Pitsquared's avatar


69 points

Comment | Pitsquared commented on Thinking Like PIO

Tbh I'm not sold on the main driver for betting hands like JsTs being to build a pot for when we do improve. I think that leaning too much on a heuristic like that might lead me to bet too many of my draws. I think that a better way of looking at it for me is putting in more money with hands whose equity/EV isn't squandered when called/raised. In other words, when opening or reopening the betting we prefer to do it with a more durable range. I think that JsTs is just a robust hand that gets called by worse, better hands to fold (some Kx), has extremely durable equity when called or raised, allows us to have a distributed betting range such that we have some Jx when a J falls OTR, and it blocks a crazy amount of OOP's high EV range so we reduce the frequency with which we're called/raised. I think that evaluating hand qualities in a more nuanced way leads to better results for me.

April 17, 2020 | 7:13 p.m.

Exactly. Sam Grafton made a good video about it where he says sizing down is helpful when villain has a decent amount of strong hands that want to put in a lot of money while also having a decent amount of money that don't want to put in any more money such that we realize equity vs his weak hands while saving money vs his strong hands.

March 24, 2020 | 5:40 p.m.

What I do is solve the flop subset provided with a tree that includes multiple sizes (up to 6). Then I look at each flop to see what size(s) the solver prefers and also whether or not there is a clear correlation between size and hand/hand class. Usually, when it is clear that certain parts of the bettor's range want to use one particular size over others, it tells me that there is more EV to be gained by using multiple sizes. Conversely, when there is no clear correlation such that most betting hands use multiple sizes, almost indiscriminately, where all the different colors run together, I usually discover that I can capture with one bet size (a catch-all size) most of the EV earned by multiple sizes. Then I try different sizes, one at a time using my initial subset as a guide, for each flop to determine which size or two earns the most EV. I also take into account complexity when developing my strategy and I usually only use multiple flop sizes when my range is condensed (3bet, EP open, etc.). My challenge with two flop sizes is randomizing bluffs/draws where many times there is no clear direction. Would love to hear how better players are doing this.

March 23, 2020 | 6:13 p.m.

After trying for awhile to figure out some kind of bet sizing formula it has become apparent to me that, excluding spr and villain's strategy, bet size is a function of range composition in relation to the texture. How much of villain's value range wants to put in large amounts of money? How much of his EV is earned from draws? How much of his range needs to fold to almost any bet size? Related to that is how likely equities are going to shift on future streets.

The ice analogy wasnt as helpful for me because you're not really testing the integrity of the ice as much as leveraging the fact that OOP needs to fold a lot of his range to a small bet while allowing the bettor to realize equity and get value/protection with a wider range of hands. Facing a capped range OTT is a biproduct of the small bet, but not the main driver of the flop strategy. If that was the case then we would just bet small on all textures where the defender ends up with a capped range OTT to "test the ice" before we attack. But we know that that isnt the case because that applies to almost every texture.

Testing the ice, instead, is a better analogy for using a small bet exploitatively on textures where a solver would bet bigger because you think your actual opponent will perhaps raise too often with his high equity hands OTF thereby capping his turn range when he just calls.


March 22, 2020 | 5:28 p.m.

For anyone reading this thread who plays BOL i won the 10 NL jackpot months ago for 100 bucks and in spite of forseeable downswings i contknue to win there and have cashed out multiple times. Im not saying that OP doesnt have a genuine gripe. Im just attesting that from my perspective the site is safe.

March 9, 2020 | 8:02 p.m.

Usually i get one bet size when i accidentally forget to unclick the get the money in smoothly with 2 bets left. Other than that it looks fine to me. Well...if you dont include a default bet size how is the tree builder going to define a size for all the nodes youre leaving blank? I would insert a 60-70% bet size as a default to make the raise sizes realistic. Let me know if that works

Sept. 11, 2019 | 8:47 p.m.

Comment | Pitsquared commented on Enough with pio

I use GTO+ but i can translate PIO training vids to my own use of solvers. Its the same output in a different format. Its especially similar now with the new updates to GTO+ and flopzilla.

And i think Nuno's message is sound but also lacks empathy. Imagine having perfect vision of every player's range, ev, equity, past and future strategy, and the highest ev action for each combo. Youd be the best player on any table you sat. Well thats what a solver does. The question is, how do you learn how to do those things? Well you practice calculating those things in your head and then use the solver to give you feedback. You learn why it does what it does. But thats the hard part.

And thats where trainkng videos and coaches come in. I agree that a solver video without context is not very useful. Its like...yeah i could have done that on my own MFer. But i think coaches are getting better at concluding WHY a solver uses a certain strategy and the WHY is something we can extrapolate. Its hard to understand the languagr of a novel program but it gets easier with time. And in time you start to think in that language in-game, so be patient with it.

That said, not everyone learns the same way. Solvers can be dry when you dont notice the value it adds to your game. I have the dilemma of not knowing which type of study is doing the right most for my game. How do you really know that? I feel like you could watch someone good play and if you understood why they were doing certain things, that alone could make you a good player.

