Enjoy the format, if possible to sort hands ahead of time to the one's you've notated skipping the dead scrolling time that would be ideal. Run it Up horse replayer looking fantastic, props to the RIU guys.
Jan. 18, 2020 | 10:29 a.m.
I think us holding the Kd in this scenario (as you said not much going into the pot/overall passive line) is more significant of a blocker in the sense that it weights him towards more made hands rather than us using it to represented the "nuts" in a bluff. A number of his "see what happens semi-bluffs" on the turn for that sizing can/should have a high diamond. I guess to me this river spot comes down to when he checks oop how often are we really ahead (against a good player I don't think very often) and what is the relative strength of our exact combo in our range and its EV as a check vrs the EV of bluffing.
When we bluff here it's safe to assume OP is folding the vast majority of hands that beat us here, would need some random Ad that they are only now deciding to turn into a check raise bluff, so we are losing an extremely small % of "our share" of the pot when bluffing, but I think we can get a significant % of better hands to fold that villain is likely to show up with given the sizing on the turn and the river check. Of course the EV here really just depends on how often villain is defending vrs whatever sizing we choose to go with....
Jan. 18, 2020 | 5:18 a.m.
Phil Galfond Top left, 10 minutes. You state KQ with the King of diamonds is too strong to turn into a bluff here. Not sure if I agree, as you stated his value range on the turn with that sizing mostly consists of weak two pairs and over pairs. There is also very little in the way of draws on the turn and I think we can expect villain to continue most blocker based bluffs on this river.
I don't think we win at showdown vrs a strong villain checking river so to me seems like K diamonds and the Q make this a decent bluff candidate. If we aren't turning this hand into a bluff here what hands are you preferring to turn into a bluff on this river that arrive here with this line?
Jan. 16, 2020 | 12:25 a.m.
Richard Gryko Exceptional video. I personally found this one of the highest value "training" videos that I've watched, not necessarily from the theory perspective (which was solid but intuitive), but more from the idea of challenging myself to get more out of the extra content I'm watching. I agree that studying games outside your comfort zone are stimulating and can often lead to surprising cross game learning moments, but something I haven't done nearly enough of is intentionally try to extrapolate cross game conclusions or hypothesis and then test it myself. Listening to and watching your thought process of these two hands, from inception of the idea to completion of the testing, really motivates me to do some deeper digging. Instead of just going "oh that's interesting I wonder if I could apply it here..." actually run the sims, look at the hands, and see if I could apply it there, or anywhere for that matter. And if I can't why, and why was I wrong about thinking I could?
I think solvers in a way have allowed
Really appreciate this one. Keep up the great work.
Jan. 11, 2020 | 3:49 a.m.
Watching this video pretty late, just doing some HU study of various older videos. Minute 32: I strongly disagree we are potting our entire betting range. We can leverage the SPR much better on a turn this wet with multiple sizings, and our hand definitely wants to be betting 1/2 pot to keep in hands we are absolutely crushing. Especially in position here where OP may call then bluff missed combo draws in the river, I think potting is hugely -EV
Minute 36 I think is a give up with our hand and that run out. Block draws, mostly unblock calls, he reps a 3 more credibly than we do, we don't have that many value bets by the river etc etc
Jan. 9, 2020 | 12:13 p.m.
Going to post about that first QJ over call when I'm more awake because right now I want to plant a flag/die on my sword and whatever other hyperbole you want to use that check over-calling after the button calls that sizing is -EV for a bunch of reasons that I'm going to think about further before potentially embarrassing myself at 4am.
For now a more generic question: Seems like you disagreed with quite a few of past phil's decisions all around the 24 minute mark while 3 fairly complex hands are going on at once. You are about as experienced as anyone when it comes to multi-tabling high stakes plo, but how much do you think these hands happening at the same time lessened your ability to come to the best decisions here, if any, versus simply disagreeing after further evaluation later? When these spots come up how do you approach it from a mental organization standpoint?
For me if I try to pause and breakdown multiple streets of a tricky hand while analyzing a tough river spot, I find I often forget/ignore important information for other hands I'm in.
Jan. 7, 2020 | 12:15 p.m.
2 minutes left in this video and there has not been blood. Misleading title, excellent content. All you need is an accent for a @Sergey Nesterenko video.
Personally fine skipping the HU portion and moving to a new series, as you stated there is a lot of HU plo content available and you contribute uniquely valuable insights in your tournament videos.
