gargamel_fk's avatar


186 points

Hand History | gargamel_fk posted in NLHE: Weird spot with straight
Blinds: $1.00/$2.00 (5 Players) UTG: $345.00
CO: $313.00
BN: $258.00
SB: $436.00
BB: $199.00 (Hero)
We play vs weak reg but standard for softer sites. He plays 22/17 W$WSF 42 low AFQ
Preflop ($3.00) Hero is BB with Q T
UTG folds, CO raises to $6.00, 2 folds, Hero calls $4.00
Flop ($13.00) 9 7 6
Hero checks, CO checks
Could lead but was planning to x/r since Villain overcbet way way too much
Turn ($13.00) 9 7 6 K
Hero checks, CO bets $10.00, Hero raises to $35.00, CO calls $25.00
Turn is interesting but I have 2 pairs and draws and some sets played that way so thats ok to add bluffs with the intention of bombing River
River ($83.00) 9 7 6 K J
Hero bets $70.00, CO raises to $200.00, Hero folds
Now it gets gross. I bet big Villain jams and I have only 88 left. In game I leveled myself in a way that he knows I have so little to call that he never bluffs me but thats probably not the case. If he turns some Ad or Kd here I probably have to call but the more I think about it I have so few flushes on the River that I probably should check and check/call? Thoughts?
Final Pot CO wins $217.00
Rake is $6.00

Oct. 31, 2018 | 11:16 a.m.

I think having option to buyin just with 100bb is not a correct aproach. It is not just anectodical because just from my experience running games on one of the apps. The higher the games the more inclined recreational players are to buyin short. Their experience is also better cause edges are small etc.
Also if you look at the sites that do run short games 20bb-50bb buyin the games with short buyin are consintently softer than the ones with big buyin.

People will hate what I say but if I could eliminate professional shortstacking I would go to as low as 20bb min buyin cause it does effect higher stakes games.
100bb min will severaly affect traffic for 1/2+ games.

In all honestly If you really think it is the way you want to go it would be better is to have 2 buyin options min and max. So say 50bb and 100bb. Still super simple and not big deal but at least let people to risk less money. Having just 100bb will be bad for everone.

May 23, 2018 | 9:45 p.m.

Phil Galfond in all honesty I already like a lot what you are doing (and that your entire team tries to innovate the poker product in a smart way instead of just "innovating" by turning poker into another casion game like Pokerstars desperately tries too do).

This is a problem where all possible solutions have their own flaws one way or another.

I mean a very big problem in the poker world is that many of the pokersites are bot friendly because bots generate a lot off rake,never complain etc. At the same time bulding solid anitbot team and solutions costs a lot of money. So the problem is that for the most poker rooms it is like "Why would we spend a lot of money to generate less rake? Makes completely no sense!!!" So they simply don't do it and only ban bots where there is a huge backlash from players.
This is the reason why many,myself included are sceptical.

At the same time we have terrible example of sites like Party Poker where they just anonymized hand histories without any security in place. So the end scenario is either you cheat like other regs at their cash games (buying illegal converter or botting) or you just quit.

So what I hope for is that it is just a piece of a bigger puzzle and you have a lot more elements in the system that will make it a lot more secure. I believe we all have high hopes for the RunItOnce Poker Room. We all desperately need a place where we can just play poker and not to worry about every possible angle and exploits that people and bots can use against us.

May 4, 2018 | 2:49 p.m.

Phil Galfond It is hard to disagree with you when you word it like this. I mean it reminds me of fellow crushers that had uniqe playstyle and got crushed by people analzying and exploiting their game (Dr. Giggy, Andrian Milroy, probably both you and Sauce lost a lot of EV by people firstly watching your vids and datamining your hand histories and just taking a lot of EV from all of you).

At the same time what you could do is send player deanonymized hand histories but without hole cards avaliable (well except for hero hole cards and cards that went to showdown). That way people would be still able to do statistical analysis but the value would decrease a lot.
So it could work in a way that there would be donwloadable hand history that would be deanonymized but no hole cards avaliable but people would be able to check the hole card history in the poker room client after 24h but say with some limits to avoid angles with screen srapping etc . (Like checking max 10 hands during the 24 hours and downloading impossible)
And to avoid people combining databases etc. you could make it so that every players get different players IDs (they would be randomly assigned when creating hand history for a player.)

