take a few days to study prior, pick a couple topics you feel the need to have a better grasp on and train them 3-4 days prior. Use a notepad and write down the viable facts you wish to retain, this will allow you to quickly glance at key points you've taken not of. This will allow you to sharpen your "needed skills".
June 24, 2013 | 11:31 p.m.
This is made for a zoom 6 max play for tables to cascade across the
image accordingly, it can be used with any number or tables running, it
is mac and poker co-pilot friendly (sized for zoom hud as well), and this is how it looks in action.
IS BY NO MEANS A STRATEGY OR ANYTHING SPECIFIC. I JUST TOOK A STRONG
M/HS NLHE 6 MAX, RANGE FREQUENCY FROM xx POSITIONS, AND USED SOMETHING
COMMON THAT WOULD HAVE A BALANCED FREQUENCY FOR A LOT OF PLAYERS. YOU
USE IT AS YOU PLEASE AND DON'T GET TO BENT IF IT'S NOT WITHIN WHAT YOUR
USING. IT IS VERY MUCH BASED OFF SEAN LEFORTS THEORIES AND VIDEOS.
you would like something specific you can message me and for a cost I
can accommodate, as I am a graphic designer by trade (went to AAU for 6
years, for web design, new medias, and graphic design) but a poker
player by profession hehe. I hope you guys all enjoy it and please feel
free to make comments on how to improve it or ideas for a next wallpaper
P.S. the 94o on the right signifies that at
run it once, we can play all hands, while also representing 94o oop
-UTG- due to its natural visual relationship to the chart moving in a
counter clockwise circular position. I also tilted the 94o upwards
because we can make even the worst hands win (turned upwards to
represent our bankroll raising).
Please note: the red button ranges reflect a min raise frequency, when folded to.
Bright yellow: 3bet/4bet/5bet hand range
Yellow: 2/3/4 bet range
Red:Steal frequency/balance 3/4/5 bet frequency (not in the button graph)
Full screen viewable link (low quality)
HD download here: http://speedy.sh/ytma5/RIOwp-ver3HD.tif
#####Link is the text at top of the page beside file size####
June 24, 2013 | 9:26 p.m.
do you want just the wallpaper or do you want the new version i'm working on vanity? I turned up the DPI to 360 (although over 300 has been said to be all the same, I have heard a few conflicts that on the newer monitors 360dpi benefits) so i capped out the dpi and turnd the resolution up to 4k for the new images that I will be posting as soon as im done with it. It is very time consuming
June 24, 2013 | 2:24 a.m.
Direct download for HD version
I hope the guys at run it once dont mind, but I figured I would make a wallpaper to support the site, this of course is for fans. I think if we all contribute where we can to the site, then it makes for an amazingly supportive community!
Here is a 1600x1200 wallpaper for you guys, I can make a tablet/mobile version if there is enough request.
(i'm going to be updating my wall paper as seen above with my frequencies and exact ranges preflop in each position, I will not post this for people, as it would show my style to people. They will be running off my desktop -adjacent to my table positioning- it keeps me sharp always having it up on my screen ;) )
June 22, 2013 | 2:56 a.m.
Wait a sec...... I guess I should have asked if this is zoom or just standard tables.
The reason I make that remark is because in Zoom/rush I feel as if players are taking more opportunities to play post flop as the game is run by taking "gto" situations to turn ev plays into reasons to make decisions.
Between my last comment i ran into a similar hand, not the exact same, however similiar river situation.
