Raphael Nogueira's avatar

Raphael Nogueira

1545 points

The flop size doesn't accomplish anything, you don't get enough value when your hand is pretty good (compared to how it will look on most runouts) and your betting range is super narrowed for value and for bluffs. I'd lean towards betting pot and going broke with it.

Nov. 8, 2018 | 3:45 p.m.

Having the Jh this is probably fold since it blocks the most likely IP bluffs. I doubt people on 109's are bluffing enough to KJ be a +ev call even without a heart, specially on this texture. AK is a mandatory call but be aware of your turn checking range to include hands that are good bluff catchers on rivers, this one is definitely not.

Sept. 10, 2018 | 1:54 p.m.

HRC does only preflop calculations, so the raise range is assumed to confront with the call range to a check down scenario postflop. This leaves SB and BB playing extremely loose preflop strategies.

Aug. 24, 2018 | 5:55 p.m.

Mostly agree.

Ran the preflop spot on HRC (the program assumes the hand goes check down so there is some weird SB flat calls) using ICM.

Adjusting to the more "realistic" strategy play then 22 is losing significantly preflop.

Aug. 22, 2018 | 7:58 p.m.

Overwhelming tournament video. First hand. Fedor is playing a extremely unusual game tree (pre and post) on this stacks setup. As far I checked (ICM wise) this board gets checked on the 96th percentile and OOP never uses pot on the turn when he decides to half pot flop. He is definitely exploiting something on this strategy. Pre, probably Salomon and Smith underdefending and post not really sure.

It should rely on one assumption that if IP always 3bet As[K-T] and fold the lower offsuit aces, then it makes Justin overdefend by 1.6% (considering he calls flop with 9d8d, Td9d, JdTd, QdTd, Jd9d, QdJd, Qd9d, KQ-KJ, KxJx-Kx9x, 77, 8x7x, As2s, As9s-As2s,QsJs-Qs8s,JsTs-Js8s,Ts9s-Ts8s,9s8s). If Justin 3bets As[K-T]@50, then he reaches MDF on the turn by calling just KQ-KJ, KxJx-Kx9x, 77, 8x7x.

I disagree on the argument that 22 should bet smaller than AK since 22 have no harmful card removal effects and having a K decreases Justin's calling frequency on the turn by 27% if you consider he continues KQ-KJ, KxJx-Kx9x, 77, 8x7x vs pot. Checking seems a weaker option than betting specially since Justin is not likely to put two bets in with his bluffs very often when OOP turn calling range should be reasonably strong and there are not a large amount of large equity pivots on the river vs that range on K727.

If Justin calls turn with KQ-KJ, KxJx-Kx9x, 77, 8x7x then he doesn't need to defend every Kx by the river and the turn large bet by Fedor is really well suited to his specific hand. Since it is a spot largely impacted by ICM what do you expect Justin's counter exploits to be on this situation (assuming Fedor is somewhat balanced on his strategy) ?

Aug. 11, 2018 | 8:23 p.m.

Don't know why but seems like posts here are about mostly unavoidable coolers. 4-bet get it in, shoving 60 blinds vs a wide button 3bet range doesn't look like a thing. I'd trap AA-KK sometimes, QQ are way more vulnerable even against expanded 3-bet ranges. As played, call flop and almost always call down on non [A-K] turns and rivers.

Aug. 9, 2018 | 1:35 p.m.

You have plenty of worse hands in your range and QT even beat some of IP value bets. No brainer call.

July 24, 2018 | 4:36 p.m.

The hands that are folding flop are almost drawing dead against your hand anyway so I wouldn't rely on that too much. There are plenty of hands that need way more protection than AhTx here to design your flop betting range for 1/3 to 1/2 sizing. It is an equilibrium bet for most assumptions for OOP but as long ICM starts to play a large whole, it should dictate more passivity on some spots.

July 3, 2018 | 2:51 p.m.

18 players left on a general pretty soft field I am happy checking back and realizing ~100% of my equity since AhTx can call almost any size from OOP. AhTx crushes in equity a lot of OOP bluffs and still can call even if it misses on bricky runouts when OOP doesn't have a large incentive to be value betting super light given there is already some ICM concerns.

July 3, 2018 | 2:49 a.m.

Considering card removal effects, then OOP only raises flushes on this strategies and obviously IP should'nt reraise very often. But it seems far from reality.

July 3, 2018 | 2:46 a.m.

