Hero (HJ): 186.6 bb
CO: 126.1 bb
BTN: 213.8 bb
SB: 103.9 bb
BB: 200 bb
SB posts 0.5 BB posts 1.
Pre Flop: (pot: 1.5) Hero has Ah As
Hero raises to 2.5, CO calls 2.5, 3 folds
Flop: (6.5 bb, 2 players) 2c Ks 6s
Hero bets 4.33, CO calls 4.33
Turn: (15.16 bb, 2 players) 6c
Hero bets 10.11, CO calls 10.11
River: (35.36 bb, 2 players) 4s
Hero bets 24 CO raises to 79 Hero folds
Villain is unknown in my small pool and is playing 77/33/0 with 2 Agg over a 50 hands sample, so he is very likely a fish of the loose passive sort.
I think I missplayed this hand and should've checked somewhere instead of betting.
Not sure of how to split my range on this flop in this formation, against a reg I would usually do a lot checking as OOP PFA. But against fish I prefer to try and max exploit and just go for value.
On the turn I think this fish will have more 6x than he should theoretically so I might have to be careful? I went for value anyway thinking I can get called by Kx, FDs and perhaps other random pairs that I beat.
On the river flush gets there. Trips also beat me. So perhaps this is just a check here. I think from fish I might still get value from Kx. But I think I just overvalue my aces here, I don't think I have 3 streets even against a fish.
May 14, 2021 | 6:51 p.m.
Isn't it a bit weird to compare b27 with range to b27 or check? Wouldn't it be way more practical and useful to compare b27 with range to b66 or check? The reason I'm asking is because I never play bet small or check strategy BU vs BB, only range bet small or polar w bigger size
May 7, 2021 | 8:45 a.m.
SB: (408.7 bb)
Hero (BB): (141.5 bb)
CO: (196.3 bb)
BTN: (236.3 bb)
SB posts 0.5, Hero posts BB 1.00
Pre Flop: (pot: 1.5) Hero has Jc Ah
2 folds, SB raises to 3.00, Hero calls 2.00
Flop: (6.00, 2 players) Ks Ac 5d
SB checks, Hero bets 2.00, SB calls 2.00
Turn: (10.00, 2 players) Tc
SB checks, Hero bets 6.66, SB raises to 18.33, Hero calls $12.00.
River: (46.85, 2 players) 6c
SB bets 23.33, Hero folds
50 hands on villain, nothing strange. But my pool is pretty small and I havn't seen him before so I would guess with something like 75% certainty he's some sort of recreational.
I would expect he can cbet alot on this flop due to his range advantage. I don't hate betting 33% with range in his shoes. X is a bit unusual I suppose, I think I have a pretty clear value bet, not sure about my sizing, I decided to go small thinking that his XC range is probably going to be really capped. Also I don't need any protection at all. For this sizing I can bluff cheaply a lot against what I would assume is a population who might XF this spot after missing flop CB.
Turn gives him some 2ps and the occasional straight if he goes XC with those types of hands, but I'm not worried at all here, I continue to valuebet against weak Ax, Kx etc. I face the 3x raise and I get pretty confused. Suddenly his seemingly capped range goes bananas. I think that if he goes for a play such as this, he's also "capable" of having straights, 2 pairs and maybe even sets here. He could just have a flush/straight draw however, or a random spazz, and I have tpgk+nut gssd so I'm not going anywhere for this sizing, maybe it's a bit naive to call turn vs unknown probable rec?
Flush gets in on the river... I think I have a decent hand and solid blockers for a call. My price is pretty good too, only need to be right 25% of the time. Am I though? What is he bluffing with here? How would you play this?
May 7, 2021 | 8:43 a.m.
Are you sure 3-4% 4b is standard? I 4b 7% over 50k hands and I use solved ranges, I'm not following them perfectly of course, but I try to somewhat follow them.. I also see most regs 4b more than 5 and i suspect most of them to be kinda tight-ish, at 25 nl, foreign site tho XD
May 6, 2021 | 8:02 p.m.
I just changed to HM3 from other HUD. In my previous program, my 3b stat said "fold to 3b after 2betting" and it calculated fold % after i 2-bet preflop. But in HM3 it only says "fold to 3bet". My previous program also said "fold to 4b after 3betting" and it calculated how often i folded to 4bs after 3 betting.
1) Do HM3 calculate this in the same way? Does it ignore cold-call opportunities so to speak?
2) In HM3, is 7-10 3b considered good and f3b 40-50? What are good 4b and f4b frequencies?
May 5, 2021 | 6:50 p.m.
How does gto change when we are deep stacked? I'm talking like 150-300bbs. What are the most important broad concepts that we can easily learn and apply in game? Are there any essential videos on this topic?
So the first thing that I think off is that we can't stack off as light preflop. I assume this means that we should be careful about 4-betting hands that doesn't really want to face 5-bets and/or deep 1 pair stack-offs postflop, hands such as QQ-TT.
I assume that we should use bigger 3b and 4b sizings when deep stacked to increase the EV of our monsters.
I guess that some marginal hands that are fine with flop and turn fast plays for 100bbs might now want to take it more slowly.
