I decided to move from cash game to MTTs... but
Currently I can not found some pot odds/equity software which will show me these relevant numbers during the whole game
Previously I was using PartyCaption/StarsCaption, but I doubt that it is working even on winamax.
Also would be grateful for some decent free video content on SNG/MTTs.
Thanks in advance :)
Aug. 13, 2019 | 10:11 a.m.
Hey everyone, I had some discord groups, but most of them are already dead, you know.
But I trust that still exists some which are pretty active. So please if you are in some, just let me know the link or so, I would be really glad, thanks =)
Mostly playing cash game 6max nl10-nl25.
Prefer calls or deep discussions
April 3, 2019 | 8:10 a.m.
Some info on villain? It looks like he is a shortstacker, which might be a sign that he is a weaker player (if you haven't reads on him), so then I would call it off. Otherwise against reg I would fold the turn, since on the flop there is still some probability that he is trying to raise your smaller sizing with something silly.
March 17, 2019 | 3:56 p.m.
What do you think about his bluffing frequency on the river? Because I see clearly zero bluffs + that low underbluffed sizing. So I think he is almost never bluffing.
Then what's the bottom of his value betting range? I think since we are dealing with some reg, we can assume that villain is perceiving our range (after we checked the turn) on AK,AA,KQ,QQ and rarely some boats. That being said even KQ would be pretty ambitious value bet from his side. So then the question is if the split equity from AK is enough to justify a call? I would say no, because some of them he just jams preflop and even with some of them he might just check the river (people don't value bet thin enough)
All in all if your 4bet range is somewhat tight AQs+,JJ+, AKo and some amount of bluffs (A4s,A5s or so) which is against the current environment pretty fine imo, then folding some AK in this spot isn't a huge inbalance.
March 15, 2019 | 7:08 p.m.
Yeah, clear bet fold on the flop. I like cbetting our range with that sizing, but the QQ is one of the worst hand in our range so it's a mandatory fold against a raise (our range is so uncapped, no worries about it)
March 15, 2019 | 6:08 p.m.
I don't agree that betting small = we are let's say capped on a thin value. Just imagine the situation when we have KK in this spot. I think it's a good example when I would use a 1/3 sizing on the turn as well, since villains range is pretty weak mainly Jx and worse pocket pairs (which he would call pretty often against the small sizing). So I think the fear that villain would perceive our range as capped and start raising us is pretty assumptive, especially on a board like this when we have all nutted hands in our range.
And I agree that the larger bet sizes after 1/3cbet are often the best ones, but not always. My idea was about this specific texture where I think he is also short on bluffs (cause mainly has at least A-high or better which in general people don't turn into a bluff often enough)
The range advantage is out of the question, because I am not talking about range bet, but betting 1/3 only with some value hands in our range. Okay, on smaller environment it's a bit risky, but still people usually play their own game and really not paying much attention on the other players, maybe like the top 20% of the playerpool or so are capable of that.
March 15, 2019 | 5:42 p.m.
I would probably size it down on the turn. We are blocking nut flushdraws and he has a lot of pocket pairs in his range, which he is folding against that large bet which you made. So I would make it like 1/3 (or a little bit bigger) to get a calls from those hands. The main point is that the hands which we are beating, has really few outs - Kx or Jx has 3 outs, pocket pairs has 2 outs, AQ has 4 outs and he shouldnt have that much draws, dont expect many calls from Q-high on the flop.
That being said I would bet the flop with the sizing as you did and the turn as well. Then we have a comfortable river value bet, but also would be cautious with the sizing, wouldnt make it more than half pot. (And ofc I would fold to a raise, since his range is mainly from hands with some showdown value which decreases his bluffing frequency)
All in all this would be an exploitable line, would be using it mostly against not well-known players only with our value hands.
March 15, 2019 | 2:18 p.m.
Well I think that 99 and TT would call the turn check raise, just because an additional draw equity. However with those hands he probably can find an explo fold on the river with some frequency. Even draws I doubt that he would fold to a check raise. And against a river bet it is an easy fold if he doesnt hit.
March 14, 2019 | 2:57 p.m.
this hand seems to be pretty standard, however I wonder if I choose the highest EV line, especially on the turn.
So his range there might be sth like overpairs, maybe half of the time 77 and 88, also some FDs and even some AK, AQ with backdoors.
With the vast majority of those hands he is calling the second turn barrel.
But then the river might be really tricky.. for instance on some 5,9,T,J,Q,A rivers we probably dont have a value bet.
That makes me thinking about choosing a different line. Concretely x/shove on the turn. But I am not sure if he is going to bet with most of his overpairs,FDs and then call a raise with them.