IP should bet this combo roughly 100% of the time, mostly for 1/2 sizing with this SPR. The best response GTO wise is to shove (shove is better than calling for 0.7bb but Ah5x for example is better to call than shove) given that we realize 100% of our equity.

AhTX is never truly behind, against different assumptions from OOP get it in range we have from 40-55% which is pretty reasonable given the pot is already large and also given that OOP is laggy he should have a reasonable folding region as well. If there is ICM concerns on the spot, then it should be played more cautiously but for me seems a no brainer shove against this player type.

June 29, 2018 | 7:40 p.m.

34:18 As far I checked the whole line by DEX is congruent with the likely equilibriums from both ranges, blocking 9c should make IP follow through turn less often since it blocks a portion of OOP flop floating region that always folds turn but still fine. For me the 7h seemed a bad card to x/c turn the but the sim have at equilibrium IP slowing down with [T-9]7h combos and the 7h will prevent we not having a heart blocker on rivers that complete a flush. Against this pot-pot line by IP, (since you almost folded Qx7h) what type of factors are you weighting to decide your turn defense strategy to make IP indifferent ?

June 25, 2018 | 2:25 a.m.

19:28 Kh9h. are you playing pure checking OOP on QT7 two tone SB vs BTN ? As far I checked, K9 w bdfd should be a lead somewhat frequently from OOP specially against the BTN range who is currently the chip leader and may be opening too wide. The main downside is how ICM dictates passivity on post flop play but stacks as they are, I don't think that is a massive concern with that SPR.

June 19, 2018 | 9:45 p.m.

As far I checked, solvers tend to bet quite large here. Since this a spot that OOP range is quite strong and there aren't too many bluffs, the core solution would be to geometrically size this across three streets on the 65-70% bet size. Even IP always slowplay AA-KK , OOP should bet this size quite often, close to 65% on my sim.

36:19 bottom left, 7h7c. I checked this one if BB folds and OOP should check extremely frequently, ~90% of the time. How do you expect the equilibrium on your bet/check mix to change when BB comes along ?

June 16, 2018 | 12:57 a.m.

24:49 considering only the river play, do you expect to be called by worse over 50% of the time ? Ranges are a bit weird for this one not only for K3o being there but I am clueless about which range IP flats getting to 1.12 SPR OTF. As far I checked into solvers, if OOP uses a geometrically sizing across the streets and decides to check the middling part of the range (wk TP's, QQ, etc) river should be an extremely high frequency check as well.

June 13, 2018 | 1:18 a.m.

15:15 JcTc, why do you decide to use a roughly geometric sizing on this texture ? Would you still use it at larger SPR's (4-6) ? Given positions this is already a quite narrowed range spot in which card removal effects play a huge role. As far I checked into solvers JTs should still be a bluff somewhat frequently OTR when IP always call any boat OTF but mostly for smaller sizing than a hand as A5s (which I assume goes on the 4bet bluff region sometimes as well). Against a smaller bet sizings JJ-TT should be on IP calling range at a decent frequency which makes the card removal effects for this combo somewhat relevant.

June 13, 2018 | 12:40 a.m.

5:21 I really don't get much of this turn bet from Ike.

Assuming this 3bet range from jungle:AA-88,AKs-ATs,KQs-KJs,QJs,AKo-AQo @100% and A5s-A2s,87s,76s,65s,54s,43s @50%.

Ike calling about TT-22,AQs-A2s,KQs-K7s,QJs-Q8s,JTs-J7s,T9s-T7s,98s-97s,87s-86s,76s-75s,65s-64s,54s-53s,43s,32s,A5o, AQo-ATo,KQo-KJo,QJo, and slowplaying AA-KK 10% of the time.

Assuming Ike is betting 1/3 with large chunk of his betting range I don't get his range transition to 1/2 on the turn. I expect the worst high frequency value bet from Ike on the turn to be around QxJd which has decent equity against jungle double street calling range and may want some protection again, differently from other parts of Ike flop betting range that may contain some pairs without a diamond for protection/value.

I checked that into solvers and Ike should be betting on equilibrium almost never (~0.04%) with 1/2 and almost always (~71%) with 75%. Can you detail why this Ike line (33%, 50%, 160% should work better than 33%, 75%, 117%) ?

June 8, 2018 | 2:29 p.m.

