I recommend going even smaller, maybe 25%.
The thing to understand is that when you bet small, you are getting a better price on a fold equity.
The small bet is used when villain will have a hard time defending wide enough. For example, If you bet 25% pot on say, JJ7r, villain needs to continue about ~80% of the time. The average player will drastically overfold compared to this benchmark.
July 30, 2021 | 6:13 a.m.
When a hand mixes between actions those actions should have the same EV. So if it's mixed between folding/something else then it's 0EV regardless - that's a hard principle of NE.
The only reason it mixes is to avoid exploitation. Typically the exact mixture is gonna come down to subtle blocker effects.
July 27, 2021 | 6:31 a.m.
0 money in the pot
Change your parameters, this right here will break your solve. You need some money in the pot to incentive betting.
The solution will be to bet only the nuts and then they fold everything worse than the nuts (100% fold since they can't have the A), but also checking the nuts has the same EV as betting since it's all 0EV regardless.
July 27, 2021 | 6:22 a.m.
GTO Wizard is significantly higher quality than solver+. The solver+ is fine for the kind of analysis you do on a phone, but GTO+ has more accurate preflop ranges, more robust solutions, and much bigger trees.
July 19, 2021 | 2:21 a.m.
Those are discontinued.
From what I've read on their discord, they're making their new preflop ranges free in a few weeks (to combat pirating). https://preflop.zenith.poker/
Also recommend checking out the DonkPot discord. They took the free zenith monker solves and made their own viewer. https://discord.gg/J7hJZBRzKC
July 17, 2021 | 1:34 a.m.
Something to consider is that blockers dictate equity which dictates hand strength.
July 10, 2021 | 8:35 p.m.
You have to identify where they split too value heavy. You can absolutely burn a ton of money exploiting the wrong direction.
1) We assume villain is balanced and polarized on the turn, but will give up too much on the river. We call turn wider to exploit by over-realizing medium hands.
2) Villain was actually underbluffing turn, so your exploit backfires and you end up with a bunch of garbage with no real SDV against a range that has you crushed.
p.s. the real exploit lies in destroying their castrated checking range.
July 3, 2021 | 4:07 a.m.
Use stronger bluffs on the river. Not every 0-equity hand has to be turned into a bluff.
Identify the bottom of your calling range; you have tons of pairs/heart blocker type hands that are too weak to call and make better raising candidates. There's really no need to reach this far for bluffs.
June 30, 2021 | 7:37 a.m.
If you want to understand this from a theoretical perspective, try solving the 0-1 game.
MDF doesn't work here, because "bluffs" have equity, and "value" isn't pure value. Checking back has EV.
Both players have a random hand strength from 0.0000 to 0.9999 or anything in between. OOP checks everything, you can pot or check back and see showdown.
What's your weakest value bet? What's your strongest bluff?
June 24, 2021 | 6:14 a.m.
When you bet the flop, you reduced their range to mostly Jx, 6x and 2x. When the turn pairs, the aggressor should generally slow down, as the defender will often have a higher proportion of trips.
You then proceeded to overbet shove 3x pot on the turn for some reason. That's a huge mistake.
May 25, 2021 | 6:44 a.m.
The vast majority of BTN's range are pocket pairs and overcards. They have a lot of medium and not that much air, so you aim to make their pairs indifferent, which requires more fire power.
25% of your range (overpairs+) beats like 90% of their range (99-), so you can definitely polarize the flop. If you were deeper than your reverse implied odds from running into trips becomes more of a problem.
May 18, 2021 | 6:50 a.m.
Solve the flop for two bet sizes, then see which size is preferred on what flop and resolve for 1 size, simplifying each flop as necessary.
It's a ton of work, but it's also good training for knowing when a (Small-wide) bet is good and when (Big-polar) bet is good.
May 18, 2021 | 2:48 a.m.
More rake means less EV means every hand from move one gets dragged down.
There is an extra dollar in the blinds which incentivizes you to play wider, but the extra rake incentivizes you to play tighter. Hard to say which one has the greater effect on your opening strategy, but it will probably be the rake
A lot of preflop theory is geared towards no-flop no-drop. It's why you're supposed to 3bet huge preflop oop. It's why 3b/fold is so common. Without the incentive to take down the pot pre, you're less incentivized to play hyper-aggressive pre. There will still be raises of course, but I imagine a lot of hands shift from raises to calls.
May 12, 2021 | 2:30 a.m.
Large bets on dry paired boards are generally rare. If BB is betting everything it must have a huge range & nut advantage.
