As you there are too many ranges and spots for learning MTT preflop ranges because of varying stack sizes.
Do you know/use any tools/tricks to learn these preflop ranges more efficiently, for example something similar to GTO trainers for postflop play ?
Aug. 22, 2019 | 10:19 a.m.
Is anyone here using SimpleGTO custom drills for turn and river spots ?
I am having performance issues with this as it takes anywhere between 5-15 seconds to load each hand.
When you compare this to free drills (which are accessed from cloud I guess), the hands load instantaneously.
So I wanted to ask how is it going for you in terms of time it take to load each hand ?
Aug. 14, 2019 | 11:42 a.m.
fantastic video !!! I think the systematic study process is one of the most important but least talked about concept of poker. So this video is a step in the right direction. Well done Saulo !
June 12, 2019 | 12:09 p.m.
I have been doing some research on this idea of investigating which sizings are preferred by solver on which flops and my conclusion is that it does NOT matter which sizing you use as long as you do it with the correct frequency. The EV difference between two sizings is so tiny that it does not make sense to spend time on working out which sizing is better.
So I think an improvement to the analysis in this video would be to remove one sizing and use only one sizing and see how frequently we are betting on each of these boards and you will achieve the same thing(very similar EV) and your strategy will be much more simplified.
April 26, 2019 | 10:56 a.m.
Hi BarracudaNL, I am simulating SRP 100bb so my SPR is 15 for example
Starting pot : 65
Effective Stacks : 975
What you are saying is inline with what a lot of people are saying, larger sizing on this flop is better and gains a lot more EV but I am not able to see that in PIO. It shows pretty much the same EV (very tiny negligible difference) for both strategies with smaller and larger sizing so I don't get where this 'big' EV difference is comes from.
April 25, 2019 | 6:58 p.m.
probably you have to look in 3b spots because it will have much bigger pot on the flop than single-raise-pot. Therefore changes in EV between sizes can be significant
the situation in question for this discussion is cbetting SRP IP as the section of the article I referred to was : Mistake #1: C-betting small (33% pot) on Ace-high boards vs. the big blind
April 25, 2019 | 1:06 p.m.
This is true for the example but there are boards where EV diff is bigger for different bet sizings and the sizing you use matters
This is exactly what my argument is, the EV will never be big enough for it to matter enough for us to investigate all boards and see which boards prefer bigger sizing.
Can you give example(s) where you think the EV difference might be big enough and I can run a sim to see. Happy to be proven wrong :)
April 25, 2019 | 10:02 a.m.
Just to add to my following statement
All 4 sims yield the (pretty much) the same EV for IP (once OOP checks the flop)
I mean the there is a difference in the EV for using one betsize over another but that difference is so tiny (less than 1% of the pot) and I don't understand how it becomes a mistake to use one sizing over another.
The effort required to study which flop sizing is preferred on each flop by solver is huge and does not bring us any benefit so I am struggling to understand why a lot coaches now a days teach how to use the 'correct' flop cbet sizing.
April 25, 2019 | 8:08 a.m.
Referring to mistake#1 in this article
This article implies its some sort of a mistake to use a smaller bet sizing on this flop.A♠ J♣ 4♣
It implies (and therefore I find it misleading), that in theory, the EV of using bigger bet on this flop is higher
than smaller bet (at equilibrium).
I am not convinced with this because of the following
* Just because solver prefers one betsize over another when mixing strategies, it doesn't necessarily mean it is a mistake to use
one betsize over another.
* if you don't follow the advice in the article about this flop and use a smaller betsize then you are allowed to bet a lot more frequently as compared to bigger betsize
so the overall EV of your strat will remain the same
** If you are using a particular bet size and your opponent is responding correctly, then it doesn't
really matter what betsize you use because at equilibrium you yield the same EV for each strategy
To back this theory up, I have ran 4 separate sims
Sim1 : allow cbet of 33% only
Sim2 : allow cbet of 66% only
Sim3 : allow cbet of 90% only
Sim4 : allow cbet of 33,66,90
All 4 sims yeild the (pretty much) the same EV for IP (once OOP checks the flop)
For our bigger cbet strat to yeild a higher EV, our opponent has to make a mistake when responding to our cbet
for example, overcall certain hands that he is supposed to fold to bigger bet.
