Kalupso's avatar


2815 points

Comment | Kalupso commented on Poker Scientist

The interface is too basic to replace Pio and a preflop solver, but it could be a good starting point for someone that doesn't use a solver already.

April 1, 2020 | 7:37 p.m.

Comment | Kalupso commented on Indifference

Very well made video that clarifies one of the most misunderstood and misapplied concepts in poker.

April 1, 2020 | 10:38 a.m.

Looks good. Your fold to 3bet is on the high side even when exploiting the pool, but I know a guy playing PokerStars zoom games that also preaches incredibly high fold to 3bet. Especially folding all the low pairs is quite tight and KTs too (I'm calling K9s+ by default vs 4x). I'd look to mix them at least 30% of the time.

March 31, 2020 | 4:42 p.m.

Hint: Look at the top right corner of your screen.

March 31, 2020 | 10:02 a.m.

Rake has the biggest effect on calling ranges and only a minimal effect on the width of opens and 3bet/4bet.

March 31, 2020 | 9:05 a.m.

Comment | Kalupso commented on huge blunder with AKcc

So you bluff XR a ton?

March 31, 2020 | 8:53 a.m.

BTN you can have a calling range if the SB and BB are not aggressive squeezers

and less than 5% of the player pool is aggressive squeezers.

March 31, 2020 | 8:52 a.m.

Comment | Kalupso commented on huge blunder with AKcc

Squeeze against 4x open... I think 4x 3bet here is OK if that's around a pot 3bet. The 3bet will be 16bb and the IP players will be in an awkward spot with 88-22 already. I believe this spot is on the cusp of wanting to have 3bet shoves but I think ranges are slightly too strong.

March 31, 2020 | 8:06 a.m.

Comment | Kalupso commented on huge blunder with AKcc

Don't be so hard on yourself. It's hardly a blunder. You lost like 2-3 blinds compared to perfect play. Of course, that's a ton if it happens every hand but this is just a small mistake and acknowledging that allows you to improve.

An acknowledged error is not a mistake, it's a lesson.

March 31, 2020 | 8:01 a.m.

Comment | Kalupso commented on NL10 Linecheck AJs

Both small bet and check is fine. This is a standard fold once there is a bet and a call. 3bet cold call ranges can be everywhere from extremely strong (much stronger than your 3bet range) to any2 cards (whale just wanting to see a flop), so any type of read makes a ton of impact. This is a fold regardless.

March 30, 2020 | 4:05 p.m.

It's not been an issue for me as I've never had a 3max table. UTG is named Lojack for 6max so you shouldn't need to know how many players are seated.

March 30, 2020 | 3:16 p.m.

Rake and opening size makes a difference for what hands to select. Bigger sizes and rake leads to fewer calls and more 3bets, so blockers to 3betting ranges are more important. The opposite is true for rake-free and small opens because it's correct to call more often vs those, so it's more important to have postflop playability both HU and MW.

Pluribus ranges look very similar to what preflop solvers are giving but it's not as simple as just copying ranges if you want to perform best in real games.

March 30, 2020 | 10:26 a.m.

There isn't any hands in villains range between A3 and A7 as far as I can see, so 76 and A3 will have about the same equity.

My sim had A7 at 27% equity and A3 at 15% equity, but I don't think the entire difference comes from beating/chopping with 12% more hands. Not being behind A7 for the villain is pretty big and we see A3 without Ah or As blockers having 3% less equity than the hands blocking A7s. Of course, equity at the tables depends on how the villain is playing.

March 30, 2020 | 9:34 a.m.

that is the reason pio prefer bluffing with KQ ?