What do you think about it?
Btw he was tanking for like 20seconds and then he folded (could make a big fold with an overpair)
(And he had only 56.5bb behind on the river)
March 13, 2019 | 2:06 p.m.
Yeah the river is probably a call.. would be important to know how big is the rake at your site.
Anyway I would like to ask you if we would check the turn, (not with this exact hand, but in general with some range) would you expect somewhat balanced stabbing range from villain or some exploit numbers?
March 13, 2019 | 1:04 p.m.
Yeah, I agree, the EV might be similiar between stabbing and checking. But then we are supposed to bet the river as well, especially this one (we can easily make him fold his pockets, 8x and some splits)
March 11, 2019 | 7:51 a.m.
March 10, 2019 | 5:15 p.m.
Plenty of bluffs means that with the lower flop c-bet size, I expect wider range. After he checks turn, I see more bluffs and weaker hands in his range than Ax, since he should bet at least half of them for value.
Yeah, he might have some Kx, but would he value bet the river with them? (if yes, then he is definitely not overbluffing)
March 10, 2019 | 5:14 p.m.
I think the GTO solution is not as important as our perception of this hand..(whatever hand would we call here, we arent able to beat something from villains value betting range.)
Since most of the time players lean toward either overbluffing or underbluffing, I would like to hear from you, in which zone do you think villain is in this spot.
So my question is if villain is bluffing on this river more than he should to justify a call with almost any paired hand or not?
March 10, 2019 | 4:48 p.m.
Some thoughts? :-)
March 10, 2019 | 9:52 a.m.
The solver pretty likes calling 3bet with these suited connectors like 87s-65s, I think mainly because the SB range is pretty tight and the villain doesnt expect that much hands like that in our range which might be an advantage on certain runouts... We can get his stack with our twopairs, straights,trips.. against his overpairs.
Btw well played. Would be calling this river with really tight range, even QQ would be really close call (because of his bluffing frequency)
March 9, 2019 | 9:15 p.m.
Hmm, I like the flop check, but.. I think its too assumptive to say, that he is able to 2x overbet shove on a flush completes turn anything, I see some TPTK (but also not all the time). Why he would shove when you can have some flushes? He can go conservatively and logical just bet/fold with smaller sizing. That being said, I think he is more polar than you perceive.
So I would focus on his bluffing frequency.. he 3bet cold call and this board is strongly hitting his range, really dont see that many bluffs at all. But with some of them he may either donk flop or just check the turn or even bet smallish..
Yeah the maniac is able to shove anything ofcourse, but that is just the one type of player profile who will do random stuff like that (even not all the time, since some maniacs may donk shove already on the flop).
All in all I would fold on the turn unless I have some good read on villain (maniac or so)
March 5, 2019 | 6:12 p.m.
I think if you shove the turn, villain is never folding the 8x. Even though I would say that he has a decent amount of 8x, some boats and combodraws (after he 3bet on the turn)
So his value range against us : A8 (4), 66 (3), K8s (1) and that's 8combos. I am pretty sure that we are dominating more than 8 combos from his range, so I see it like a valueshove from our side (only against fish!)
I am prefer this option mainly based on assumption that his 3bet on the turn means trips or better and strongdraws. That being said he is going to call us with the vast majority of his range vs a shove.
Would be super important to know what type of fish is he. Otherwise our decision can't be precise.
March 5, 2019 | 4:04 p.m.
Hello, after going through my hand history, analyzing... saw this pretty interesting hand.
I think up to the river is it somewhat standard.
After he checked the turn I expect some worse Ax, but I suppose to he would bet with the vast majority of them just for protection and value. Also see a lot of air which he just gave up.
Since I checked back, I also dont have that much Ax, but even Kx, so my range on the river is pretty weak, mainly low pairs.
The important question is if villain also knows that we are lets say capped on low pairs? ( I think yes)
I know that bet check bet is pretty underbluffed line, but if exists some exceptions, I think this might be one of them, since villain has plenty of bluffs and not much value (trips).
(no info on villain, lets calculate with standard reg)
March 4, 2019 | 5:51 p.m.
Yeah I agree, but my assumption was that villain will stab much more than he should, since he even might be protecting his marginal hands from draws. So in this case, it isn't a problem with checking whole range.
March 4, 2019 | 11:41 a.m.
I think the key point is, if he is capable of value betting AQ on the flop. Because his bluffing frequency in this line is ofc really low.
If our answer is yes, then the sizings on the later streets are kinda good for us, cause they are representing some thin value which AQ definitely is. So if you feel like he can be value betting AQ on the flop, then you probably have to call it down against those sizings.