Jan. 6, 2020 | 9:26 a.m.
What a bizarre hand minute 30. Tagult has to be making this raise for some sort of weird protection/bluff merge thinking UTG so rarely has boats, he has a straight blocker, so he can get protection from flush draws and fold out some weird KK limp combos? Also just could be an exploitative ICM
Jan. 4, 2020 | 12:35 p.m.
First hand, can you talk about why you went with half pot here and what your sizing strategy is when leading on a lockdown turn? I personally use a blocker/pot sizing strategy in this spot so always interested in another perspective even if it isn't changing EV much.
Hand 2 just seems extremely standard, not sure if it was worth the in depth break down. Only real decision is deciding to check to the rec you think is over-bluffing. River is a fist pump snap call. I'd say this is more the theme of the video, recognizing and exploiting a rec's tendencies.
27 minutes: Curious with what frequency you are mixing call/raise on the turn. I lean pretty heavily towards raise here given the stack depth and how rarely I think we can get raises for value on the river called on cards that we do end up raising for value if led into.
Jan. 3, 2020 | 12:21 a.m.
First thanks for the continued mix game content. Only got to catch the first bit of this now so may have comments later but:
15 minutes: Betting is ok but prefer a check back with this hand, our hand plays much worse vrs his continuing range and I expect to get x/r'd off our equity a fair amount here when we can play turns fairly well in position. Turn as played definitely seems like a fold.
Jan. 1, 2020 | 3:58 a.m.
Alien Slayer Interesting. Not sure if I agree with this one. I think A) population is checking twice to trap far less often on double FD boards than a solver B) playing non nuts far less aggressively and a huge portion of that consists of NFD's+ stuff. While I agree that once we get check raised we don't love our hand vrs range, I still think it is the lesser of too evils vrs allowing a huge range of hands with decent equity vrs our holding to A) see a free card B) never get value from on the river since we can never bet our AA for value and will be hard to get value if our flush comes in vrs non straights.
Appreciate you running this. I may just be thinking about this spot wrong, but for now still feels like betting is just higher EV.
Dec. 29, 2019 | 9:52 a.m.
18: Not a fan of the turn check here. I think the K clubs is a card we want to be betting, charging the huge amount of pair+straight draws and pair+flush draws that will be continuing. I think villain has very few nuts at this point (only showed up with them here because had both FD's), and living in fear of the check raise by sets isn't worth not getting value from a ton of hands that are calling this turn and protection from jt9x etc. Would be interested to see if you run this spot.
To me this hand analysis seems very results oriented.
Dec. 28, 2019 | 2:33 a.m.
For the 22m hand the bet makes a lot more sense if we are using a check/pot strategy as apposed to one with multiple sizing's here.
36m: If we aren't going with a range check here what are we using as our bluffs, NFD's without AA or straight draw?
Dec. 26, 2019 | 11:09 p.m.
At 13 minutes, bottom left. Agree with that being a high frequency lead on the river, but wasn't following some of the reasoning behind it. I think the biggest reason that specific hand leads is we are blocking a lot of his bluffs and none of his calling range (other than a single 5). Holding 2 clubs here especially weights us to a bet.
21 minutes: Not sure how credible our pot size bluff is given our range on the river. Don't have many straights here as the UTG raiser and don't show up with much QQ/KK after the flop check back. I think this trends more towards a block bet sizing targeting Qxxx/ pair+FD hands, and SD+pair hands that continued on river. Has small characteristics of a good bluffing hand blocking no diamonds and a 5 but I villain shows up with a lot of 2 pair that can call here. If the bet is just exploitatively saying population is simply over folding to pot here then seems fine.
36 minutes top left: This flop might be a range check as the BB 3b'r and a SPR of 5-1. While it's great to pile chips in with this much equity leaves us pretty unbalanced?
38 top right: I like a bet on the flop here. Our hand has a lot of equity heads up but potentially not very much 4 handed. I think we benefit a lot from a protection bet/thinning the field here.
Let me know your thoughts on these spots. Thanks!
Dec. 26, 2019 | 5:46 a.m.
Hey Richard great first video. Clearly a high level thought process and am looking forward to your future videos. Specifically appreciate how often you explain your exploitative adjustments and your view on population tendencies.
Couple small feedback personal opinions since it's your first video:
I don't think you need to make an effort to make eye contact with the camera after talking points. Personally found it a bit distracting.