Just not sure how viable this solution is in real life and how costly it would be but I guess it could worth just fine.

I hope you really have something special against bots that will make it impossible for them to play or hardly viable option. Because again bots>>>>>humans at the current state of the games. So when you weight options you need to take it into consideration. Like you have to be really sure that your other solutions are very very good to take the de anonymized hand history from players (and I would say it has to be of a magnitude better than any other sites offer)

Especially that some sophisitcated stuff was discovered only by players and not sites themselves (most of what we reffer now as "bots" are in game aids/solvers that tell players what to do).

There were several cases of such bot rings where it required creative ideas from players to uncover them. Because there was human input that was distorting the data.

May 4, 2018 | 8:54 a.m.

Hey Phil If you don't mind I believe that your thought process might be not consinstent here.
Basically from your 2nd post I learned that one of the goals of your entire team is make cheating -EV by having strong policies against it.
Lets be honest here bots at this point are the strongest players at most stakes both for Holdem and PLO thats just the truth.
So here is the problem. For basically every poker room EV of creating bot>>>>>>EV of creating sophisticated HUD for someone who tries to break the rules.

At the time you will start you will not have good enough traffic for anyone to bother to make the pattern based HUD as it would be not super reliable and very expensive to make and EV would be terrible (small possible market,nosebleeds will have HUDs allowed anyway). But creating a bot might still have value even if just for the sake of it.

Secondly as every start up you need to be cost effective so lets be honest your security team won't be huge and won't include as many people as you would like to.

So a lot more logical solution would be to start with deanonymized hand history and switch to anonymized hand histories when you feel your business reached critical mass when creating such a sophisticated HUD will become viable option for someone .And it will take a long time for you to get to this point with your business.

I mean creating the "potential" HUD is so -----EV you can't expect anyone to make one in a foresable future. Like it would cost a lot of money and be at best somewhat better than chance but not better than observant player seating at a table with all the limitations you already incorporated. So it would probably costXXXK$ to make and the market to sell it would be very small and people wouldn't be that interested in buying it for obvious reasons. (Risk of being caught and how unreliable it would be)

In the meantime it would make everyone feel a lot more secure if we have always this option to check the players and send you info about suspected accounts.

May 3, 2018 | 7:57 a.m.

I think the hand history we have after 24h should be completely de anonymized with every player having distinct ID e.g RIO394855 or sth.
The overwhelming amout of the bots was caught by players at higher stakes mostly when people just got together and analyzed suspicous account.

The impact will be really minimal for RIO poker as players will be still anonymized while playing but we need to have some ability to know that Jason ,Mark and Steven were the same player to confirm our suspicions after and send RIO info about suspected bot after we collected all the data.

So anonymized tables with deanonymized hand history is the way to go Plz.

May 3, 2018 | 3:25 a.m.

888 only dumb people say they are good because they are a lot worse than Stars.

Party what you are saying is just not true and Stars spreading false information. Their rake is higher but their effective rake is a lot lower because of how much they give in promotions/cashback etc.

Granted their vip program is maybe too friendly for regs and should give more recreational players but for most of their player base the rake they pay is 30-40% lower than Stars. If not less.

I believe even with Stars own analysis Party overall rake is 108% of Stars but they still have rewards system that gives players big chunk of it back

Feb. 26, 2018 | 11:03 p.m.

This isn't the case of them doing what is the most EV it is simply position abuse where in many ways they have near monopoly in offical/regulated poker. Add to this increadibly high entry bariers for new businesses here (probably milions of dollars). Also the regualted markets with their licensing costs which makes Stars even bigger because small sites can't afford going thru licensing process and pay the fees. So the problem is that poker rooms have a lot of fixed costs but the bigger the room the less it pays per player. So it makes no sense for a 200 people online poker room to try to get Italian/French/Spanish license only the few biggest players can do.

So this is the same situation as in our games where highstakes regs pay the least amount of rake in terms of their rake/winnings ratio. Or as in our economy as it is called economy of scale where rich are getting richer and poor are getting poorer.

Besides no one proved that Amaya model is correct or the most +EV. This is what they desperately try to convince everyone . But this is just not true.

