Right that's what I understood too. So in this particular case we can either have 1bfd or 2 bdfd because we presumably only have ds combos of this hand. with both categories (1 or 2 bdfd) it's advocating for a fairly high bet frquency ~45%.
I think this could be because our hand actually unblocks a lot of folds AAxx/AKQx hands; the board is decent for our range; we certianly can't check call; and we can turn the nuts/ set of 3's which will likely be the best hand; or we can turn a decent pair/draw to continue.
Based on what Vision told us, I felt this spot deserved a bit more attention than you gave it. Thoughts?
Oct. 7, 2020 | 4:19 p.m.
At 12:40 we have KQ33 on T96r. At the top right it says KQ33(0%), why is it saying 0% there? And is it saying we should check 55% and bet 45% of KQ33 combos here?
Oh and as per your question to the viewers, I would prefer a more focused approach.
Oct. 6, 2020 | 5:42 p.m.
I've been focusing on PLO for the last 4 years and am now looking to get back into NLHE because there are some good games I'd like to play in.
The games run deep with a few regs.
Would it be recommended for me to purchase some preflop solutions for different stack depths as a starting point? And from there working with PIO. I have experience with PIO and Monker (for PLO) already.
June 16, 2020 | 10:16 a.m.
Just to clarify... Do you mean a Khh + wrap hand would always raise, you spoke about it incorrectly in the video and your filter on screen at this point is actually not showing this category of hand?
Good job for going over this and spotting it. Nice to see that thoroughness.
How are you finding Visions since then? Have you been using it much?
Feb. 23, 2020 | 6:11 p.m.
I have just purchased a month to try it out. I have some off the bat questions.
1) What rake structure is used? It looks like it could all be rake for $1/$2 game?
2) How high quality are the preflop ranges used for the outputs?
3) WIll there be 200bb situations added?
4) How many iterations per node for postlfop spots?
5) Will there be multiway spots?
6) Will there be ways to study exploitative solutions?
7) Why at the end of the "Getting started" does it say UTG will be added but you can already toggle to UTG position with the seat icon (it makes me wonder if the graphic is just incorrect and in fact it is another positions ranges that are in play).
8) How did they choose which spots to have multiple bet sizes or not, and how can we know how much EV we are losing when adopting a simpler strategy?
It seems a lot of this information is hidden for one reason or another and players like myself will have these questions. Unless of course I am not the target for such a tool, in which case I'd like to know that too.
Feb. 19, 2020 | 11:41 p.m.
I was also curious about this. I checked a 2k preflop solution and it has SB limping KK 32% of the time and then limp/calling 64%, which seems to mainly consist of rainbow KK and the worse single suited KK (which KK93 qualifies for).
FWIW: Overall the solution has us limping 20% of range in SB unopened and raising 30%.
Jan. 22, 2020 | 2:10 p.m.
Hi Ben. Good job on the series!
@ 13:55 you talk about opponents shoving range on K946dd 6, and we see in PIO that he shoves almost all KQ and checks a decent amount of AK, is this because AK is blocking a section IP's calling range of A9?
Been a bit out of touch the NL so forgive me here.
Jan. 16, 2020 | 2:16 p.m.
Really great video. Ironically I felt rather engaged after the preamble about easily auto piloting through videos we're familiar with, so excellent job there!
Two small nitpicks: at 29:20 you speak about the fact that JTs and KQs block J9s, T9s and K9s, but the board already blocks these hands, nevertheless the point is clear.
Then shortly afterwards you speak about how A8 and A6 have the highest EV since they "have 1 out to a straight flush". I suspect the reason for them having this higher EV is actually because they block opponent from having the straight flush. When opponent has 86s we get stacked almost 100% of the time whilst we have an A high flush. Also making the straight flush isn't that valuable when we already have the nut flush because opponent will be more reluctant to put money in with worse, even in the very rare situation when he makes quads or a full house he will be worried about straight flush.
Anyway like I said - nitpicking.
Jan. 10, 2020 | 2:59 p.m.
I second these points. I think he just means when you look into the camera, although there is clearly a conscious effort coming from you to do this, more than anything it takes our attention away from the tables to look at you at this moment, which is counter productive.
Jan. 5, 2020 | 5 p.m.
The first hand top left AKK3hhh on Ts9d3d... It seems to me that check folding this hand leaves us way over folding on this board, that as you said, seems rather good/OK for us. The hand we have seems to make a good candidate for a pot cbet/get-in, reducing IP playability on this dynamic board and also putting a lot of 1 pair hands and/or weak dd hands in a roughish spot.
Most of all you should just get a ton of folds, which is pretty great.
Were you perhaps a bit nitty here or am I misunderstanding the spot quite horribly? :-)
Otherwise thanks for a quality video.
Dec. 18, 2019 | 2:28 a.m.
Hi Joni, would you mind explaining a bit why an SPR of about 2 on the turn is so favourable. Is it simply because we can put villain in a terrible spot by potting and being more or less committed on the turn? If the SPR was more we wouldn't be able to apply as much pressure?
Dec. 17, 2019 | 2:04 p.m.
Hi Alien Slayer, good video thank you.
Your video brought up something I've never quite got my head around: When he have AAxx and one of our low cards pairs the bottom card, like at 31:00 w/AA43 on JT3 and 35:15 w/AAQ2 on J82, it seems to me that it's generally unfavourable that we paired in this way. With AA43 we mainly just lost one of our outs vs JTxx which is the most likely 2 pair, however with AAQ2 it's different since as you mentioned a Q would give us a better two pair than J8xx.
Am I missing something about this bottom side card pairing in these situations, besides ofc having a blocker to the low 2 pairs and set combos, is it actually bad news that we paired?
A second question, you mentioned the stab when checked to in 3bp stat. I have recently done some work on my HUD and have added this and found it quite helpful, do you have any other stat suggestions that you find particularly useful that might not be obvious inclusions to a HUD.
Dec. 12, 2019 | 3:21 p.m.
I was one of the people requesting PLO8 content, so thank you for delivering so nicely.
Question about Odds Oracle: would you be in favour of someone using the "ranking" tab to find out which hands are ranked at which percentile to get an idea of opening ranges for 3h-6h? Or do you know a better way?
Thanks a lot, would love to see more.
Dec. 5, 2019 | 11:40 p.m.
Why was this series not continued?
July 26, 2019 | 10:48 a.m.
I'm wondering if there is any good content out there for adjusting to a game described as above.
For example if our maniac is opening 70%+ and the player to the left of him is 3betting 30% plus to isolate him and we are sitting in the blinds 200bb eff, how does our cold calling range and cold four betting range change.
I realise stack size and position become way more important in this scenario.
The value in the game is getting into pots with him, and because he is deviating drastically from optimal ranges everyone else needs to too.
I feel there is a lack of content on this site about playing vs maniacs.