radtupperware's avatar


631 points

glad to see you and I are on the same wavelength on this one!

July 4, 2020 | 4:10 p.m.

Comment | radtupperware commented on Strike Three

Hopped on the NLHE zoom and tilted a bit for some reason today... don't know if it was the zoomin' or the NL that was getting to me. Either I s'pose I'm going to avoid that game for now.

Grindin' away at the regular PLO tables. Played about 500 hands today which is great volume for me. Going to study some vision in the morning and grind a bit in the afternoon tomorrow. In between, my partner and I will be looking at some new places to live... staying in San Diego, but looking for a new neighborhood.

July 4, 2020 | 3:51 a.m.

fwiw I think your take makes more sense when you and BB have tighter ranges so they interact with the wheel cards less.

July 4, 2020 | 3:40 a.m.

I disagree with a lot of this post...

  1. 30% seems like a low percent to open, I am opening a lot more than that from the small blind.
  2. KK is a negligible part of both ranges so I don't even think it's worth considering when developing a strategy, but the opener definitely has more density of KK
  3. No idea if I expect your field to overfold, since I don't know where you're playing
  4. Big blind has to defend super wide preflop... Since his range is super wide, he will have a huge advantage in two pair combos and straight draws on this runout. In general, I would guess that the small blind opener should be quite cautious in general on runouts with two wheel cards and definitely not cbet very often.


July 4, 2020 | 3:35 a.m.

If the club and agent are legit, then yeah of course it's fine to play on. Those are the two important things.

July 4, 2020 | 3:16 a.m.

Two guys I've considered myself, but never really bit the bullet and did much with either... I did have a session with Q, his stuff is super theory based and definitely not about finding leaks in your game, etc. So, go that route if you're looking for a better theoretical foundation. I'm not as sure about Pete as I haven't talked with him myself. I'm sure they're both great though.

Anyway, keep up the good blog, very entertaining!

July 3, 2020 | 6:01 p.m.

Comment | radtupperware commented on Strike Three

Took a break from playing anything reasonably after the post above... mostly just donking around mixed games without really putting in much effort and losing money (playing as a complete recreational, one might say).

In order to get myself back on track, I've started a PLO50 10k hand challenge/prop-bet with my partner. I'm playing 10k hands of PLO50... if my winrate is above 5bb/100 at the end, I win the prop bet, otherwise she wins.

About halfway in, the main thing I've discovered is that PLO50 is an extreme rake trap.

I think that's something like 20bb/100 so far! Bovada is doing well in these games. If I do well at the challenge, I'll probably have to up the stakes just to avoid this robbery. The other thing I've found is that these hands are very slow! Unfortunately the HU zoom doesn't seem to have been running on ACR anymore. I guess I was the fish. :/

Here's my stats so far, for posterity. Will update this a little more frequently, hopefully...

July 3, 2020 | 3:28 a.m.

Comment | radtupperware commented on Flop spew?

July 3, 2020 | 3:20 a.m.

Top notch. Loving these vision videos. They inspire to load it up myself which is more valuable than watching a video. :)

June 29, 2020 | 11:22 p.m.

I didn't watch the video (just happened to click into the comments) so I'm coming at this without much perspective, but I'd try to think about what you're trying to accomplish with each. A raise with the backdoor fd and bottom pair is more for protection/board coverage probably? It also makes for a pretty easy raise fold, where as I guess front door is raise and very uncomfortable vs 3bet.... One nice factor about the front door flush draw and bottom pair is you can basically close your eyes and call any turn (then open them up and decide on the river).

June 29, 2020 | 10:56 p.m.

Comment | radtupperware commented on Flop spew?

I'd just think about trying to make a coherent strategy with my range on this flop... if you want to be potting as your bet size, then I think pot-call is probably fine. If you want to be small betting, then probably small bet - fold is good without any suits.

Either way, I think on this two-tone board a little more caution with hands that don't connect with the suit is warranted. I would usually be checking without either of the suits (with the intention of check/calling a non-pot sized bet) no matter which bet sizing schema I decided to go with.

June 28, 2020 | 12:55 a.m.

5 card double board has been going a little bit at 1/2(1) lately... but there's definitely not a ton of volume there. kings club has more games at 5/10(4) plo I think.

The site has most of its traffic for limit games.

June 24, 2020 | 2:13 p.m.

Starting to get into PLO (before only watched your videos from a NL player's perspective), gotta say pretty confidently that you're one of the best coaches out there -- super, super good stuff.

June 23, 2020 | 2:45 p.m.

Comment | radtupperware commented on essay on plo

lol "cheat at intro level college courses dot com"?

June 22, 2020 | 6:09 p.m.