To give you counter argument . One of the biggest critics on 2+2 of Amaya is Talal/Radialot. He is an incredibly succesfull hedge fund CEO that has been doing deals for like 30+ years and in terms of his business decisions and how succesfull he has been in his life he dwarfs anyone that has been in charge of Pokerstars after Sheinbergs had left.

So who do you want to belief?
Lee Jones that his biggest business deal was taking charge of Cake Network that he burned to the ground and left when it was shinking ship to be back with Pokerstars?

The Stars CEO Ashkenazi who went from Playtech where when they lost probably 2/3 of their poker traffic when he was CEO there? They guy that was fighting poker with all his heart and turned PLaytech to what it is today basically casino group with laughable poker income?"

Like you seriously belief they have an idea what they are doing? I mean unless you assume like Askenazi that all poker players are dumb and we just do it like we did with Playtech so make the client terrible and rake insane high so no one enjoy playing poker so they play more casino games/bet on sport. Success!!!

Or maybe you can at least imagine that if CEO of sucessfull hedge fund with 30+ years experience of deal making calls them basically greeedy idiots that will burn the business to the ground right???

This is like my biggest dream come true if Phil made a deal with Talal and they did this business together with fairness and transparency and within 3-4 years all the casino scumbags would be gone.
Man can dream

Feb. 26, 2018 | 12:23 p.m.

Comment | gargamel_fk commented on Specifically Poker

I think big part of it is that for the most part we don't grasp the idea that folding or losing less is winning. If you look at hand histories in blogs people like to post some sick hero calls but have you ever seen anyone posting sick folds? Where they made a good fold and they are like "yeah I lost only 500 and could 800$ fuck yeah".
No one does that.
There is also the issue for most the Western guys that we don't grasp the idea of our own imperfection and how little control in reality we have. Big part of our society and basically enitre law system is based on the Christian concept of free will.
So it is not surprising we all struggle with it.

To give an example about tilting from my own life. Yesterday was fighting with my wife got super tilted and knew that I shouldn't play no matter what. But even with so much experience and data to back it up that based on which I know it ends up with a disaster at least 70% of the time and is insanely -Ev for me it doesn't matter cause I seat with such a mindset 80% of the time and play anyway and end up droping like 5-10BI and don't play next 2-3 days.

But during the moment there is this little devil that says to you "it is ok dude it is Friday night ,this is the best day in the week,You have to play etc.etc." "There is no fucking way you won't destroy games that soft"

I literally needed to use program called cold turkey to not let me even start the poker room because I know from the past that if I took a look at the games I would saw some sick fishes and would seat and play and there is a huge chance it would end up terribly.

For me big part of the problem is that it is hard to acknowledge how fucking terribly I can play when it gets really bad. It is hard to acknowledge I can lose control over myself and just start throwing money out of the window basically.

Feb. 25, 2018 | 11:10 a.m.

And to add to this I think people don't realize how big part of the poker boom was that the sites at the beggining were owned by poker players (Mike Sexton,FTP guys,Shainberg for Stars) that all understood poker and were interested in growing the game and their player base.
Granted their financial decisions were terrible (FTP guys) but they grew the popularity of the game imensly.

Now all the sites are owned by Casino guys or Hedge funds that are trying every trick possible to either make poker another casino game where only house wins or make the poker game so unfriendly and shitty that their player base will switch to Casino/sports betting anyway.

The huge part of the issue now is that for the most part most of the "poker sites" don't even want you play poker. In fact they would be extatic if they lost like 2/3 of their player base but the rest would switch to play casino games/bet on sport etc.

Feb. 24, 2018 | 8:17 a.m.

I think there is one big problem in Daniel post-he makes examples out of thin air without providing numbers. That way he just made up examples to suport his core beliefs rather than base them on the facts.

Just to give you real life example> Say you play nl100 on some average Poker Site.
There is 6max game with 5 regs and 1 fish. The regs will on average paid between 8bb and 10bb/100 in rake. The fish due to his/her lose style will end up paying at least 15bb/100 but closer to 20bb/100.

So the site will take at least 55bb/100 in rake from this table and realistically closer to 60-65bb/100

To say that the regs ar ethe problems when there are very few regs beating the games for more than say 3-4bb/100 in small stakes games is just totally misleading.

