He's the face of upswing, RIO training's biggest competitor. Even if they wanted to ask him I highly doubt any deal would make him promote RIO poker (and in effect RIO training). Moreover he lives in the US so would have to relocate to play.
April 15, 2019 | 7:55 p.m.
Hey Pete great video! I was just trying to access your website but received a 404 Error "The requested URL was not found on this server - tried on different browsers and changing DNS settings. There's also an unsecure connection. Could you look into this please?
Edit: Also I think the mental game book would be well worth every player's time as this is a particularly undercovered area of the game when compared to the technical side. You also have a nice thought process that resonates with me so would love to hear your thoughts on the mental game.
As for further video suggestions I would love to see you play some 25z and recreate your "comparing triangulum" video for lower stakes talking about the leaks that population tends to have. I think a Key concepts: Multiway pots would also be particularly beneficial as multiway pots are very common in LS live and MS online and learning the correct adjustments would be highly beneficial to win rate.
April 15, 2019 | 1:34 p.m.
What flushes do you think villain can have in this scenario? Axh are the main 4bet bluff hands pre that get there but we block all those. I agree this is an interesting spot. Really makes me wish I had PIO in spots like this.
April 8, 2019 | 2:56 p.m.
Yes thanks - obviously we can never be sure of villain's range but I can't see much else that villain can take this line with. Do you think this range is appropriate?
April 8, 2019 | 2:55 p.m.
CO: $9.46 (Hero)
April 8, 2019 | 12:48 p.m.
Yeah no recreational player is going to want to pay to play; if you have no recreationals you have no game. The reason rake works so well is because recreational players don't realise or care that it exists.
April 5, 2019 | 12:19 p.m.
Great video but I have a question. In the first hand example @22:35 PIO likes to use a big bet sizing with hands like A3s and A2s. Should these not be in our checking range or in the "smaller bet" range in a partially polarized sub-range? Why are they using big bets when they will struggle to extract value and are too strong to bluff using this sizing? I would have thought PIO would have bet small near 100% with these hands for protection and value.
April 3, 2019 | 3:27 p.m.
Is my analysis sound? Was this fold too nitty?
Rake is $0.10
April 2, 2019 | 3:07 p.m.
Hey Pete! You're my favourite coach on this site and my favourite video of yours was Comparing Triangulum, however, i'm not currently playing NL50/NL100 and would love to see you play some lower stakes (even just NL25) and talk about the population tendencies and adjustments similar to your comparing triangulum video. Thanks very much!
April 2, 2019 | 2:50 p.m.
Good video - thanks for reviewing my hand! (The NL5z one). I think i've got stuck in a rut of maybe overusing the block bet because it makes my decision points easier. Population under bluff raises that sort of river and I thought I could still get value from Ax from a player trending towards weak/passive. If he raises I have an easy fold, whereas if I check and he bets it's a tricky spot.
March 14, 2019 | 7:32 p.m.
CO: $6.88 (Hero)
March 9, 2019 | 5:50 p.m.
SB: $6.21 (Hero)
March 9, 2019 | 5:47 p.m.
Well played. If you want to incorporate some AA into your calling range then I would call with hands that don't have the Ad as this is a card that villain could conceivably bluff turn with. That being said vs this player type I wouldn't think about blockers too much and would lay this down the large majority of the time
Feb. 21, 2019 | 8:09 p.m.
Just move up if and when you have the bankroll. 1k hands is too small a sample to say anything. There's as much chance you are a losing player as there is a winning player from this sample. Play a minimum of 30k (and preferably closer to 100k) to get a rough idea of your win rate.
Feb. 21, 2019 | 8:01 p.m.
CO: $18.91 (Hero)
Feb. 20, 2019 | 6:18 p.m.
I am a serious player looking to improve. I have played ~300,000 hands of NL2-NL10z with mixed results. I crushed NL2 for 15bb/100 but have been breaking even at NL5 and slightly losing (albeit over a negligible sample) at NL10. I have the aim of being an NL25z winner by the end of 2019 and would like some advice of how I can achieve this, particularly what the main things to study are to beat microstakes poker. What should I make sure that I am good at to raise my winrate at these stakes? Often when I am studying I do not know which things to prioritise as there seems like a lot - I can't quite afford the FTGU course but will be looking to get my hands on it at the earliest opportunity. What things have you guys been doing that you think are effective at the microstakes? Or, if you maybe have experience with students at these stakes then what are the obvious leaks that stand out? I have found that overfolding to aggression (as the population doesn't bluff enough) and betting range in marginal spots (as the population doesn't defend appropriately/raise enough) have worked well.
Alternatively some links to your favourite 6-Max NLHE essential videos here on RIO would be greatly appreciated. My favourite coach is Peter Clarke - I have read both his books and watched all of his videos but am still unable to win regularly at NL5 and NL10z.
Thanks for any comments!
Feb. 18, 2019 | 4:01 p.m.
BN lost and shows a pair of Jacks.
BB wins $9.51
Rake is $0.41
Feb. 18, 2019 | 3:11 p.m.
I didn't say we should bet range but the smaller your bet size the more you should bet because otherwise you are betting small with a polarized range which means villain can call all of his bluffcatchers profitably, so if we don't want to bet many hands on this board (we shouldn't as it is bad for our range) we should be betting bigger.
Feb. 10, 2019 | 4:51 p.m.
Should we not size up on monotone boards specifically because they are bad for our range and we want to bet more polarised? Isn't betting 1/3 with a wider range very bad here?
Feb. 9, 2019 | 5:01 p.m.
Strange hand, I begrudge plays like this where somebody shoves the nut board meaning we both have to pay more rake (when priced in obviously). Any reason why you limp behind with 33? In this high rake environment and IP do you not prefer an iso or fold?
Feb. 9, 2019 | 12:05 p.m.
Yeah I remember Peter Clarke said in one of his videos that when villain has a very snug value range it doesn't take much unpredictability for villain to be overbluffing. That being said villain is never betting a Q here so we have a pure bluffcatcher and with the backdoor diamonds getting there villain can't have to many natural bluffs. I feel like this is AQ more often than not so i'm fine with the fold against population.