KQ doesn't block the intermediate hands like underpairs and weaker Jx, but Pio makes sure to mix most of its Jx to not make KQ much better to bluff and some other combos much worse. Real players might call all KJ, AJ and some QJ vs 1x pot and fold all worse Jx. Having an FD blocker is generally bad and leads to about 5% fewer folds when using a 1x pot river bet. I say generally bad because there can be some odd specific effects. My sim had AcQc as a low-frequency turn bet (only reaching river with 25% of the combos) and always bet the river with a 1x pot to 1.5x pot size. There are some weird effects here that I wouldn't try to implement in real games. I think the effect is to balance that you mostly don't bluff clubs but if you never bluffed any clubs the BB should hero call all his bluff catchers with clubs, so you throw in some bluffs with hands like AcQc and some offsuit and suited KQ with a club to reach equilibrium. Having Tc to 8c seems to be really bad tho, as you mostly block AcTc to Ac8c and underpairs.

March 30, 2020 | 9:17 a.m.

That was my guess. J7s is usually a fold preflop for BB though (both population and preflop sims with 5% rake) so I don't think the effect is that important.

My sim when I included J7s didn't have river shoves but I didn't force range cbet OTF, so BB has a lower XR and the calling range is more protected. Ad7d was the best shove hand. There is some effect of the BDFD flop calls. A7 with BDFD calls flops and turn but folds to river shove. Ad7d doesn't block those and blocks 2 combos of 77 and 1 combo of J7s. EV for different A7 below:

There is also an overlap between river value shove and bluffs with A7 because the main potential river value shoving hands are 77 and A5 together with 65 and lower sets.

March 30, 2020 | 9:14 a.m.

Comment | Kalupso commented on Range Charts

Those hands are actually really close and mix if you were to open 2.7x or larger. If I were making ranges for a beginner playing 2nl to 5nl, I would probably recommend something similar.

March 30, 2020 | 7:46 a.m.

Sorry, I just have too little to do these corona times :)

3bet pots IP it's in some situations correct to bluff more often without a backdoor than with the backdoor. I believe the reason is low SPR and high XR (SPR and XR correlate too). There is less upside to start building a big pot with a BDFD at SPR 4 and you fold more equity when facing a XR.

It's not like you never bet them or anything, and it's good to bet the higher equity ones more often if villain doesn't XR enough or you can easily continue the backdoor against a XR.

March 30, 2020 | 7:40 a.m.

There isn't any hands in villains range between A3 and A7 as far as I can see, so 76 and A3 will have about the same equity.

its seem blocking villan 77 is major key here ..

Yeah, but only with all in size. Blocking the turned set and 2pair. Its probably only using 2 of the 3 suits too. Can you guess which?

March 30, 2020 | 7:24 a.m.

It's not obvious if people overfold or overcall or close to balanced. The hand you have needs even more folds than other possible bluffing hands because you have like 10% equity. 10% equity means you need even more folds to make bluffing better than checking. I'd just take the equity and feel good that I'll win around 10% of the pot regardless of what BB is doing.

March 29, 2020 | 7:18 p.m.

Comment | Kalupso commented on nl200 HU

Yeah, Jeff_ is SB and IP and the other guy is BB and OOP. It's been like this for like 5 years but 99% of hands are ring games and not HU so haven't been fixed.

Found some HH from way back when I was only playing HU:

March 29, 2020 | 3:01 p.m.

You "under-realize" your equity and there is 5% rake so you need to multiply equity by 0.95 for rake and whatever amount you realize (0.85?) to get a better estimate of EV. Against 3x open, you need to be ahead of the PFR's range when flatting in BB in games with rake. A wide caller that makes large postflop mistakes doesn't make you call tighter against 3x open but a tight reg will make lots of your hands less playable.

28.3 * 0.95 * 0.85 = 22,85%

Here you risk/call 2bb and the pot will be 9bb OTF so you need to win 2/9 = 22,2%. That makes Q9s a marginal hand so EV will likely be right around 0EV against the ranges you used which are both on the looser end of what you'll commonly see in softer games.

I don't like the equity realization model for finding preflop ranges because it's so prone to errors and you need to make many assumptions. I prefer to just run simulations. The rake impact is slightly worse than 5% of the pot in games with 5% rake. The equity realization can be very difficult to estimate accurately.

March 29, 2020 | 12:46 p.m.

Does it also apply in the case of sb/utg where are ranges pretty narrow?