For most of the sites nowadays the end game scenario will be that the site is going to take 60bb/100 in rake from the fish while the regs will take 20 and thats like best case scenario

And contrary to Daniel I didn't made up the example to make a point. I gave real life rake numbers we pay every day!!!.

Overhwelming majority of players play micro/small stakes and pay a ton of rake every day.

To be fair. I am not all against rake. In fact I think in the past the model with competing sites with big rake but great rewards and milions spend on promoting and retention of the players worked just fine.
The biggest tragedy now is that basically all the poker sites are either owned by Casinos or Hedge Funds that are interested only in short term profits.
Stars are even worse because it was basically managment buyout where Amaya didn't have the money to buy stars so they just took a lot of leaverage credit to buy it and after that they just suck as much as possible form ecosystem to pay the credit costs first and make money on top of that.
So thats the biggest problem with Amaya getting rid of rewards or increasing rake. The money they get from it none of it goes to players it all is sucked to decrease the debt,pay dividents,hookers and blow for managers etc.

Feb. 24, 2018 | 8:08 a.m.

Comment | gargamel_fk commented on Specifically Poker

Well I could imagine scenario where it is possible. Mostly because a lot of the Chinese sites can get within couple of hours to really sick deep stacks. So when you and like 2 fishes are 300bb deep everything is possible :D . At the same time very few people have really an edge playing deep stack quite a few myself included play it super poorly. It makes sense because before the Chinese apps being deep with anyone at the table was rare occcurance and it didn't make sense to work on deep play that much (or we ,not so good regs, thought like that )

Like how many of you guys did any work with PIO with 200bb stacks + ???

I believe there were quite a few regs on Stars in deep ante games when the games were still 200bb+ with long term winrate at these tables of 15bb/100+ . One of the reasons why Pokerstars get rid of them,lol .

So I don't always agree with Nick but I agree with his idea that I limit myself and my winrate by thinking "WTF this is impossible". This give me nothing.
Worst case scenario by trying to achieve 30bb/100 and study super hard you will get like 3-4bb/100 more to your winrate at least. Still sounds good to me :D

Feb. 10, 2018 | 3:41 a.m.

Comment | gargamel_fk commented on Specifically Poker

BTW Nick or Ivan . The new mutliway pack did you also dabble into big ante/mandatory straddle games? This is quite important because this is a big part of the market now and I have reason to believe most of the people play them poorly.

Jan. 31, 2018 | 2:34 p.m.

Comment | gargamel_fk commented on Specifically Poker

I think people are results biased and this is one thing I thought in the past and for the most part vs good regs and even reg+fish scenario when you are OOP there are tons of hands that are just folds preflop. For example I see people notoriously calling as BB into 3 way/4way in this spot some suited trash without really taking into consideration that PFR has all Axs and quite a bit Kxs same for cold caller and basically your Top pair is trash and your flush when you hit has insane reverse implied odds but people feel compelled to call "because I have great pot odds" been there done that and learned the hard way to fold more that most people in such a spot.

AT is very simmilar here. Vs even semi competent reg or 2. this is a snap fold. Vs Reg+fish it gets closer but again you are basically always hitting medium strenght hand when in multiway pot the required hand strenght for calldown 3 streets increase a lot.
The only reason that we call is because everyone myself included plays multiway pots poorly.

It is much the same as Cold Calling preflop when for a very long time (and in many games still) People havew been cold calling a ton out of blinds where for most this is not profitable anymore if they just did database analysis. This is in line what solvers and even Poker Snowie were doing for years( ploaying mostly 3b or fold game).

Multiway will go the same way. People are going to get better so doing dumb cold calls OOB will just get worse and worse because this just isn't theoretically sound game.

Jan. 29, 2018 | 7:19 a.m.

Comment | gargamel_fk commented on Specifically Poker

This all depends on Villain fold to 3bet and fold to cbet in 3bet pot.
If you look at solution from PIOSolver Preflop

1) call
2) 3b/call are roughly the same in EV. PIO tend to slighly favor 3beting but thats like whatever tbh.
3) clear fold.

But Looking at Nick post I just assume there is some catch and If I did mass database analysis it would show me some clear deviation from optimal.