No Limit Hold'em $0.50/$1.00PokerStars6 players
UTG - Hero ($120.37)
MP - MP ($231.36)
CO - CO ($106.14)
BTN - BTN ($159.07)
SB - SB ($100.00)
BB - BB ($58.22)
Preflop: ($1.50, 6 players) Hero is UTG with 7s 7c
Hero raises to $2.50, 1 fold, CO calls $2.50, BTN calls $2.50, 2
foldsFlop: 9s 5c 7d ($9.00, 3 players - BTN: $156.57, Hero: $117.87, CO: $103.64)Hero bets $5.00, CO calls $5.00, BTN calls $5.00
Turn: Kh ($24.00, 3 players - BTN: $151.57, Hero: $112.87, CO: $98.64)Hero bets $11.50, 1 fold, BTN calls $11.50
River: 8h ($47.00, 2 players - BTN: $140.07, Hero: $101.37)Hero bets $22.50, BTN raises to $140.07 (all-in), Hero calls $78.87 (all-in), Uncalled bet of $38.70 returned to BTN
Total Pot: $249.74BTN shows 9c Jc (a pair of Nines)Hero shows 7s 7c (three of a kind, Sevens)Hero wins $246.94
I feel in Zoom people are taking this line often and really looking at the way the hand plays out can be a factor. My decision was based on him having more combos of 2pair, 1pair/bluffs, awkward hands like k9, q9, j9 t9.
Sometimes he has the 6 yes, and yes sometimes he shows up with t9, but his bet sizing -much like in your scenario- screams suspicion, like he is looking for an excuse to buy a pot. More often then not when i'm making these types of calls i'm analyzing the player, if the board is for sale, the texture or the board, and what line they took on each street (including the river jam) the river jam just makes no sense value wise. In my eyes only a strong villain would over jam for value here, I deduced he wasn't a strong enough player to get this type of value off made hands. Much like your situation, again I cannot deduce your opponent as I do not have a history vs him and cannot see the stats in depth (outside the typical hud stats) but I still think you folded vs 2pair such as jt.
I truly think he wouldn't throw all value out the window here, donk river lead shove vs your range of maybe as weak as a bad played aces? Like I said it could even be bottom set.
Maybe he had 78, i dont think its totaly unrealistic for him to have the lower end of the straight, but again, your ahead of more combos then your behind here.
My opinion should be taken with a grain of salt as my reads, again, are based off deeper hud stats and pull out menus which include previous hands he has played. If I see he has played AA or KK followed by j5, q3, 93, and just complete flounder hands, then it's clear, he lost with aces and is tilting. My read vs your situation is very linear and should only be taken as "another opinion". The main thing to do is think your plays through, have logic for every decision you make, and get comfortable with the right plays and confident in your ability when thinking situations through.
Phil Galfond states in one of his videos as well "You need to get a read on the limit and game type as a whole, and how it is being played, not just the players.". Not an exact quote, but it gets the point across.
June 20, 2013 | 3:48 a.m.
The first thing I think you did, as stated above, is that you 3b to small. You needed to not range cap yourself on the flop, if I was the villian, I would instantly put you on AA or KK scare raising the board, and he can now profitably over bet any q,j,t,9,8,7 of any paired suit on the turn and non suite on the river. This is all just because you range capped yourself with the smallish 3b sizing. To be honest I feel as if you have him beat here more often then not, I feel as if his range is more weighted toward 2 pair combo such as (A or K)j/jt-89 and air (he also sometimes shows up here with 88 and possibly 99 but less frequent. If he had any type of qj, q9,kq combo here I think he has enough equity and outs to rejam you on the flop due to your smallish raise sizing.
My assumption is you folded to 2 pair, the odd lower sized set, and complete air. He might have had a queen but you just played your hand so weak that his over betting range is more weighted with value vs 1 over pair type hands. Sometimes its a losing call, but more frequently, I think you were ahead.
Also I think his sizing is a tell, any queen here I don't think is a betting that large vs a perceived 1 pair type hand, it's losing a lot of value over time vs your perceived range, and also inducing a shove vs AK.
June 19, 2013 | 7:28 p.m.
I would love to discuss this, but your sentences are not legible. I am not trying to be forum troll or a grammar nazi, but I could not make it through half of what you were trying to communicate. Please take the time to structure out your thoughts properly, it will benefit you and your readers.
Although I would love to comment, I cannot at this time. I'm sorry I could not be of more help.
June 18, 2013 | 8:44 p.m.
I was wondering what people thought on this board, obviously the C/R on the river worked as a cheap stab, however should I have bet more to give him -EV with his range?
here is a link to the boom.