Yeah, they're still high-frequency cbet flops, but you have to slow down more OTT and OTR vs UTG because UTG has lot's of AKo and more high pairs. UTG range also has a higher fraction of K containing hands and pocket pairs. The flops are maybe more like 80%-90% cbet for GTO but it's not losing any EV to cbet 100% of the time.

DNegs98 Good points, and yes the flops aren't necessarily 100% cbet spots. My wording was definitely strong to say that basing on GTO is odd to look for. The main point I tried to make was that it is fairly frequent to see people deviating substantially from GTO when checking these boards. Some players are checking overly strong, others too skewed towards medium SD hands (hands like underpairs on K72 and AK on 223) and there are probably a decent amount of people being more balanced. Not sure how common it is to have too much trash in checking range and XF these flops too often tho.

March 28, 2020 | 10:44 p.m.

id bet hands with BD potential

It's a very reasonable way to approach it. The only downside is if the villain is playing a high XR and low call strategy, but we can't be sure if he's doing so or not. That will make you bet/fold your best better bluffs instead of your worse bluffs.

March 28, 2020 | 6:56 p.m.

Comment | Kalupso commented on nl200 HU

Preflop, I dont think I would use such a small size OOP. I am going to be using a larger sizing, and probably not including this in my raising range very often

It's a long time RIO bug. He is raising 2.5x IP and is playing HU.

March 28, 2020 | 6:52 p.m.

Comment | Kalupso commented on nl200 HU

P.S. This is one of the worst bluff spots you can get because of the large amount of 9x+draw in villains range improving OTR.

March 28, 2020 | 11:29 a.m.

Comment | Kalupso commented on nl200 HU

The bluffing frequency with air (low pair or worse) and a spade is:

Pio is never shoving as a bluff without a spade! It's never even bluffing the smaller sizes when I don't allow a donk bet.

Most bluffs comes from offsuit Qs hands:

Lower spades are bluffed some of the time too for shove size:

March 28, 2020 | 11:27 a.m.

Comment | Kalupso commented on nl200 HU

You typically want to have the best blockers to nutted hands when overbet shoving the river. In HU villain has to call way more hands weaker than flush compared to 6max so you don't have to be quite as picky. I do suspect you have enough offsuit JsX, QsX and a few other hands with great blockers so you don't have to use hands like you have as shove bluffs.

March 28, 2020 | 11:09 a.m.

The worst is preflop XD. Preflop is a fold if SB is calling an 8% range or something similar. If it's a fish that calls 25%, then you can call.

The river is not a great spot for sure but you should have like 40% equity when called even in some of the worse scenarios and I think that's enough to justify a shove. Checking and allowing IP to polarize his range to better hands for value and bluffing worse (typically counterfeited 2pairs or missed nut FDs) is very bad for the hands EV. It's a very close spot though so maybe check is better when there is a full pot-sized bet left. I'm really not sure here and it's a difficult spot to get certain about what's 100% correct, and especially if we start to make assumptions about what his flop and turn size says about his range. The smaller turn bet should on average skew his range more towards thin value hands (and maybe KK if he understands blocker effects). What hands does he view as thin value OTT? AK? Weak 2pair? I don't think it's skewed 100% towards thin value either but just more than if he bet 70% pot or larger.

March 28, 2020 | 11:04 a.m.

Same scenario but removed all QQ+, AK, and AQs for both players. Reduced JJ to 50%.

So how capped they are is a big factor. It seems like around 40% of their VPIP as both raise and limp combined for opens is a good baseline, and then we shift that based on how capped their limping range is (this is difficult to know for fish because of small samples). We can probably use their PFR for estimating that.

March 27, 2020 | 1:35 p.m.

Overall looks like my hand selection in first guesses were good but I underestimated how good EV check is the potential iso hands.

In squeeze 3bet scenarios we are more incentivized to 3bet because EV call isn't too great. Not sure how much that effect is impacted by if the caller is IP instead of OOP.

March 27, 2020 | 1:04 p.m.

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