Besides I never used Monker and Maybe Monker gives different ranges (just my guess it can slightly underdefend compared to PIO in mulitway solved because defend is our shared responsibility so it can get away with defending less as long as other people defend correctly??? Or maybe I am just confiusing myself)

Jan. 25, 2018 | 3:50 p.m.

Comment | gargamel_fk commented on Specifically Poker

I think based on my experience and students, people that tried to go pro and failed and I encoutnered during my career people just don't understand poker well enough.

The knowledge part is farily simple you have all the solvers,cardrunners EV,poker snowie, even simple flopzilla is just enough to get pretty competent in poker. You have also all the videos and how to instruction with the courses etc. This is really simple as long as you are stubborn enough.

So most people when thinking about becoming poker pro they think oh I will become poker pro I will learn a lot and play a lot. Sounds easy right? But they just underestimate Variance and how much it is going to affect them.

I mean I am mediocre poker pro. Big part of it is simply handling Variance. This is super easy to play well when you run well. But ask yourself how many dumb mistakes you do when you run poorly for a week or for a month? Where you simply stop folding because you are fed up with them costantly raising you on shitty cards , River card causing huge equity shift and you do crying calls because you can't stand it anymore??
This is like a big reason why I never become more in the poker world. Like last year when Variance hit me bad I started to play super poorly and almost stopped playing. It lasted for almost 4 months but honestly mostly because I was barely playing. I played less than my usual volume during those 4 months.
So been doing it for so many years and still this is happening to me. This happens every say 2 years or so when I got hit by a really bad period of variance and play poorly and low volume, then have to move down stakes, spend money from the bankroll because not playing enough so after that need another 6 month just to be back to where I was before bad streak started.

Compare it to my very good friend who is a high stakes reg. Whenever Variance hits him he is like Thank you Variance, you want to challenge me? Me?!? Challenge Accepted. He works 2. as hard whenever it goes bad. He works a lot on his game analyze his every opponent push himself to the limit. So not only bad variance doesn't affect him but also he end up stronger and better player after the bad streak ends.

This is that simple. Like if you are even average nl200 reg there isn't as much difference between you and the nl1k guys except the 1k guys are just miles ahead when it goes to handling Variance and pushing themselves when it is needed.

Dec. 17, 2017 | 3:23 a.m.

I think vs CO 4bet people tend to fold here a lot. I mean he is maybe calling some 99-TT here but kinda don't see him calling 77-88 with any reasonable frequency. We can't always win and sometimes we kinda need to pays Villain off. I mean we need to call something right? I mean the 6 Turn doesn't really change that much equity wise but I do expect bunch of micro regs to go berserk here + they never expect you to check here so strong. Call/call can't see other option. I mean people have the tendency to call mostly broadways vs 4bets and I think I will find enough busted Flushdraws to get the call given Villain sizing we only need to win less than 30% of the time

Sept. 27, 2017 | 1:10 p.m.

Bigger sizing Turn and Bigger Sizing River. If you don't value bet here thin QQ-JJ for 3 streets ( I mean after the Turn is K) Checking The River some % of the time is also fine. In theory it is bet/bet bet/call and you fold some QQ-JJ that you should tripple here too for thin value. BTW you should overbet Turn and overbet R already. As played this is the combo you have to call and fold KQs/KQo if you range cbet here. Having A blocker is very signifcant.

Sept. 25, 2017 | 4:25 a.m.

Check River. You have many hands like pairs you want to protect here and he is still gonna valuebet TT+ . His betting Range OTR is gonna be wider than calling Range.

Sept. 25, 2017 | 4:16 a.m.

I think it is a call if you think about it range wise he doesn't have 77 like ever. Graned he has the sets and maybe QJs but after you Xback the flop it is call/call. Nothing you can do. He has a lot of random hands he can bet with so kinda no choice here.

Sept. 25, 2017 | 4:12 a.m.

Comment | gargamel_fk commented on Specifically Poker

@Arizonabay I wasn't talking about the Turthful Conversation video but the last video of PIO UNLOCKED 1 I had access to when Nick did a session review with you and I was surprised how poor your thought process was in many spots tbh.