Analyzing his range he could possible have here on the flop I feel he could have a every combination of 78, 79, 89, even some random 58, 59 suited combos, pocket pairs 22-55 & 88,99. I am confident he isn't on a flush as I think most flush combo's and check raising earlier in the hand.
My question isn't range analysis, it is more weighted to putting his value hands into a -EV situation. I think my river C/R range can included any made flush, any overpair to the flop, and complete air. I was confident on triple barreling any non 8,9,10 run outs.
with the blocker here does this "minish" raise work often enough to cheaply stab this pot, or am I not putting in enough negative value vs his value range?
June 18, 2013 | 5:09 p.m.
Great reply Michael, and if I may add to Michael's post I would like to mention that misreading a HUD
can be a big pitfall for a lot of players, understanding how the stats reflect vs eachother and how one effects the next is vital in using a HUD.
For example if we see a player that looks like this:
fold vs Cbet stat 80%
fold vs Turn barrel 10%
This second stat will naturally be low because we can tell that when our villain is calling a cbet we know he is most likely trapping or has showdown value (this is a basic example of how one stat can effect another)
fold to river raise 30% (this may appear high but given the fact that our villian reaching the river will be put in a lot of situations where he is playing for polarized pots; either small pots or big pots) this may be read as weakness and a flaw in his game, but it is just the natural effect reflected back to us in the HUD, of course due to the fact that when he gets passed the flop he is most likely going to showdown.
There is an amazing video on this entitled Stats: Making Better Use of Your HUD
by: James Hudson.
couple that video with The Adjustment Game by Sean Lefort would be the best place you can start. those two videos are amazing!
Take it from someone who has used many sites and paid subscription across almost every site you could name, the 99$ per month fee is more then worth it for the elite membership cost, when we are getting videos like this!
June 4, 2013 | 7:12 p.m.
My advice would be to go into intensive training with a HUD, put aside 3 hours a day specifically watching HUD related videos or training on it. I would recommend this for two weeks or until you are confident you can let your HUD co-exist with your decisions.
Also a rule I set for myself back when I was HUD training (THIS WAS A GOLDEN, YOU MUST FOLLOW OR FAIL RULE) was to never make a decision -ON ANY STREET OR SITUATION- without first looking at my HUD. Do not however let your HUD make your decisions for you, let your HUD give you valuable information to reaffirm your deduced logic, and otherwise exploit and opponent in spots you would not have been aware of.
Players who let their HUD play for them are extremely exploitable and weak non thinking players, your poker foundation, logic, and knowledge based decisions comes first, then let your HUD help you only after you have made the "right decision".
June 3, 2013 | 5:10 p.m.
SPECIFICALLY A FLOP COMMENT
You guys are looking at this board from the turn only. There is lost equity on the flop and it is a leak to not bet on the flop. Before we see the turn we have to put our villain on a range, without stats its tough to do that, however assuming that the button could be making a standard position raise vs one limper, we cannot rule out hands 22-TT and also suited connectors and suited overs. Given all the possible (NON STATS BASED) hands we need to look at our hand vs the board vs the villain. In a naked situation we have an over pair with a gutshot -so we have a draw/combo draw vs smaller sets; while also having showdown equity-, to give the villain free suck-out equity is a huge mistake. If he has us beat on the flop it is an easy cbet/call vs raise.
KQ+AQo/s will reraise the flop which we can call/re-asses the turn.
Suited connectors now have FREE draw/gutshot value.
Sets are winning regardless unless we redraw on them.
So we are giving hands behind us free equity and hands ahead of us are sometimes costing us a slightly more on the flop if/and when we get check raised while also deciding to call. The downside to betting on the flop is vs the opponents who want to play for stacks on the flop, i.e. draws or sets. Again without stats being posted it is impossible to say what was the right play here but vs the possible hands the BB "could have" I think betting for value on the flop is the appropriate play. Also another thing to note it is never a good idea to give up pot control on wet boards because then it becomes more of a guessing game which leads to more misfolds and miscalls (misplays in general) because when we check the donk lead out on the turn by our villain is completely unreadable.
You cannot discredit your showdown value from the flop while also giving up pot control here because you are scared of the "vs hands" that you are beating and the smaller amount of hands that you are not.
