on top. In that case again an overpair retains it's equity much better vs his draws.
Oct. 25, 2019 | 10:39 a.m.
yep agree with phrikshin usually this is a fold preflop. Betting for protection on this board should be fine but so is check-calling. I'm sure the suits in your hand can help you to make a decision but I'm not sure. I would guess that having the As reduces his check-raising and continue frequency and also gives us more equity if he calls or raises so check-calling without a spade could be a heuristic.
One additional problem with your shove is that if you were 100bb deep you 3bet 8x his check-raise which makes this a big overplay. I can see your reasoning wanting to fold out flushes and you are also blocking his 77 and 87s which besides 88 and some 99 might be his only value combos. But this means you are risking 90BB to win ~19BB and because he should only call when he has you crushed this can't add up to be winning unless he is massively overbluffing.
Oct. 24, 2019 | 9:57 p.m.
cool good luck with the goals! Keeping such volume goals is much easier to stick to in poker than setting result goals anyway so I think that's the correct approach.
Of course NL25 still has lots of weak players and if you are good you can easily be winning. But note that for an aggressive BR management like this your winrate needs to be pretty decent to not have a sick probability that you will go broke. And I've met many players who thought "wtf this is only NL25" but actually were losing after rake.
On the pro side the rake structure might be a little bit better than on NL5 / NL10 I think you should compare that. If rake doesn't differ that much I don't see much benefits for moving to NL25 right away but I believe indeed there is some gap.
If you're 100% alright with going busto and reloading your BR because you can afford it this might be a quicker way to improve. But if you would stop playing when you go bust then rethink this decision.
Also to motivate you by unmotivating you...hourly winrates for beating NL25 are still pretty low maybe do some calculations. So imo focusing on money motivation at any stakes lower than NL100 doesn't make that much sense. And getting motivated to beat the game and get better isn't any different at NL10 than it is at NL25.
I still respect your decision though and it might be the correct one for you. But just wanted to point out some threats that you might encounter :)
Oct. 24, 2019 | 8:55 a.m.
Usually being flatted by IP checking high frequency on the flop is a good strategy. However, even though the CO will usually have a tight calling range his preflop range is capped i.e. not having AA/KK/QQ/JJ AK/AQ as much as we do (or at all)
One main reason why we‘re playing passively in these spots is that IP can make our life hell postflop by bloating the pot on board changing turn and river cards being in position. Note that most players don‘t do this as much as they should as the IP player and also often overfold to cbets.
But this board while being connected and having a FD still is an interesting one where I believe we can bet some frequency. Especially if we believe villain not to have 64s and 22/33 from the CO so he has fewer sets than on other low connected boards.
Maybe AJ is still a better check as Jeff suggested but I would personally vote for trying to play a betting frequency here with some hands just based on our better overpair advantage.
As played I would bet turn again though because CO has to expect you to barrel this card a lot as bluffs and can have many medium/low pocket pairs which can call even two more streets on brick rivers.
Jeff_ do we really mix fold here on the turn? I‘m very interested in the reasoning. Also if we call turn (which I always would) would you then fold river? I think I would have just called down so probably I‘m bleeding money here
Oct. 23, 2019 | 3:09 p.m.
Oct. 12, 2019 | 8:55 p.m.
I think this is a very interesting discussion to launch and looking forward to see other members' thoughts.
First of all, there indeed are boards where splitting our range into two sizings doesn't happen. From my viewpoint this often happens in 3bet pots because the SPR i.e. the money left to play is much lower and you can even get all the money in by the river starting with a small size only. Also ranges are usually narrower in these lower SPR pots due to more aggressive preflop action which makes splitting the small range tougher.
But there are also single raised pot situations where betting range with almost only a small sizing is the highest EV line. But in most cases it's just a simplification and at least a small portion of the range wants to use another sizing.
Of course the most obvious reason for betting bigger is that you have some very high equity value hands in your range which want to shovel as much money in the pot as possible. Will the exclusion of these hands make your small betting range weaker and harder to defend? Yes absolutely. But if performed well it will still overall yield a higher EV just because you gain so much more when villain has a bluffcatcher vs your strong hand. But you need to do a good job at
1) Finding the appropriate bluffs that accompany your strong holdings in the big betting range
(e.g. high equity bluffs / bluffs with great blockers)
2) Putting some appropriate still very strong hands into the small sizing (but of course you are right that this alone can't strengthen your small betting range enough)
3) Rely on great bluffcatchers in the small betting range that need to call down
Combining 2+3 should then do a good enough job of preparing you against opponents trying to apply pressure to your small sizings. Regarding 2) when playing around with solvers you will often see that on a K74cch board a set of 4s will use the big size and a set of 7s will favor the big size but still bet small (or also check) some amount of the time. KK often will favor the small size or even check just because it blocks so many continues of our opponent and therefore rather wants to be more cautious and sneakily force our opponent to continue. And the same happens for two pairs, top pairs and so on. So you will always need to ask yourself which hands exactly have better reasons to bet bigger and which can still bet small. By doing this you automatically protect your small bet range.
