RReivax

On the last hand, knowing Vilain is recreational, I would be tempted to block bet to have him call his Ax hands and fold vs his jams since I assume he won't be turning any of his Ax hands into a bluff. Would you recommend against that in practice and only GTO check? (maybe when we actually can't be sure that villain won't attack our face-up sizing?)
I think I'm biased as I find it easier on the mental aspect to bet/fold than pure check/fold.

Something that helped me for that is to take time to mark hands where I feel like I was not sure what to do, or missed value or potential bluff. It makes you feel like you are working for the long run and less inclined to actually look at the current result (I actually go in the "report" tab of HM2 with a filter on VPIP to find hands quickly to mark for review, so I don't have access to current session results).

Well I have 6bb/100 on 120k hands on nl2, with a long breakeven start, and nl10 doesn't have a particular high rake what are you talking about ? Anyway, not really here to discuss sample size in every detail I guess.
But it's nice to say that I just suck and ran good before, gratz

aamadeo nevermind, I guess you were trying to say that I should not see any result in a sample that is that small, but still, it never happens to me to loose 10 buy-ins in so few hands when I play lower stakes

aamadeo I never spoke about a current winrate in 16-25, I know the sample is ridiculously small, and for my nl10 winrate well, you seem to like to be picky, why do you think I state a sample size there ? (Sorry but your answer is not really helping me there, I don't really know what you are trying to say to me)
As for nl16, I was not to sure, got some feedback of players saying they had a harder time with more funky regs, so would you say nl16 is really the way to go ?

@dddogkillah Thank you for your answer, very encouraging. I feel like when I move down to nl10 I find myself trying to do things differently and it's only when I go back to my routine that I start winning again, but yes, sometimes it takes me some times and I really have these unwanted emotions (too many deja-vu situations that just start tilting me sometimes, as if I had to redo it again and again and again)

I'm not to sure but that might be what your conclusion is about, so I guess I'll just watch the part 2 to get a better idea

Hey, thank you for the video ! I have a question regarding therory study of poker. When you work with the equity of hands versus a range, it's very rare that you can realise that equity easily, so wouldn't it be more accurate if instead of hand equity we would speak in "winning equity", and look more in detail postflop plays instead of preflop hand equity ?
Just to be sure I'm clear, let's say you only need 25% equity to call profitably, 85o might have that equity, but we are not going the win the hand 25% of the time versus an aggressiv player for example, and we might win it more than 40% vs a weak player.
Don't you believe that looking for vilain postflop tendancies/leaks should be the first thing to look at when actually playing, as there is a lot of spots that are almost played the same way with ATC ?

I'm just wondering as it takes quite some time to do all that theory work, and even if I love it and find very intersting, I don't see myself applaying it at all when playing.
Thank you very much :)