I have no problem using/studying multiple bet sizes but I want to make sure it is for the right reason, for example
if I have a reason to believe villain is going to respond incorrectly to a certain betsize then its makes perfect sense to
use multiple betsizes depending on what assumptions I have about the villain.
However, if I am up against a good opponent who knows how to respond effectively vs each betsize, then it doesn't matter what sizing
I use ! Am I coming to the right conclusion here or I am missing something ?
If my understanding is correct, it brings us to the point
of this discussion, what incentive do we have in studying which sizing PIO prefers for different flops ?
Is it not better to study one betsize for all flops and master it when we are studying equilibrium play ?
April 24, 2019 | 6:46 p.m.
I am looking for an MTT coach who has lots of online & live experience. I have been been playing micros zoom NL for the last few months and considering getting into MTTs as live MTTs is my ultimate goal.
Please PM if interested.
April 18, 2019 | 7:29 p.m.
Also, on a related note, I am seeing some spots where pio choses a particular action more frequently than the other but its actually not the most optimal option if you compare the EV of the available actions.
For example, in a given spot, its calling 65% of the time but has negative EV compared to folding which obviously have EV of 0.
So I am wondering why its playing a negative EV strategy ? does it have something to do with balance ?
March 2, 2019 | 2:21 p.m.
I have just started to use PIO to improve my understanding of the game and have trouble understanding mixed strategies which is usually the case with PIO outputs.
For example, I am in a 3-bet OOP SBvsBU as PFA with AA and flop is J78dd
It seems PIO bets this hand very frequently on the flop but if we look at the EV of betting and checking
The EV's are super close.
Does this mean
* In a game where there is absolutely no need to balance, It doesn't matter at all whether we bet or check since the EV of both actions is the same and we should look for other exploitability factors when deciding between betting and checking ?
March 1, 2019 | 8:35 p.m.
1k hands is ridiculously small sample, you might as well not play this limit at all.
It will be 30k-50k hands which is when you will start to know whether you are a winning player and some idea of your winrate.
Feb. 22, 2019 | 3:58 p.m.
My feeling is that this varies person to person, I have also found it very useful for me to write the hand down with some title that will leave a very clear image of that hand in my mind. Otherwise its much likely that I will just forget the hand especially when I am playing a lot.
Feb. 22, 2019 | 3:46 p.m.
Hi Peter, great video, I also have an issue with my redline even though my WWSF and WTSD% seem to be in the reasonable ranges.
Any other ideas you can give what else could be the reason for my bad red line or if there is any material on RIO you can refer to which can help me improve in this area.
Feb. 1, 2019 | 12:24 p.m.
OTT, I prefer 1/3rd bet. Since the villan is quite unpredictable, his range includes all the legit hands that are ahead of you, mainly Jx (excluding super strong hands that would x/r), 8x and draws. By doing a 1/3rd bet OTT, its a cheapest way to showdown by charging the hands that are behind and not giving free river to them and also not loosing too much when you are actually behind.
And my take generally on bet/x/bet line is value heavy.
Jan. 17, 2019 | 1:58 p.m.
I am not sure what kind of reads are in play here but in general, this is a thin value raise OTR by hero because of flushes and full houses possible, I would raise to something like $1.0 or $1.25 max but fold to a raise as I do not expect the villan to go crazy with anything less than a full house TT or JJ.
Jan. 14, 2019 | 11:28 a.m.
Since I have started playing online and studying, obviously I am spending a lot more time sitting than usual, I feel sluggish after some time. Are there any particular exercises you guys find useful while playing to keep active ? For example, some kind of a 2-3 mins workout after every 45 mins or something ?
Dec. 1, 2018 | 5:14 p.m.
I have a few thousand hours live NLH cash experience and recently switched online 6max cash with live MTT (& cash) high stakes long term end goal in mind. More on my goals here:
But thats long term, In the short/medium term,I am focusing on building a strong base with 100bb cash game and started at NL2/NL5.
I am looking to work regularly with a coach who can help me move up the stakes(for 6max Zoom).
I have pokertracker/H2N/PIO edge and have played about 67k hands so far.
Please PM if interested.
Nov. 22, 2018 | 2:26 p.m.