June 3, 2013 | 5:04 p.m.
I think this situation is pretty transparent actually. When I read through the hand -before I saw your post of his holding QQ- I immediately put him on exactly QQ. This is of course a very vague statement so I will walk you through how I deduced this logic; Looking at his stats while also assuming his positional disadvantage preflop to the initial raisers we can assume he is not playing hands like (suited connectors, pairs under JJ and AK/AQ suited) so we immediately we know his hand falls within JJ, QQ, KK, AKo/s, AQs, we can also assume that JJ, AA, and AKo would reraise as our villian would want to isolate these hands HU and not play them in a multi way pot. Now we can take his range and put him on QQ, KK, AKs and AQs. So his hand is very transparent preflop.
Your post flop decision becomes a little more difficult as we have deduced his range and lead out with a c-bet, when he calls this c-bet we know we are never ahead of his range unless he is beyond bad and calls with KK for suckout equity. So given the hand we put him on we lose vs AQ, QQ, we chop vs AK but beat KK. The turn changes nothing (he never shows up with kjo or s), when you give up pot control he is and was on the flop solely looking to extract the most value from you without getting you off your hand. The turn is a clear check-fold situation based on the board.
If you look at relative vs absolute hand strength in this situation, although your absolute hand strength may be strong, your relative hand strength given the villain's stats and line he took is very weak.
As stated above, your losing two situations -VS. AQs and QQ-, chopping with AK, and KK has 15% suckout equity vs you with one card to come.
AQs + QQ = -2.0
AK = -0.10 (rake loss)
KK = + .85
totaling a -1.25 loss
This is by no means exact math, it is just a quick way on the fly to deduce what makes sense as an EV play long term on a very very basic scale, it will also help you make the right play.
When making tough decisions, as poker players, we have to look at what makes sense not as/just "in the moment poker play" but what makes sense as a winning player who is regularly make good decisions based on deduced logic, using the given information we have.
Poker is an incomplete science, one that we have to reason with and come to terms with by making hand shakes on incomplete assumptions.
June 3, 2013 | 4:40 p.m.
I can comment as I have played with and without a HUD at various stakes up to $25/50 and only 6-max.
I know that when I played without a HUD I thought I was doing fine, and albeit I was a winning player, I was missing opportunities to benefit spots where I could exploit my opponents. My math was on point -most of the time-, I had a great feel for my tables, I felt able to win and play without a HUD. This was all fine and dandy, but even with my ignorance and refusal to not use a HUD I was doing nothing but fooling myself and robbing myself of guaranteed profits. I tried forever to convince myself that a HUD was not for me, and for awhile it worked, I had myself thinking I was an elitist who could fore-go the HUD.
Then a day came where I saw some real pros using HUD's to make exploits that I could not have possibly known without the use of a HUD, I personally watched them say to me "Look at his c-bet, and now look at his turn cbet frequency. I am certain I can call his cbet knowing he will double barrel, ONLY SO I CAN CHECK RAISE STEAL THIS POT!" and it played out exactly as he called it, and he won a healthy sized pot because he had numbers that only a HUD could keep track of. After that he showed me his year to date winnings on just his turn cbet reraises, and halfway throughout the year he had a profit of $3,200 specifically filtered for when reraised a turn double barrel.
This was my turning point, I saw he was able to basically just read numbers and understand them on a calculated level, and then he showed me the value of a HUD. Just that one situation he had justified means and cause to make the play he did based on factual numbers that allowed him to exploit a players weakness, most players will fall victim to an exploitable pattern in their game. Our jobs as aspiring pros are to find these weakness's and recognize them so that we are aware of where we can exploit if the opportunity proves itself relevant.
A HUD is by no means a method or guide on how you should play poker, we have fundementals that we must practice and follow first and foremost, but it is the greatest tool we have to help us analyze situations to make more calculated decisions. One of the best things you can do to hone yourself as a poker player is to go into HUD therapy and train extensively on how, why, and when to use your hud. It will grow your profits and allow you to evolve as a player, it is the single best ROI tool you will ever have.