However against loose-passive players I would be really careful if they start doing things like this. You know, he just cold call 3bet and raise your cbet with one player behind. Some voice is telling me, that he is not going to play AQ this way 100% of the time.
That being said the nitty fold on the flop is not as bad as it might looks like. Imo it isnt huge -EV and keep in mind, that with this tight fold you can avoid a tough decisions and crying calls on the later streets which may makes you even more tilty... (since you will be losing more often than winning) which might be in the summary much -EV than the fold itself.
March 3, 2019 | 3:36 p.m.
Yeah, I know that this combo isnt a good one, but I was asking what type of hands would you barrel on the turn (if some)? Cause as I mentioned our fold equity is really low if we decide to bet.
Is something wrong with checking our whole range on this turn?
March 3, 2019 | 2:45 p.m.
I would like to discuss about our strategy on this runout. The hand is not as relevant as our range strategy here.
I did some work in equilab and I saw that if we want to continue barelling this turn, we will have really poor fold equity (lot of resistance from his draws and pairs). We also dont want to be betting only value here.
That makes me think about checking the whole range here (on the turn). Check/raise some equity driven bluffs and probably overpairs, since I expect a ton of stabs from villain. Check/call with hands like this (which arent blocking his FDs) top pairs, TT and maybe some boats for protection.
What do you think about this idea?
(Btw my 3bet range SBvsBTN is 15,69%(incetivized by monkersolver) 55+, A3s+, K9s+, Q9s+, J9s+, T8s+, 98s, 87s, 76s, AJo+, KQo)
And I know the size 3bet could be bigger :P but it was an older hand, now I am using mainly 4x OOP.
March 2, 2019 | 1:42 p.m.
It depends on a player profile, it might be spewy fish, maniac or just passive. I doubt that there is a huge EV deviation between 1/3 or 2/3 flop cbet. Against fish I would start thinking about pot bet flop and shove on the turn just for a simplification. Still expect a lot of crying calls from pair+gutter or draw.
March 2, 2019 | 1:15 p.m.
I think this is the spot when you can go with small sizing on the flop as other mentioned. Then 2/3 on the turn seems reasonable and on the river, even shove is a decent play, but I would rather play more exploitable.
That being said, I think we can bet something around 40-50% of the pot, try to get more crying calls and fold to a raise and save some money against those better hands.
Now I think it works, because people aren't enough bluff raising on the river and they also tend to bluffcatch more than they should, especially against smaller sizings
Jan. 30, 2019 | 8:42 a.m.
Well, I think his range on the turn based on sizing is somewhat polarized. As other mentioned he has a decent amount of draws or some random bluffs and then maybe some sets or strong Ax (with weaker Ax he would use a smaller sizing). So his range is mainly from AQ,AK,44,JJ,AA,A8,A4 and bluffs.
Since on the river he has still a decent amount of bluffs, I think he is still gonna bet with them. Even with the boats and even with the hands like AK and AQ he is able to make a value bet. So then by checking on the river we are missing only value from A4 and A8 (sometimes from AQ and AK and rarely from weaker Ax), but compared to his bluffs even if he would bet more Ax on the turn, he has more bluffs than the Ax combos. (Hands like KQ,KT,QT,T9,Q9...)
That being said if you donk this river, you will get a value from Ax and earn nothing from his bluffs (except of the case when he is bluffraising the river, but I am not that confident about it, because you are really repping the Jx tho, so I would give him few spews and that's it).
But if you just check the river you can earn money from his bluffs which I think is more than the value from the Ax hands. Because he has more bluffing combos than the Ax. And you also won't be facing to a tough decision if you get raised.
Jan. 17, 2019 | 7:04 a.m.
Maybe the important fact is the timing of his bets. Because he just insta bet turn and river.
That was also one of the reasons why I decided to call it down.
And that's all reads which I had.
Jan. 15, 2019 | 4:17 p.m.
Hey guys, have some uncertainties about this hand.
Up to the river is somewhat standard. (Was wondering about 3bet shove on the flop, but he can have a bunch of air)
But on the river.. to be honest against reg I would fold, since this line (especially with that sizings) is pretty underbluffed.
Well, this player is a fish as you can see. Sample is only about 60 hands, but its enough to say, that he is a volatile player profile.
I called the river, because he was quite active at the table so far
In one hand he cold call 4bet with 77 and on a board T86 rainbow, pushed all in against my 1/5cbet.
So I was like why should I fold this time? What if he is playing now something like the 77 before.
I made a decision based on fact that he is able to bluff more than he should and even that he can take this line with something totally random. I also thought, that he may value bet AK and AQ with some non-zero frequency.
What do you think? How would your decision-making process looks like?