I wanted to point you out it is just I had my fair share of experience with coaches that buddy buddy you and you would feel good and spend the money they would tell you 6 months you are going to play mid stakes+ you are one of my best students bla,bla,bla. Been there done that. I lost like that probably like 100k in EV by being coached by types like that. There is entire self help industry scam based on it tbh. Especially if you are a guy with below average self esteem. Again I done that.
In the end results tell the true story and if the results aren't there It means you should change and find someone else.
To put the things in perspective. The best coach I ever had was an average dude that was playing nl1k. He wasn't talking smart and cool, wasn't trying to be your friend but had a really simple system to coach and it gave me a ton of value because It was easy to learn from him. He had several exploits that helped him on his way up that still work.

So yeah Nick persona makes me extremely cautious and I am biased like everyone else (because of my bad experience from the past). He is a very cool guy and seems really smart but you always have to check whether the results are there or not...

There is the problem that everyones here seems to be so emotionally invested and people just love Nick "because he is such a cool dude" but there is the questions about his past results which should make people cautious at least.

May 25, 2017 | 2:58 a.m.

Comment | gargamel_fk commented on Specifically Poker

Speaking about Ignition Poker results. Non US/Canadian guys were paying 1k/month to be able to play there and room would ban them,affiliates would scam them and people were still paying because the reward to risk ratio was so insanely good. Now no one can vpn there except for the few and without bovada it isn't the same as it used to be. But people don't realize how big of an oportunity it was back then. I mean nl600 was softer than probably nl100 zoom on Stars (especially if you did little table selecion). Remember ChciagoJoe saying PLO2k there was a lot softer than PLO200z on P*.... On top of that seen way too many coaches cheating on their graphs (you just need to remove losing big pots here and there and/or add some winning ones). Thats why nowadays everyone ask for the tracked sites you can werify on the russian ptr so not to get scammed.

Again the Copernicus guy is crazy and should be banned from this thread because he makes legitmiate concerns looks silly.

I did take a look for Nick work (Pio Unlocked 1). There was very good content but there were couple of things I wasn't impressed with (for example not even speaking about aggressively overbeting turn after 1/3 cbet which in many spots is preferable option by PIO and changes a lot the EV strategy at least in SRP and if you look at what better players do e.g. 500z thats basically the preferable strategy). On top of that the last video was with his favourite student Arizonabay I believe he posted several videos with him on youtube too. I mean they are buddies for years and the guy still can't/barely beat nl200 on Ignition which is like nl50 on P*.... For me it is a red flag tbh when it goes to Nick ability as a coach

May 24, 2017 | 2:49 a.m.

Comment | gargamel_fk commented on Specifically Poker

Well for sure I don't want to be a part of such a discussion and I like Nick content at the same time I am aware of my own biases. On top of that I am still aware of the daliyvariance scheme that was going on for years where people were buying books for 500$+ from a guy that hasn't been winning for years. He even wrote a book after that basically how to make a milion from poker (and not really playing it).
I mean if you have been long enough in poker world like me you will learn mistrustful quite a bit (e.g. lost like 30k in 6 months due to a disastrous advices from mid/highstakes crusher from whom I took fair amount of coaching that it took me a while to realize ( BB vs BTN and BB vs SB defense when Villain opens less than optimal and with bigger sizing that optimal and you pay way more rake that them playing like nl100 some nl200 on high rake sites-the coach was teaching all of his student the same way and with his ranges and was forcing me to defend a lot more than I used to when after looking at PIO preflop solutions adjusted to the sizings and rake on my stakes and it ended up me being a lot closer to the optimal on my stakes than the coach). I used to think about myself smart enough but it took me way too long to realize what was going on especially when you respect the other guy success that makes you biased (he is too good to be wrong sort of thinking).
So basically both the guys that are pro Nick and against have their own biases that cloud their judgment. It is riduclous to think that any of us with couple exceptions can really evaluate the value of Nick work.

We all have our own biases and no one is objective enough but :
"The facts are always friendly, every bit of evidence one can acquire, in any area, leads one that much closer to what is true."

So I do believe that wanting Nick to post his Pokerstars results and/or results of his students (and not only the cherry picked one) from sites that are tracked (pokerstars,ipoker,888,winning network as of now) can't be a bad thing and his unwillingness to do so put him in a bad light.

May 23, 2017 | 4:27 a.m.