Sept. 6, 2019 | 6:55 p.m.

I'm ecstatic. Built in GTO Trainer...

Aug. 22, 2019 | 2:47 a.m.

Actually giving solver 30, 50, and 87% cbet sizes it chooses 30 and 50 almost exclusively and is Xing around 20% and very rarely Xs flush draws. Also the question is not whether or not IP prefers to X back some flush draws. The question is why X back these specific flush draws that intuitively feel like they should be bet having little sdv, back door possibilities and block OOPs continues?

June 11, 2019 | 3:36 p.m.

Yeah its hu and im using pio hu 100bb srp ranges. Forgot the exact %s. Like 85% open

June 11, 2019 | 3:28 p.m.

I simulated a hand played between these two gents and im noticing on Ts8s4d in a SRP IP checks back Jx, 9x, and 7x flush draws at a decent frequency even assuming a small cbet strategy. These are hands im usually autocbetting because we block OOPs continues/XRs and turn more equity frequently. But im wondering why solver Xs back these particular FDs. Is it so we have turn bluff raises when we turn a straight draw to go with our flush draw? Is it because we're blocking a lot of the hands that OOP would auto probe turn so we realize equity more easily with these hands?

June 10, 2019 | 11:37 p.m.

Post | Pitsquared posted in Chatter: Play me HU NLHE to get better.

Im looking to play someone HU micros at any online site i can play in California and record your screen while i record mine. Poker is filled with uncertainty so that we can only verify the quality of our decisions and assumptions by looking at long term results or if an established expert gives their stamp of approval. But even then its presumptive because you never really know the ranges people are playing or the variables that are affecting their decisions. What if you could see your opponent's hole cards and read their thoughts? The feedback loop you would create would be more accurate.

Im winning at hu micros, 6max micros, and husngs. Im looking to play someone who is at least break even. We can each record our session and either discuss our decision making process while playing or discuss later. I study relentlessly and think deeply about the game. Message me

May 9, 2019 | 8:36 p.m.

Comment | Pitsquared commented on Avoid BetOnline

Ive won there for almost a decade with some pretty decent variance at both sngs and micros. Ive actually run pretty good as of late

May 4, 2019 | 2:51 p.m.

I play micro heads up and am looking for a play/study partner to play and record our sessions to later discuss. I play 25nl to 50nl and $10 husngs. Offer is open to anyone. I have a pretty efficient study regimen that i can share too

April 10, 2019 | 10:13 p.m.

I agree with Mikey. I struggle with wanting to protect a win too. At that point i either quit right then and there or i use that fear (what it really is) to challenge myself to continue making the most profitable play. Its like anything else. You have to practice dealing with that fear if youre ever going to learn to play through it. But booking a win might give you confidence to bring to the next session or it may inspire you to study more. It all comes down to what your goals are, booking wins or playing well longer.

April 5, 2019 | 9:18 p.m.

Theres a youtube video replaying a recent hu match between Linus and Trueteller. I think it would be a great and popular idea to review that match and evaluate the play of the best technical player vs the best exploitative player. Sounds like popcorn material to me.

April 5, 2019 | 6:10 p.m.

Its pretty much scripting. You can set up preflop ranges and construct the tree and solve hundreds of different flops by just letting the solver run all day long. That way i can have a whole database of solutions to study so that i dont always have to solve a new tree every time i want to study a specific situation. But 100bb trees with multiple sizes take forever to solve so id rather trade databases with someone

April 4, 2019 | 10:15 p.m.

GTO+'s database function is awesome, isn't it? Does anyone want to sell/donate/exchange database files? I'm looking for 100bb+ solutions using HU preflop ranges for SRP, 3bet, and 4bet spots with multiple bet sizes. I have decent size databases using reasonable HU ranges for everything from 15bb limp pots to 75bb SRP and 3-bet pots to trade. Message or comment.

March 31, 2019 | 3:40 a.m.

GTO+'s database function is awesome, isn't it? Does anyone want to sell/donate/exchange database files? I'm looking for 100bb+ solutions using HU preflop ranges for SRP, 3bet, and 4bet spots with multiple bet sizes. I have decent size databases using reasonable HU ranges for everything from 15bb limp pots to 75bb SRP and 3-bet pots to trade. Message or comment.

March 31, 2019 | 3:38 a.m.

I would recommend the video by Sauce exploring the proper adjustments facing different cbet strategies. Basically he concludes that the less polar villain's betting range the less polar your raising range will be vs a bet. Also you will want to fold more of your weaker bluff-catchers because they have less equity/ev vs a linear range. You also want to bet pretty much your entire range vs a X because villain's X range is weak/unprotected. So it's less about villain's bet size and more about his range. Size does come into play because it affects SPR and that does affect your strategy (look at Apotheosis vid How stack size affects strategy). Also, as he stated above, bloating the pot with a weak range opens villain up to exploitation but only if you're defending properly.