As you can see my knowledge/intuition on this topic is questionable at best. What do you guys think?
April 30, 2021 | 7:42 p.m.
A significant portion of the regs in my relatively small pool off NL 10-25 opens for 3x and some of them even 3,5x. I think they may do this exploitatively against the loose passive fish in the pool. They could also just be bad, many of them have some overall frequencies that are a bit off. Anyway they seem to be doing quite well results wise.
In theory, how should one adjust versus bigger open raises assuming their range isn't tighter? I assume they should open a tighter range if they want to open for a bigger sizing. However, they seem to play a normal range for a bigger OR sizing.
I obviously call tighter from the big blind getting a worse price and the rake is quite high at my limits.
How should my 3b range change? Should I go tighter as I have to invest more into the pot? Is it fine to just 3b the same range as I have been so far? Can I go even wider because they loose more when they fold and perhaps I have a bigger incentive to 3b?
I only cold call vs an OR as an exploit if there's fish behind and I don't want to squeeze them out of the pot. I do this with hands that has weak-medium strength such as; small-medium pairs, suited Ax, suited connectors and 1 gappers and some weakish double broadways.
April 28, 2021 | 8:34 p.m.
That’s interesting I thought the overall strategy would suffer EV wise from getting the mixing wrong. To me this is becoming nitpicking now, I just wanted to make sure I had the overall idea right, which I guess I kind of had. So thanks everyone :)
April 28, 2021 | 7:14 a.m.
A8o has some good things going for it compared to QJo. A8o is better hand vs hand. A8o also has better equity vs BBs calling range which will be the most common specific spot to compare I guess.
I'd say QJo has more "frequent strength" which is something Clarke covers in his course and refers to the ability to flop a hand that we can continue with. QJo can flop straights and straight draws which A8o can't do to the same extent.
I'd say QJo will not have as much reversed implied odds, when QJo flops a top pair it will have the best kicker more often, as BB can have many worse Qx and Jx. I think we will be outkicked more often with A8o.
With this said, I think A8o and QJo are pretty similar when it comes to "how good is this hand to open". I don't think the EV differs a lot. I have solved ranges for micro-low stakes and both QJo and A8o is an open from the CO.
It's not like A9o is great to open and A8o is suddenly very bad. Instead, it's a gradual shift, and the players behind will determine and often change our opening range quite a lot, especially in the micros. I think this is important to remember. Clarke even says in his course that he doesn't like opening ranges because they're too rigid.
April 27, 2021 | 9:30 a.m.
Well said :)
April 27, 2021 | 6:37 a.m.
very nice summary that is also sort of the conclusion im getting to, ive become more aware of how little I know exactly how to play against different opponents
April 25, 2021 | 5:37 a.m.
BB: 233.3 bb
MP: 325.3 bb
CO: 273.9 bb
Hero (BTN): 243 bb
SB posts 0.5, BB posts 1.
Pre Flop: (pot: 1.5) Hero has Ac Ad
UTG raises to 3.00, fold, CO calls 3.00, Hero raises to 14.00, SB calls 14.00, fold, UTG calls 14.00, CO calls 14.00
Flop: (55 bb, 4 players) 2s Jd 3h
SB checks, UTG checks, CO checks, Hero bets 18, SB calls 18, 2 folds
Turn: (92 bb, 2 players) 6s
SB checks, Hero bets 55 bb, SB calls 55 bb
River: (202 bb, 2 players) Jc
SB bets 142 bb and is all-in, Hero ???
How would u play this spot? Small sample on SB but he seem to be some nitty fish. His stats were 29/0/0 over 70 hands... I just hate my life on this river and I wouldn't be surprised if villain only does this with trips or better. I have no idea if I should call river.
April 24, 2021 | 6 p.m.
Interesting inputs! Thanks everybody :) I think I have a good enough idea conceptually now, for the moment atleast!
April 24, 2021 | 5:23 p.m.
I don't think I would do too much cbetting on this flop OOP and with that said AJ certainly doesnt fall into the cbet category for me. Depending on the opponent I might go for a flop XR bluff, otherwise just xf flop seem standard for me, we have plenty of better hands to continue with and AJo is pretty far down our range
April 24, 2021 | 6:14 a.m.
I just wanted to check if I understand these concepts 100% accurately.
-The statements include two players: Player X and Player Y.
-The statements will assume a game with 0 rake.
-The statements will assume an enourmous sample (no variance)
X plays 100% perfect GTO. It is absolutely impossible for any opponent or any strategy to get a higher winrate than breakeven against X, who can never lose money over a big enough sample. X is completely unbeatable, in all games, against all opponents. There is no counter strategy to gain positive EV against X. Your best chance is to also play perfect GTO which would net you breakeven results.
Y is exploitable and does not play perfect GTO. It doesn't matter which suboptimal strategy Y adopts, he will always lose to X, who can stick to his perfect gto strategy and print EV against Y who's exploitable. X could deviate from GTO to exploit Y which would always give him a higher winrate compared to the winrate of his perfect GTO 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.
It is impossible for perfect GTO to be the highest EV strategy against an opponent who does not play perfect GTO. Exploiting the leaks will always gain more EV.