Comment | gargamel_fk commented on Specifically Poker

Well for me personally it just signals meta shift to use a term from esport. Basically rules changed and there is completely no reason anymore to chase volume. The strategy of being a rakeback pro is dead. Although I think it is terrible for the games that are destroyed by huge rake (PLO for example or hyper turbos) that without huge rakeback will cease to exist but at the same time there is slim to none chance that Pokerstars willl decrease rake for those games. They are just to greedy to do so. So basically GL in being online PLO reg in 2018+

April 6, 2017 | 7 a.m.

Comment | gargamel_fk commented on River Actions

Really appreciate Serge for all the comments (kinda bad with the RIO comments system) Thanks for taking your time to respond. Learned quite a bit tbh.

Jan. 14, 2017 | 2:12 a.m.

Comment | gargamel_fk commented on River Actions

9min KK on K45tt just curious what would be your bottom bet/call Range and what would be your bet/3b range I mean for me it honestly sucks here because when I have here hands like AA which is close to top of my range it sucks because his x/r range consisting of sets and strongish draws that can barrel me on super many cards makes me think whether I want to bet 3bet most of my range here so sets,AA and strong Ax flushdraws and not having a calling range vs his check raise?? I mean yeah we are IP but it still is kinda gross spot to be in. What would be your default strategy here? and what would be your bottom defending range vs his x/r on the flop??
I mean this is a board where in spot vs 2 regs made me think a lot lately whether I want to even have cbeting range for the most part here (I mean the hands I beat (Kx, draws I have 2 streets value and I expect marrajon to stab with a lot higher frequency than calling my cbet here tbh). KK is probably one of the few hands here that might be more + EV to bet than check. I mean I wouldn't cbet here 66-TT at least with JJ-QQ being close between beting and Checking. And I am probably checking most of my Kx here (not even sure whether I should bet or check AK here)

13min KK there. Hm you made me think a lot because I autmatically stop bluffing on cards like that (That pairs the boards) because it doesn't improve my range at all but you said you would barrel most of your broadaway cards with decent frequency. Will you follow thru on the River or just bet/bet give up expecting him to overfold T vs 2nd barrel??

15-16min the spot vs kreuznagel what would be your bottom calling range vs his R overbet I mean I feel like I kinda overcall here expect aggro regs like him to be full of it which might not be the case?? And to put ourselves in his shoes what hands you would decide to bluff overbet R with?

20min I think that Turn is a clear check because having T of hearts is terrible for us because we block most of the draw hands and I don't expect pacpacbum to ever call me here T and R with worse (no reads about the possible recreational but again blocking his draws he might call T bluff R sucks).
As played super suprised you bet/call it on the Turn with the TPMK. I mean you block most draws and PacPacBum he opens from EP so it is not that his range is full of it (I honestly struggle to see bluffs in his range. 2 kombo of KJs he might open and not cbet (seems reasonable) JJ, at fr tables some checked KK (at least 1 kombo just because it might happen and we play full rings where regs love to trap).
So we have 6 kombo he value raise and at best 3 kombo TJs and more like 1/1.5 kombo I would be suprised to see him bluffing here with a super high frequency tbh. It is not like you stab here into 2 people with a super high frequency. So it is clear Turn fold on the Turn. (I mean I don't expect him to ever open here EP QTs and raise OESD there tbh but even if he does it is still super close on the Turn)

25min 88 on 28964 I think you are just super result oriented here and this is like never bet/3bet River
KovI is never ever bluffing with this sizing he doesn't have 44 so we are left with 22,99 and maybe 1 kombo of 66 (I honestly don't think he calls it all the time but he is kinda bad I guess) I don't understand why you discount all kombo of T7s from his R range and 57s (I mean if you assume he has 66 there you have to also assume he has 57s there too). I mean if I don't x/r you on the flop my range is 89s,76s,99,TT,JJ and probably QQ some T7s,57s I might just yolo call because I feel like it so I would never raise the Turn here because I just need to protect my range and I probably want to x/ship R with the 89s,76s with some frequency vs your 3rd barrel. I mean yeah it is possible to x/r on the Turn and be left with 99,TT,JJ on the River but I don't see people doing it often and I don't do it myself too.