In the example you outlined point number 3) is not as clear but it becomes much more important when splitting your range into checks and bets. In these cases you will often find that you are forced to call down with a decent top pair even when facing lots of pressure because it might be among your best hands left in your range.
Overall the challenges you mentioned are true and splitting a range into checking and betting or also into small betting and big betting makes the weaker one of the lines more vulnerable. But the advantages you will gain by winning more with your strong hands will overcome the downsides especially if you learn to properly defend and protect the weaker range.
Oct. 9, 2019 | 10:41 a.m.
Get inspired by our top members for the month of September 2019 and interact with the community to up your game while finding new poker friends. We greatly appreciate every contribution but for those who make it to the top we go one step further. Members whose name is on either (or both) lists will receive free Elite membership for the month of October. Congratulations! For more information on our monthly leader board and how it works, click here.
Any questions or concerns with this months list - please email us at [email protected]
Oct. 1, 2019 | 10:09 p.m.
ugly spot :/
Given there are no flushdraws on the flop and almost all straight draws get there it indeed is hard to find a bluff he can do this with on the river. If he's decent then he might turn 88 or 99 into a bluff on the river because he shouldn't really ever win against your flop check-raising range but probably he's squeezing those with at least some frequency. He could also decide to turn two pair he called the flop with into a bluff.
If you think he could ever valuebet a set here then this should become a pretty straight forward call.
If not it really comes down to whether you think he will turn some two pair into a bluff. If he finds the perfect frequencies I agree that PIO should spit out a call here given your exact set combo also blocks his 76 combos.
Sept. 30, 2019 | 6:20 p.m.
I really loved how you managed to make the rather standard seeming first spot very educational with the depth of analysis you chose. It felt like the perfect balance between going into the most crucial parts of the sim while not getting lost in the details. Great job ;)
Sept. 26, 2019 | 10:07 a.m.
Welcome to the team Ryan!
Sept. 26, 2019 | 9:36 a.m.
Given that ICM comes down to the chips you will be winning not being as valuable as the chips you could be losing and this being most extreme in hands where you lose all of your chips -> yes ICM matters in postflop play just as preflop. Of course the impact will be strongest in direct shove/fold decisions which is why most often ICM is insta-related to preflop play but I've heard many of our MTT coaches mention ICM in postflop discussions as well.
As I'm not a MTT player I don't want to give any specific advice but I'm sure there exist some heuristics how to maneuver postflop when having to acknowledge strong ICM effects. Of course you have to keep bluffs in your range but maybe you're allowed to shift the balance of value/bluff ratio. But maybe it would also mean that you have to play more polarized to still stay balanced (i.e. betting for value tighter and therefore also bluffing less accordingly)
We have lots of content on ICM and maybe you can find some postflop specific advice in these videos:
Learning Paths -> MTT -> ICM
Sept. 25, 2019 | 9:51 a.m.
I think generally there should be a range that makes sense to flat and take to postflop. One advantage is that position postflop will almost be worthless so if you believe you get enough equity with your hand given the pot odds a call should make sense.
It's been quite a while since I've played my last short stacked HU match but T9o seems to be a good candidate to flat being situated within the weaker medium part of your range and rather shove hands that are a bit stronger. I would recommend you to check out equilab / ICMIZER or a similar software to study these kind of spots and quickly improve you shove/fold/call ranges in these spots.
Sept. 23, 2019 | 8:46 a.m.
I know that excluding a flatting range from some/all positions is sometimes also done to simplify your strategy but one big downside of flatting in high rake environments compared to 3betting is that you pay more rake.
So another adjustment you could take is working on adding solid flatting ranges because one big benefit of 3betting only is taken out in this rake environment.
Sept. 20, 2019 | 5:04 p.m.
Hey RunItTw1ce sorry for missing your post, I just stumbled over this. The reason for the issue of adjustable speed not working on android might be that android phones use the built-in browser player of whichever browser you use to access runitonce.com
To my knowledge this unfortunately currently makes it impossible to use the speed feature you normally can see on our custom player on other devices. If anyone from the community has found a way to make this work on android phones we of course would love to hear about it.