radtupperware's avatar

radtupperware

385 points

Developing a strategy around 9x is a reasonable play if you feel like you don't have very many Tx+ in your range here.

That said, I sort of disagree that QT is a medium strength hand here. I think it beats pretty much all of villains range.

"Using a polar sizing vs a capped range, mainly only makes sense to me if hero is trying to bluff."

I don't really understand what you're saying here. Of course you will have to bluff sometimes to have a polar range, but you will also have to bluff sometimes to have a 1/3 of the pot range. The value of betting bigger doesn't actually come from bluffing more, though. The EV is all gained by your strong hands. (If you're saying you think QT is being used as a bluff in a polar strategy, I think that's definitely wrong -- it beats pretty much all of villains bluff catchers, so I think it's fine in a polar strat for value.)

July 20, 2019 | 2:22 a.m.

Disclaimer: I didn't PIO it and just scrolled through the video to see what the action was so I don't know what FL's reasoning was yet, but I'd like to share my thoughts based on the action.

(1) My default play would be around $400 here, but I think all-in looks okay too.

(2) I think the only reason to use 1/3 sizing is if you're worried that we have no bluffs. Villain is almost never going to have a slowplay here, he's quite capped to a weak T. That said, he does have quite a lot of "showdown" bound medium strength hands (Any hand like JJ (or say AT/KT) or better will want to bet the turn at a very high frequency because they're still quite vulnerable and there's just a ton of value to be had off of our rang). I don't think we're pushing a huge range v. range advantage and want to just play a tiny bet for that reason either.

I think the moral is we're up against a range that's really bluff catcher heavy and won't struggle vs 1/3 at all in my opinion. I'd choose 1/3 if I didn't feel like I had many bluffs, but given this action we should have quite a few combos of hearts, some random overcards with a heart, and some 5x.

Hopefully this makes sense!

July 20, 2019 | 12:59 a.m.

Uri your videos are awesome. And now that I see you stabbing that Q2 on the turn I'm going to be bombing all xx xx rivers against you in limped pots bud.

Anyway hope to see more from you. Your videos are higher quality than everything else on this site, IMO.

July 8, 2019 | 2:07 a.m.

Barewire on live poker? Sign me up.

(Nothing against heads up, but this much more relevant to my experience.)

July 6, 2019 | 1:36 a.m.

Random note that you might appreciate Tyler. If you click the HH button (not the hand replayer but the history button), you can see people's hands assuming they went to showdown. You mentioned not being able to see someone's hand until tomorrow, but if you click the HH button you'll see it on that page.

July 3, 2019 | 4:37 a.m.

Always glad to see new mixed game content

May 22, 2019 | 4:16 a.m.

Been learning some PLO myself recently, so I can give you my take.

Nick's been putting out some good videos lately, I'd start with some of his stuff, as he mostly focuses on low stakes games with some weak players.

Richard Gryko's stuff is super good as well if you have elite. I would watch all of his videos multiple times, you'll catch something new each time around.

No comment on RIO poker vs Pokerstars. I'm in the US so I can't play on either.

May 4, 2019 | 11:34 p.m.

fwiw to anyone I was a little suspicious watching this and put a bigger turn raise in (5x and 3x) and saw the lead percentage go down and the large raise size used almost exclusively.

April 26, 2019 | 2:35 a.m.

A classic quote from Robert Pirsig that has always spoken to me relative to poker and is related to your 2nd bias:

"Of the value traps, the most widespread and pernicious is value
rigidity. This is an inability to revalue what one sees because of
commitment to previous values."

April 11, 2019 | 5:17 a.m.

I think Elias also put out several videos on Ignition but at pretty high stakes (I think 5/10 and 10/20).

April 10, 2019 | 3:31 p.m.

To be honest I don't mind it nearly as much as everyone else seems to. Only thing I don't like is the flip between hands in zone lol.

The cards themselves are a little small, but I'm mostly playing only a few tables at a time so it's not a big deal to me.

April 10, 2019 | 1:51 a.m.

Whew, man that is a weak game. So many 4,5,6 way pots. You play quite tight at the micros, but it's probably a necessary evil given the action.

April 6, 2019 | 8:24 p.m.

To add on to Phil's point, rake almost feels free to some recs -- they don't really think about it or notice it coming out. You notice your totals maybe you like .50 euro or whatever, but you don't think about how much of that was rake. With this, you feel like you are being charged which is a big deterrent.

April 4, 2019 | 4:17 a.m.

Actually that's probably a funny side effect of anon tables. If I see a table with one person sitting and have no other data on them, I definitely assume they're a solid reg comfortable table starting. (I play on Ignition though, not RIO)

April 2, 2019 | 9:29 p.m.

You mentioned webcam, gotta say I really don't see much value to having the webcam running -- I've actually found it a little strange that there is a trend toward having the webcam on for no reason in videos on this site. So I prefer the no webcam.