Can't read any of the HUD stats clearly, so when you are mentioning an action due to a players stats best to read the stat itself like you were with the players vpip and defend stats on table one when talking about your button opens.
Dec. 25, 2019 | 8:33 a.m.
This was the hand I was interested in as well, as my thought was the same as Endymions when first watching: C/folding here seems like an over fold
I haven't run this spot yet, but my guess is that a solver is going to use this hand as a mix 3 options if you give them 2 flop sizing's, block, c fold, and c/call at a smaller frequency. I would guess we C/fold somewhere between 50-60 person of our KKxx hands without diamonds, and that this particular hand mixes at around 50/50 due to the lack of diamond but containing a 2 pair blocker.
I don't think we can just check fold 100% to a pot bet justified by future play-ability fear and a minor range equity advantage despite the polarity disadvantage. Traveling with only a lap top for a bit but if someone runs this would be interested to see the results
Dec. 25, 2019 | 1:15 a.m.
Oh, this was meant as lighthearted sarcasm. I assumed you/everyone knew I meant the very infamous hand in which he loses his 99.98%er to the crazy backdoor wheel draw. Not an interesting hand to analyze, just one of the absolute craziest hands ever televised.
Dec. 22, 2019 | 9:07 a.m.
Iteopepe88 Late to the party here but catching up on some mix game study. Why do you prefer not having a 3b range at all vrs something like a 3b range that mixes 80% premiums with 20% semi bluffs + a calling range that mixes medium strength and premiums. Is getting the extra bet in on 3rd street when pushing a smaller equity advantage simply not worth implementing a mix strategy? Or is the value being fully disguised for later streets just higher?
Dec. 20, 2019 | 2:03 a.m.
30 minutes. You mention AQQ6 as a slow play or QQ with a SD, for the former I don't think this is ever in our 3b from the BB even double suited at 100 bb's with a button caller, and the latter has VERY few combos in the 3b range as well. I'm struggling to find enough x/r value combos here to stay balanced. I'd be curious if you have run this spot what the solver is using as the x/r's.
Dec. 18, 2019 | 1:09 a.m.
I think population is actually likely to play better versus a small bet in this spot. A smaller bet takes the pressure of the hands we want to be pushing towards indifference and leverages the spr significantly worse as well.
I think we have to be careful making "cutsie" bets in spots that our we gain a significant range advantage IP and are facing essentially a pure checking range to not make villains continues too easy thus almost counteracting our advantage.
Nov. 5, 2019 | 7:27 a.m.
Richard Gryko Doing a little brushing up myself. Question for you in regards to the first hand, do you think population at the higher/est levels of PLO tournaments is 4 betting pre-flop with a "correct" range? My experience in spots like this is that population is 4 betting dramatically tighter than a solver range when facing a limp 3 bet and was curious if you felt the same way or not and adjusted accordingly.
Last hand seems weird there is an As combo mixing check on river without any specific differences.
What the heck happened to part 2 of this video?
Nov. 5, 2019 | 6:16 a.m.
Don't know about everyone but PFR's often tighten up in a zoom pool when you know specifically there is a fish or targeted player. Might be trying to just get more hands in against that player thus folding marginal spots pre against others
Nov. 2, 2019 | 2:39 a.m.
As usual great stuff Richard. Good balance of solver work and hand review, looking forward to the rest of this series.
Last slide was the most interesting to me, would never have a full pot range on 227 rainbow as the PFR. Interesting to see how frequently that's being used
Nov. 2, 2019 | 2:38 a.m.
Joni Jouhkimainen Really good content. 19 minutes table 1. Do you think after this checks through you have multiple size leads with the nuts multi-way? Or always potting? I always feel like I'm not balancing my bluff sizing multi-way with enough full pot bets trying to take advantage of the combined MDF, so in return I think I backwards adjust to myself by not potting this spot enough.
Oct. 25, 2019 | 6:30 a.m.
Appreciate the high level mix game content. Great video
For the PLO hand at 59: Common thought mistake here. It's never a disaster to get check raised when you have 0 showdown value + your draws aren't (mostly, 6 nut outs) nutted. I don't expect us to get check raised much on this board as hand like KKxx and AKJ6 would keep betting for value and protection on a board this wet. This type of hand with no showdown value makes a decent bluffing candidate with the biggest downside being no blockers to made hands