@10:58 top left 3c2c. I checked into solvers that turn should be a bet quite often with 32s considering how little showdown value (but I assume IP never bet-calls T9o) do you have and how poorly it performs as check-call not only equity wise but on its own realization. This seems one of your better candidates to check-raise/fold blocking A2-A3/43s (not that is a huge win but still ahead of some other possible picks) and how stacks are designed you still have a large bet to go OTR without pricing in every single Ax on IP range. Can you explain further why you decided to check-call turn ?

June 7, 2018 | 6:15 p.m.

Great idea for a series. Next time, if possible, bring the payout structure as well.

5:13 I agree with most of your reasoning but you didn't touch on $EV of calling here and how possibly not chip leading anymore the FT may hurt the cazzette future strategy on a spot that chip EV wise seems pretty close considering he is facing an "UTG1" range. Thanks.

June 6, 2018 | 9:48 p.m.

Comment | Raphael Nogueira commented on 400$ Wynn

There are players that are quite ICM aware and would open the button way tighter given the stack scenario and those who won't. If it is the second case, this board should be a lead with ~10% frequency from OOP, specially with 88 that doesn't block his flop and turn calling range vs reasonable sizes (33 is more of a lead than 88). His continuing range should be decently wide to make donking good enough given how close equities run on this board on the middle region of ranges.

If he is ICM aware this board should be a check somewhat often since OOP can put a lot of pressure with a variety of draws even though OOP lacks on offsuit two pair combinations. As played turn should be a lead almost always with 88, except when you have the read the is going to hammer twice with low equity hands.

Ac is on the 15th percentile of worse turn cards but you should lead it around ~20% of the time with flushes, sets and strong Ax that not necessarily 3bet pre always and straight draws+club combos.

You have plenty of other hands that can x/c twice that still have decent equity against his betting range but flushes and sets are probably way too strong to be checking and you get value from hands that not necessarily are going to bet when checked to, as broadways with a club. If you want to have sets on your x/c range the ones without a club seems to be the best according to sims.

May 30, 2018 | 2 p.m.

Fold pre. If you are opening on the looser side K9s is prob the worst Kx suited you are opening, but in general is KTs+ so you are pretty close to the bottom of your range to be calling a squeeze OOP and you don't cover anybody to justify calling a bit wider. Floating OOP vs a strong range with no immediate outs seems pretty optimistic.

May 15, 2018 | 1:24 a.m.

Call pre, except with very strong reads that UTG and MP are way too wide. Calling seems pretty bad OOP with no implied odds against the hands we are flipping against. 3bet-folding seems the best as played.

May 15, 2018 | 1:21 a.m.

You are busting on 75-85% range without even cashing. Don't take it too seriously and play as focused as you should play any tournament.

April 19, 2018 | 8:56 p.m.

If you are trying to make him fold AK why do you choose a hand that has an ace on it ?

April 19, 2018 | 8:54 p.m.

nope, mistyped it.

April 4, 2018 | 10:54 a.m.

MP and CO are pretty tight RFI's and BTN if you are not playing the highest stakes you probably can get away opening more as well. You seem to aggro on the preflop battle but your sample size is somewhat small as well. Folding 82% to 3bets specially playing this tight is quite strange.

April 3, 2018 | 9:45 p.m.

with Ks blocker I'd check-call more often since I strength my river range to prevent not having good calling hands against overbets. TT-JJ I expect to bet flop at a extremely high frequency (but I also expect that from his whole range) and probably won't fit on a 1.5x pot range when OOP has a lot of incentive to check-call his Qx more often than betting since it is a card that makes protection less important than [T-6] turn when you hit top pair.

April 3, 2018 | 9:39 p.m.

You have one of the best stack distributions to open since you are getting called at a very low frequency compared to a scenario in which you have deeper stack sizes left to act.
The largest stack at the worst position decreases the overall frequency you are getting played against which makes another point to raising instead of shoving.
The BB is on a stack size that he can't really x/r bluff you as often so it increases your overall equity realisation when you get called.
folding is a large mistake compared to shoving when there is no $EV pressure and shoving is probably a small mistake compared to opening.

April 3, 2018 | 9:35 p.m.

It relies on how good your deep stack game is compared to the field and how much variance are you willing to take. Money in any poker format comes from playing against players that are weaker than you and those are the ones who are more likely to bust on the early levels (on non reentry/rebuy tournaments).

March 22, 2018 | 4:05 p.m.

Probably fold flop right away with a hand that can't really improve considering how frequently his BB defending range has suited hands and how often he leads pot 3 ways without a flush or a set there.

Feb. 23, 2018 | 12:40 p.m.

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