So on the River you have 3 kombo of 99 that beats you, lets give him just 1 kombo of T7s (and discount 57 but thats whatever anyway) so thats 4 kombo. We have 3 kombo of 22 and like 1-1.5 of 66 and I would assume he is not raise/calling 22 there on the River(I mean he shouldn't but he is kinda bad but that very questionable)

If he always call 66 and fold at least with some frequency 22 we never have a value jam with our 88 because he has 4 kombo of 99 and T7s that beats us.

31min maybe I am old nit but I kinda don't feel like it is like that easy call vs elmu on the flop vs his checkraise I mean he is not doing it it as a bluff and he shouldn't have many worse Kx on the flop (he probably squezzes here KTo,KTs+ for value given how terrible the fish is). he is not raisng here like weak Kx hand (I think he shouldn't but maybe I am just too nity) so he has like K4s always,K2s always some 44 and 22 even if we add him some A2s,A4s,A5s it is still super close on the flop and I would probably just fold . I just don't see him bluffing ever in this spot (and I didn't look at the results just not to be influenced by what he showed on the River). Bottom line on the flop he doesn't raise worse Kx there for value because he doesn't have them or just won't raise them (he probably even squezz K9s pre) so the weak Kx I would think he just calls flop given you cbet into 2 and fish being so terrible makes you not cbet it super wide into 2.

ATo I think also it is pretty much a fold his bluffing range is for the most part Turned flushdraws and we know that there is a lot less combos of suited hands than offisuit so unless you know he is super aggro on the River and he can spazz jam like that QJo it is a fold. Same I might call here it vs the best regs simply because it is Top of my range and he should be aware that he has a lot more 8x than I have so super tough for me to call there with anything and I kinda feel like I have to call something. If I knew what he showed this is snap call but still suprised.

Jan. 10, 2017 | 3:56 a.m.

The problem is that it is hard to say what correct play here is in a vacuum. I mean there are quite a few regs from fr that will raise there 77 (because the board is getting drawy and they feel like this is the last street for them to built the pot and hey I have a strong set so raising the Turn for value/protection). On top of that the action on the flop was 1/2 pot cbet with nitreg/lose passive fish? and just call from a reg so he/she has no reason to believe his/her 77 are behind on the Turn. Of course the spot is super close and it is not heavily +EV/-EV. For example I would snap fold Turn vs TimStone and sigh call T/call R vs Kreuznagel. This spot is extremely player dependant.

Nov. 13, 2016 | 2:47 a.m.

Well I do mix it up playing both fr and 6max (with roughly 40% of my volume on nl100-nl200 being fr) It is not hate it is just reality for example 6max regs nowadays tend to error on the spew side when the fr regs tend to error on trapping side (I would say majority of fr regs trap when they are strong with no regards to their range). Even now in 2016 there are quite a few fr regs I feel not having 3 street of value with bottom set and betting AK on Axxr for 3 streets seem suicidal . I still after couple of years tend to value town myself on nitrings because firstly they trap hands you would never expect reg to play that way and 2nd they rarely hero calls. There are of course exceptions and now a days there are quite a few aggressive regs on small stakes but as a population reads in regards to regs my observation still stands.

Nov. 12, 2016 | 3:11 a.m.

Gross spot. I mean I don' really think there is a correct way to play it. I mean Villain is probably not bluffing (T8s) on a Turn or some 8x bocker and he still might have something like 68s or even J8s given that it is getting increasingly likely it is going to be a multiway flop. In game I probably would just call/call mostly because it makes sense for Villain to play 77 like that (can't see him doing it with 33 tbh 180bb eff on nitrings). Nasty spot but I still feel more inclined to call because Villain might show up with something like 7d8d,QdJd given the flop action and odds he got IP and felt obliged to raise as best bluffs (tho I don't see many regs doing it o nitrings but PIO does raise hands like that at least some % of the time in that type scenario)

Nov. 11, 2016 | 2:56 p.m.

I think I would go and watch vids from Alan Jackson on bluefire about analyzing your database. If you are to lazy for this you can find his thred on 2+2 about pokermetrics and he will do it for you but he increased the price a lot and now it is like 1k $. Might be worth checking (although in your case it might be difficult because you have a really unorthodox style of play)

March 9, 2015 | 7:50 a.m.

Load more uses cookies to give you the best experience. Learn more about our Cookie Policy