I'll second making use of PPT. I think it's pretty underrated at this point with all the focus on solvers.

June 17, 2020 | 10:44 p.m.

(Not Phil, take with grain of salt) There's a weird pull in this hand -- yes, I think we mostly just get x/r by AA and everything from OOP folds. However, I think IP will definitely have some calling hands including A9, Q9, QQ. So, I think if you think of them as some super-person defending range, it still makes sense to bet because we'll often get a call from IP and a fold from OOP.

June 17, 2020 | 7:34 p.m.

Very interesting final hand. The type of hand I could see myself "gross, he's never bluffing..." and still flick it in (obviously that's a pretty bad leak but I definitely do it sometimes).

June 16, 2020 | 3:51 a.m.

This post really read as being from Chris Pimmer. I can hear that last paragraph in your voice.

June 13, 2020 | 11:14 p.m.

I like the slow-paced video with a lot of pausing for your thoughts, thanks!

June 13, 2020 | 12:50 a.m.

That's just propokertools/odds oracle

June 12, 2020 | 6:58 p.m.

Nice video, thanks. Are you regularly playing in the 5/10(4) games on kings? One thing I'd like to see from a RIO video (which your video made me think of because of the blocked out nickname): a video with all the nicknames blocked out (kings is fine, but w/e) where you note about deviations/plays you're making because of specific reads. I understand the desire to not do this with the nicknames revealed for a myriad of reasons, but I figure if everyone's name is blocked, it doesn't really hurt.

June 11, 2020 | midnight

Format was good, looking forward to the next installment.

May 30, 2020 | 10:17 p.m.

I’m definitely not the person to ask about that. I’ve had coaching in MTG and Hearthstone and there’s definitely no money in that. I also have no idea the “dead”-ness of the game. I only play for fun, but if you enjoy a game and enjoy improving at it, why not? (Plus I sort of doubt there is no money to made playing poker at this point, but I could be wrong.)

May 18, 2020 | 10:17 p.m.

To... improve their poker skills?

May 18, 2020 | 10:10 p.m.

Just want to throw it out there QY is one of the most thoughtful coaches here on RIO. I worked with him a little and he was great. He definitely embraces the mindset of teaching you to figure out why we do things so that you can think on your toes later, rather than blindly teaching you how to act in certain classes of situations.

May 15, 2020 | 4:49 p.m.

Never actually thought about any theory here so I won't even try to comment, but just to add a data point, on ACR I usually reregister if I'm still going to have at least 30bb or so when I do.

May 15, 2020 | 1:40 a.m.

Wow, that really makes me appreciate the "drop" games ($5 or $6 per hand fee basically) here in so cal.

May 14, 2020 | 4:56 p.m.

Yeah, getting paid off when they hit a pair is definitely part of ""we play a lot better against the full range than the filtered continuing range" :)

Thanks for the reply.

May 13, 2020 | 5:47 p.m.

Good video QYang. Yours are always entertaining, even for someone who hasn't played a hand of NLHE in quite a while...

That said, I feel like how often we bet these hands is mostly a function of how much of a range/nut advantage we have vs opponent. I am sort of thinking of it as "This hand plays a lot better against full range than vs continuing range, and really doesn't like to get blown off it's equity by a raise." Then, the more capped villain is and the more of an overall advantage our range has, the less we have to worry about those two factors.

So, for example, as a thought experiment (which I guess you could put into practice) if you played a two player bomb pot (to simulate the SPR you were using) and OOP checked dark, I don't think you'd ever want to bet these hands. Villain is completely uncapped and we gain a lot more by playing against the full range and keeping hands in. (Of course, there are other factors at play here -- if villain is just going to massively overfold there may be some more advantage to it, especially since we then have clairvoyance vs their range when they call, but I'd ignore that now.)

May 12, 2020 | 11:54 p.m.

In theory, 1-alpha (using MoP language).

Basically the amount to make villain indifferent with bluffs. So, if villain is betting full pot, he is betting 1 to win 1. To be indifferent, his bluffs need to win this half the time, so you should be calling 50%. Or, if you're playing limit and villain is betting an 8th of the pot, he's risking 1 to win 8 -- that means to make him indifferent, he needs to win with those bluffs 1/9 of the time. So, you should be defending like 89% of the time. (Sometimes people try to give some formula for computing 1-alpha... don't worry about that -- just think about what odds your opponent is laying themselves with the bet.)

Of course, that's all in wacky vacuum theory land and it's not even 100% accurate. It would be totally accurate if you had all bluff catchers and he had a polarized range... In real life, you probably want to overfold sometimes when you think villain lacks of bluffs and overcall when you think he has too many bluffs.

May 6, 2020 | 3:26 a.m.

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