March 24, 2019 | 4:35 a.m.

I think Tyler and Juan Copani both have such videos

March 20, 2019 | 6:04 p.m.

Also i remember the Tyler vid where he rails nosebleeds and cindy XR vs linus on Kh7c3h or something like that and barreled pot on an off suit T and Tyler said Linus prefers to continue ott w/ QhQx compared to QQ without a heart because when he rivers a Q it doesnt bring in the flush. That sounds like such a small effect because of how unlikely it is to happen but i guess when you consider how bloated the pot is becoming in both my example and yours it makes sense to block a possible "cooler".

March 15, 2019 | 7:52 p.m.

I thought about your suggestion for a while before responding to make sure im being honest with myself. In the past i have had more of an issue with lack of focus and not knowing when to quit, trying to chase a loss to prove to myself that im not a loser. Or quitting too early to preserve a small win but more importantly preserving the "feeling" of being a winner. Ive learned how to recognize when im emotionally compromised and leave the table or leave when im unfocused. What im wondering is, does there come a point where you become less emotionally attached to results, good or bad, just by playing more and confronting those attachments? Do humans naturally adapt to losing, fear, etc. with practice?

March 14, 2019 | 8:21 p.m.

Ive heard good players say that "we do a good job of blocking villain's higher-equity hands" that continue vs a bet/raise. I've also heard that "we have more equity when the flush does come in". For example if the river came the 3c we would have a more profitable bluff-catch after XRing turn? Im not really sure if the context of your question matches the context of what im saying but i hope it can continue the discussion of something that is interesting if not important. I myself dont have a game plan for XR turn (and playing rivers when called) on this particular texture with this hand category but ive seen this trend in solver outputs in other spots and would love some context for this mystery.

March 13, 2019 | 9:38 p.m.

Ive played poker for over a decade and currently gring husngs and 6max cash Poker is just a manifestation of the issues ive struggled with my entire life: Attachment to certain results leading to fear of losing or entitlement or confirmation bias, projecting onto other players creating a false & rigid narrative of whats going on without being able to reassess my assumptions. In other words i am results oriented and i jump to conclusions...big surprise. These are the same things i have done in other facets of my life since i was young.

I start my sessions well, keeping a balanced, open mind to evaluate the right variables and seeing things truthfully (or so it feels) but there comes a certain point where i get sucked into emotion/fear depending on my results or I start projecting. At this point im flying by the seat of my pants grabbing onto the first thought that fits my narrative. I can even sense when i have ventured into this place and it takes awhile to right the ship. Its not like an on and off switch.I have gotten better throughout the years and can play better for longer. But that is only some background information to help you shed some light on my real question...

Assuming I already do the things off the table (journal, TMGP, meditate, etc.) that help me understand my issues at their core and i am aware of myself even as i venture into this fight or flight stress state, will simply playing more to practice corrcting myself when i slip into this state help me progress? I know ive improved but its hard to target the reason why ive improved. Has anyone else had this issue and improved over time just because theyve had to confront it more often by playing more? Am i answering my own question and just impatient with myself and the speed of my progress?

March 13, 2019 | 7:41 p.m.

Comment | Pitsquared commented on GTO + SOLVER

Ive been using GTO+ extensively since its inception. I have a decent database of solutions using HU ranges at different stack sizes (srp, 3bet, iso, limp pots) and i was hoping someone else had a database of deep (100 bb stack+) hu range solutions that they want to trade for access to my files. Let me know

Jan. 31, 2019 | 4:12 a.m.

+1.Every time I see Krab doing 6-max or Sauce doing fusion or staking or anything that's not playing HU or shorthanded at nosebleeds I'm severely disappointed.

Dec. 22, 2018 | 3:32 a.m.

Its been done before but its exciting and extremely helpful. As a HU player i would love to see a RIO coach break down a replay of high stakes HU (or short handed) action between the best players in the world. We've seen video playbavk of matches analyzed by Tyler and KRab but i think a mash up of interesting hands between top pros would make my heart sing. Maybe a little solver intertwined too

Nov. 30, 2018 | 2:16 a.m.

I mostly play hu sngs and 6max cash now but I'll share GTO+ databases and maybe my flashcards with like poker minds. add me on skype

July 17, 2018 | 3:15 a.m.

I think the size you chose on the flop is problematic for a couple reasons. 1) The only reason to bet small or xr is if you think villains are stabbing/raising enough to make that line profitable. VS passive villains it's probably better to get as much value as you can by betting yourself and bottom two is the perfect hand to start betting given you unblock top pair. If villains are only betting top pair+ and checking the rest of their range you're just allowing them to realize equity and pot control with 77-JJ by checking. 2) You really don't learn much about V1's range by betting small on flop given her range is so undefined preflop. Passive players might raise QT+ when you bet 1/3x but likely are only raising AQ+ or maybe only KK+ when you bet bigger.

Either way, if there's any chance she has KK I don't think you can fold given your stack size

July 4, 2018 | 10:43 p.m.

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