There aren't enough details in this post to verify the claim. What are the exact ranges, SPR, and rake structure being used here?
May 4, 2021 | 1:41 a.m.
How does fish making polarization errors, betting with weak/medium made hands affect this concept?
The mistake is that they are inefficient and exploitable.
They won't get much showdown value with medium because these hands either fold you out or narrow you down to a range that has medium crushed.
Meanwhile, their passive ranges are so capped that they don't get to realize equity with half their range..
You can overfold bluff-catchers because they aren't bluffing. You need to be able to beat a bluff (or cleanly outdraw value). If their weakest bluff is 2nd pair, then you're not making a mistake folding 3rd pair.
April 28, 2021 | 6:16 a.m.
MDF is so easy to misuse.
1) MDF is 1 - 58.3% = 41.6% on the river. Villain needs you to fold 58% to break even on a pure bluff.
2) if their river bluffs have equity then you defend less than MDF. Your goal is to make their bluffs indifferent between betting and checking. If their bluffs have value as a check, and you call exactly MDF, then the EV of checking becomes higher than bluffing. Thus you compensate by overfolding a bit to make them indifferent between checking and betting
3) You only call hands that have enough equity to meet pot odds on the river. That's true in theory, and in practice. Solvers don't always adhere to MDF, but they 100% adhere to pot odds on the final bet.
April 28, 2021 | 5:44 a.m.
Y is exploitable and does not play perfect GTO. It doesn't matter which suboptimal strategy Y adopts, he will always lose to X.
Not always true. GTO doesn't punish mixing mistakes.
Player A, B, and C all play a GTO strategy, with one twist-
Player A always folds any hand that is indifferent/mixed between folding and another action.
Player B always calls any hand that is indifferent/mixed between calling and another action.
Player C always raises any hand that is indifferent/mixed between raising and another action.
Player A, B and C would all have the exact same EV vs a fixed GTO player. At the same time Player A, B and C would all be exploitable.
It is impossible for perfect GTO to be the highest EV strategy against an opponent who does not play perfect GTO.
GTO can be equal to or lower than the most exploitative strategy.
GTO is the best strategy against an adjusting opponent who will punish mistakes. Exploitative is just a fancy word for a strategy that is specifically optimized to destroy some fixed strategy. Obviously the solution to the general strategy will not be as razor sharp as the solution against a specific strategy.
As soon as X deviates from GTO to exploit Y, he in turn becomes exploitable and exposes himself to the risk of actually being a losing player against Y if Y adopts the correct counter strategy
Usually yes, but there can be multile nash equilibria in certain situations. They could change from one equilibrium strategy to another, which Y plays worse against, without becoming exploitable themselves.
April 28, 2021 | 5:17 a.m.
QJs has more equity than A8o against a range of any two cards.
Avoid hand vs hand equity comparisons because they lead to rock-paper-scissors situations.
e.g. A8o > QJs > 22 > A8o > QJs > 22 > A8o > QJs > 22 > etc etc
The value of drawing increases as stacks get deeper. You don't want to play for 100bb stacks with top pair no kicker, you want to play these big pots with hands that can draw to the nuts.
If you want to read more about this, google "equity realization".
April 28, 2021 | 4:32 a.m.
Start by defining your "continue" range, then shift the entire line of indifference tighter. Marginal calls become bluffs, marginal 3b bluffs become folds, thin value 3bets become calls.
There are two lines of indifference:
Value line- hands which are thin value 3bets or strong calls.
Continue line - Hands that are almost too weak to play. EV of continuing very close to folding.
The easiest way to implement this is to use preflop charts that are specific to every position. Then just pretend you're playing an earlier position.
Would you 3bet an OMC nit UTG with the same range you'd use against an 80%VPIP whale in the SB? Of course not.
I don't think 3betting ranges change that much vs tighter ranges
They change significantly. Compare a SB/BB 3bet vs UTG to vs BTN.
For example, a hand that has x ev when called but has x+0.01 when 3bet
0.01 is usually within dEV so just treat that as solver noise.
If X is 0, this is an indifferent continue against a GTO range, and a losing continue against a stronger range (not considering explo factors).
April 28, 2021 | 4:12 a.m.
Stop limping altogether.
Just always raise KK+ at the microstakes. You really don't have to get that fancy.
You trap with the nuts when you think the value of trapping is greater than the value of raising. Maybe they bet a lot against your flatting range, but overfold to your raising range. The other side of that reasoning is that trapping helps defends the rest of your flatting range to prevent being run over.