I like the live hands, but, to be honest, I would prefer to see both tables simultaneously if possible (rather than flipping between them). That way you don't have to explain what's happening on the other one and I can watch the action and think about it myself even if you're not talking.

Thanks for the good video though!

P.S. random comment, man WSOP.com looks really cruddy to my eyes. Weird suits, weird table set up with the chairs and such.

April 2, 2019 | 4:14 a.m.

Prefer the former but not by a very significant margin.

March 31, 2019 | 2:53 p.m.

I definitely agree that it's some of the highest quality PLO content on the site. Keep it coming.

March 30, 2019 | 10:08 p.m.

On the whole, the spots here seemed relatively straightforward as a collective group. Still good to see confirmation of Tyler agreeing with my analysis when I pause (I'm often way off). So all-in-all a pretty good, but somewhat straightforward video. Thanks Tyler.

March 27, 2019 | 2:49 a.m.

I'm not really sure what you mean by "ranked." If you want to contact Leszek, I'd recommend PMing him on this site.

March 24, 2019 | 6:12 p.m.

Post | radtupperware posted in Chatter: Oh man, Leszek's book is out

Just ordered my copy. Very excited for it to be delivered!

March 22, 2019 | 3:35 a.m.

Really don't understand the turn float with KQs for IP. Seems like he's blocking a lot of the bluffs you might have found KQs, QTs, KTs you might raise sometimes. And totally unblocks your main value bets. Any insight there?

My only thought is it has pretty decent implied odds on a K or Q vs your AJ region while AK has really bad implied odds on an A.

March 21, 2019 | 5:14 a.m.

therapist Sure, that's almost certainly true. But I also think it just doesn't really effect the strategy enough to matter. That said, if I were to use either some random %s or just all 45% I'd probably go with the latter.

The more complicated the strategy is on one street, the more annoying it will be to follow on future streets, including preflop.

March 19, 2019 | 4:14 a.m.

disclaimer, I haven't watched the video. I don't think it's going to affect the output the solver spits out either way. As Demondoink points out, what we're trying to do here is find what the optimal strategy is. Editing those to exactly how you play preflop won't really matter. A lot of time the goal is to figure out what optimal is so you can know what to deviate from and why.

You know that optimally this board should have x% cbet but you know this guy is a little bit prone to folding vs probes so you up it to x+epsilon or w/e. (And you know your range is slightly wider than optimal in this case or slightly tighter, etc.)

March 19, 2019 | 3:45 a.m.

In PIO solver, not long at all. Especially 3bet pots. Depending on your computer a few minutes to half an hour?

March 18, 2019 | 4:57 a.m.

I do enjoy looking at fewer hands more deeply as a general approach. You get a lot out of really thinking through a hand.

My suggestion is if you're looking at these hands with a solver (and/or if you're analyzing them in PLOCalc or w/e) you should include some of that analysis in the video. Maybe it means doing slightly fewer hands but it would help to see. You mentioned several times checking with a solver if your line seemed right. It would be nice to take a quick look in the solver at what hands are betting for each size. How does the solver like to compose it's range here? A bit heavy focus on specific combo vs range construction in that sense and I think bringing in the solver would help with that.

Either way, good video, thanks for the content, Nick.

March 17, 2019 | 5 p.m.

Nah; I've gotta say Krab is the only one that talks slow enough for me. :)

March 15, 2019 | 2:29 a.m.

Not everything tagged with a certain game is in the learning paths section. For instance, there are thousands of videos tagged NLHE, but they don't all show up in learning paths.

The learning paths is more a specific series of videos they've chosen as giving a good introduction. You can still find more videos by going to daily releases and filtering mixed if you want more mixed game videos.

Feb. 26, 2019 | 1:24 a.m.

Is there a quick way to grab say all of Monker's bet flop range for the IP player and put it into PLO calc syntax?

I really like PLO calc as a range explorer tool, because Monker is pretty bare bones, so I'd like to be able to grab the ranges for both players on certain streets and then analyze them myself inside of PLO calc (i.e grab the opening range and calling range or the bet flop and call flop range) then analyze them inside of PLO calc.

if anyone has any insights on how to do that, I would really appreciate it, thanks!

(P.S. I chose midstakes at random because it forces me to choose one...)

Feb. 17, 2019 | 4:48 a.m.

Still haven't watched this video but I apparently get notifications about it because I posted a comment. Yeah; I'd personally be calling 77 to a big squeeze. Especially on Ignition if this is the spot. Because the flatter behind is more likely to be a rec and we'll play a 3 way pot. I'm not excited, but when I do hit my set, I'm feeling pretty good about the implied odds.

Feb. 14, 2019 | 4:31 p.m.

Somehow I never realized the pattern that your videos came out every other Tuesday. Can't tell if I'm excited to know so I can be ready every Tuesday, or disappointed that I've lost the surprise factor.

Feb. 13, 2019 | 3:21 a.m.

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