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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Only watched some about the first hand, but it seems to me like you made the conclusion slowdown on the turn vs low WWSF player too quickly here. Yes, it is true that his range is stronger than high WWSF player on the call node, but we also should probably not assume that he is defending optimally on the turn. Seems like we should probably consider his fold to cbet OTT. How often should villain be folding to cbet on the turn given the tighter flop play? I would guess less than these villains are on average (your aggregate data said something like 41%).
Obviously I haven't looked into it, but just my thoughts as I watch. Might run my own sim later though, I do like the process.
Feb. 10, 2019 | 12:43 a.m.
Also, any insight as to what physically makes you notice someone as the aggro fish that doesn't want to give up/fold? You mentioned "the way they handle their chips," etc. but I'm curious if you can be more specific about the types of things you notice that help you make this distinction. (I'm trying to get more into live playing so making reads like this is something I still struggle with.)
P.S. Thanks again for the live content. As someone starting to play live a lot more recently, I'm glad to see more live poker content on RIO.
Feb. 1, 2019 | 5:46 a.m.
Seems to me like reg should just auto cbet small on JJ5 (to my intuition and PIO's confirmation with ranges I'm putting in). So the xx node is pretty worthless with PIO analysis unless we want to node lock him to some strategy, but it would really depend on the player type. Some people never check air here but will check some hands with some showdown value. I.e. he might check some A high but never check like T9s or KQs or something. I sort of expect that to be honest. I also expect he doesn't have a jack too often here either.
Mostly, I think after xx on the flop, his hand is exploitatively really A high heavy so I wouldn't mind a bet on the turn and probably would have found one in game. If you think he's capable of checking back some overpairs here (which really doesn't seem like the best strategy) then maybe being more cautious is okay. But I still think betting the turn is a reasonable play.
For completeness I said he checks beck something like A with showdown and AA and resimmed. You want to lead pretty frequently in that case. You're leading all your jacks at a super high frequency and pocket pairs are all pretty darn mixed.
After turn xx, xx given the flop locked strategy I gave him, PIO is basically just betting always from you. You don't even need to hit the 8, your pocket pairs are just crushing his mostly A high range at that point.
Obviously I made some pretty strong assumptions about what his check back range is here. But I think even if he checks back some Jx on the flop, he's never going to check on the turn. So the river is a pretty standard value bet with pretty much any pocket pair (no need to hit the set) vs his ace highs. That's true even if he checks back some stronger hands on the flop because I suspect he rarely slowplays a J for two streets (except MAYBE top quads).
Feb. 1, 2019 | 5:39 a.m.
Very swingy day today while not playing that much. I was loading up a game of dota with my girlfriend and playing some hands on the zone table. She was laughing about having watched me lose like 1k while we were queuing for a match. She saw me flop nut straight with AK in four bet pot and get owned by a boat on the turn. :)
Ended the day on a hand that was so lol I just had to stop playing. Rec open jams for $270 preflop from HJ. CO jams over him for $680. BN folds. I jam over them both for $750 with Aces (BB covers). BB folds. They show KJ (rec) and QQ (CO). Flop comes KQJ. Turn A. River brick. What a ride. Gonna watch that sweet new Krab video now.