When I got introduced to poker in 2012, I was told I have missed the train, online poker is completely dead and live poker is slowly dying as well, people are going to do something else etc. If all of that was true at that time, 6 years would have been enough for the game to completely die
Well, guess what 6 years later
* there has been no change in the negativity surrounding the future of poker
* there are games where ever you go, online/live/MTT/NLH/PLO and people who are out-working their competition are still making money
OK, some of the games are not as big as they used to be and now you have to work harder to be ahead of competition but thats the thing with everything in life in general, you got to put in the work.
People who will put in the work and have all the ingredients for success in poker, WILL always make money
My 2c :)
Oct. 31, 2018 | 12:15 a.m.
I have now made the switch, quit live poker and started studying (started with sorting out my preflop ranges and being a proficient PIO user)
So any advice with my end goal as described in orignal post will be greatly appreciated ! :)
Oct. 28, 2018 | 10:22 p.m.
I am new to PIO and ran this sim at 34:11
Basically, we 3bet 7d7s vs BU open, BU call and we face a flop Qs2d6s
I tried to simulate the instructor's simulation on my machine (using a rough estimate of the PF ranges by looking at the yellow area in the range section in the video). Initially I was getting results that were way off for example, in the instructor's sim, solver suggests OOP betting 87.24% OTF but in my sim, its suggesting less than 50%, I made a few changes in the preflop range (which I think are minor) and I manage to bring the betting range for OOP on the flop to 78%
What I have also seen in this case is by only removing the 6 combos of QQ from IP player's range, it makes a huge difference and that makes me wonder how only 6 combos out of 255 total combos makes a huge different to the strategy advised by the solver.
I do appreciate, with these solvers the solutions are only as good as the assumptions you input and in the above case, QQ is an important combo on Q22 flop but it makes things very hard when you are trying to analyse a hand and assuming ranges.
For example, if I had this spot in real life vs an opponent that I either know or a complete stranger, a lot of the times it very hard to say whether he has QQ in his 3bet calling range or not, and if that is going to make such a huge difference to the output solution, how am I ever able to trust the solution.
Either I am missing something in running the sim or I need some advice on practical aspect of the assuming preflop ranges of opponents we don't know, do we just assume they are playing GTO ranges pf (when they are clearly not especially incase of microstakes where people are making random plays everywhere) ?
Oct. 19, 2018 | 7:01 p.m.
Very good video ! A couple of questions though
In the table at 21:30, you do not have anything for SB vs IP ?
Secondly, can these stats help us finding the leaks in our game, the sample size for each category would be too small to determine whether its a leak or not.
Oct. 17, 2018 | 12:49 a.m.
Completely agree with above two comments. Trying to copy certain players is not going to do much for you in the long run. Yes you can get hand histories, but there is no way to find out why certain player made a certain play vs someone, the conclusion will be very subjective and will not help you build a proper foundation of the game. The best way to learn any format of poker is
Work out the basic strategy in any spot > Solvers
Learn how to deviate from that basic strategy using exploits > Studying your day to day opponents
Oct. 13, 2018 | 10:51 p.m.
I play live 2/5 PLO have a winrate of 11bb/hour over 700 hours.
I always start with 500 and What I have experienced in all these hours is that
its way more easier to spin up the stack from 500 to 1500-2000 but winning anything beyond
that is very extremely difficult. I cannot remember many sessions when I won 1500 in the first
1-3 hours, continued playing since I have an edge in the game and ended up winning even more
but it routinely happens that I have won 1500, continued playing and ended the session either breaking even
or even negative few hours later.
So I have come to conclusion my winrate at a certain point in the game depends on my stack size.
i.e. with a stack size of 500 its best and it gets worse as my stack size increases eventually
reaching a point where I have very minimal edge in the game.
Either above is true or this is my fallacy. If its true, the following could be happening
With deeper effective stacks, its becomes harder to realize equity in some situations
An average player makes much bigger mistakes in 100bb effective stack situation than the one in 400bb effective stack
When I sit down with 100bb, most players at the table are covering me and its much easier to find a plus EV
spot to get the whole stack in, such as with AAxx
So I just wanted to get opinions if there is any truth to above or I am just fantasizing :) I aware it could be possible that I biased because of my recent results but I routinely experience this and thats why deciding to post it here.