rengonnaren's avatar


51 points

I like your comments, they're a good starting place. Is PIo the best place to start for multi-way pots? Or would it be best to start w something like Odds oracle and then just ask frequency questions?

Thanks Nick!

Nov. 15, 2018 | 8:01 p.m.

Liked the video
- agree with the value check dev brought up
-Also, think your PIo solver explanation was great, but only made the case for a small raise even better
-I'd also add 5+PP to your calling range, gives you 2 extra outs v Tx when your bluff gets called later, will work better than your 5678 down the road imo. Agree with your BBB5 hands, just 5+PP gives improvement possibilities equity wise to your non Tx range.

Question for you and all the others using Pio and whatnot: how would you begin using Pio for games where people are ridiculously wide preflop, even the decent ones because the bad players are so much worse? restricting the ranges makes me think i'll get false positives.

Nov. 13, 2018 | 5:43 a.m.

great vid-
@21.30 using your 50% pot bet strat you calculate it only has a loss rate of !/3 teh 1/3 psb sizing. i believe this is because youre dividing it by 4.1 (MES EV?!) and not pot size (6). using 6 (pot size) would be the correct term, wouldnt it?

i see you caught this error a moment later when showing the full pot ev, and are now dividing by GTO ev, but then you still eave B33 unchanged as dividing it by 6 (full pot) and not GTO EV, i think this mischaracterizes how big of a mistake b33 is, does it not?

Jan. 23, 2016 | 10:58 p.m.

It seemed to me, when you asked it to look at different strategies on different turn cards you wanted it to solve for how your strategy should play on turns I . It still has A9s-AJs, A2-A5s, AJo-AKo, KT-KQs, QT-QJs, J9-JTs,T9s, 86s, 75s in your turn range, all of which your strategy wanted to fold out on the flop. So if you wanted to solve for how your strategy were to continue on these turns, the percentages of betting/checking are now not true (along with possibly the true strategy being skewed?!)

Do you having it solve for your strat or its own (previous) flop strat? it seems the latter while flow suggested the former.

Jan. 18, 2016 | 5:52 p.m.

no clue about this program, but the program (or at least what you showed of it when it you had it compute your strategy for the turn given your inputted flop actions)- still had in hands you were going to fold. so that messes with your frequencies

or it could be reverting to hands from its strategy, but it also had hands it would fold (tho a much more mixed %) in the turn range. can you clarify whats going on? ~34min?

Jan. 17, 2016 | 8:13 p.m.

well played, thought out overall, just a few critiques below:

23min: regarding TTT on t963.(and previously with your AA65 hand)

your reasoning of "being happy with your play because he tanked so he probably would have called a smaller bet and you get to avoid some tricky rivers" feels intuitively a bit lazy and misses the point of his tank fold, especially with your hands. You block QJ/J8 somewhat, you have no clubs. He tanked, so he likely had a decent chunk of equity against 78, but he ends up folding. What type of hands are those? pair+gutter+fd, 2pr+gutter, 66/33, fd+gutter, bare Ahi clubs, (if he believes us, which is a good starting point facing a pot sized checkraise).

all in all i think this means we can play rivers quite well, especially with our perceived hand being 78. All these hands we have crushed and can force significant river mistakes from. His continuing range will contain a lot of clubs and we can play pretty straight forward on them, and will probably check back some of his two pair hands given their SDV, so not all of his range will be firing on clubs.

Board pairs are quite fun and are going to be our money makers where we x/call (club board pairs im probably jamming outright). Js we can fold, 8/q/k we can make reads and play poker. By picking pot as your sizing you are leaving a lot of money on the table by letting him fold and avoid these trouble spots for him.

The AA hand my criticisms are quite similar. our choice of pot, while we may never be bet folding, avoids letting him peel with various hands he can against a larger sizing. taking those hands out, i think he continuing range here is quite strong against our pot and were not pushing that much equity. You could argue for a much smaller sizing to accomplish having him put more money in the pot drawing quite slim.

While we may have good hands in the moment, we can think bout how their range reacts on various rivers as well, and analyze how hard it is for us to play/get value on/push good equity on various run outs. We may lose the pot more often by betting smaller, given he is realizing more equity, but his mistakes (and our visibility) will allow us to way make that up especially vs an aggressive villain (which i garner from them having bet folding ranges)

39min: mid pair and backdoor make for better check raises than check calls, top pair and back doors we can check call. The added fold equity adds much more value to the hand and we want to fold out 66-QQ. You then say you dont block to the straight on K456K, but yet you have an 8 and a 2. the only straight you dont block is 37. we are also quite near the bottom of our range here, if not at it, we can go ahead and lead this card to rep the straight imo, if he only calls w K+ we should still be fine. -- you got there in the end to think bluffing is better

44min: q9 straight:
what are you trying to get called by when you're value betting this board with this hand? seems like a xb to me since you're trying to get called by middle 2 pairs (or bet a lot smaller, like 4). The nature of the board means youre not bluffing often and he has no incentive to bet his broadways really.

April 8, 2015 | 5:08 a.m.

Phil, I think that set of 4s in the 3-bet pot is a check

March 23, 2015 | 6:22 a.m.

What about ck/jamming the flop against nimzon in the hand ~ 5:15 in? It looks like he has a 83% cb vs 1 villain percentage? Still too dicey with all his dominating hands? Don't you rep uber-strong with a check jam?

March 12, 2015 | 4:14 a.m.

jen did you conciously change your value of fantasyland for this tournament or is it an overall theme of your recent gameplay?

Feb. 6, 2015 | 4:47 a.m.

you dont go to the land w any middle royalties. the boat/boat stay went out of style at least 18 months ago. he would not get to remain in the land w jens set, it is just risking 2 points to scoop much more often which it should as T hi never wins the top

Feb. 6, 2015 | 4:46 a.m.

in hand 1 i dont understand your need to average the hand values vs each player? i think that only makes the picture blurrier.

mathematically the best way to approach the hand is to add the line battle results you have with each player plus your royalties times (one from each player). The result is similar, but it breaks the hand down into its constituent parts over which you have control.

Q up top risks:
current situation: -5 w jason, +1 (probably closer to -0.5?!) w btn, 0 royalties. if we foul here we are -6 for each player, so we are risking 8 points

Q up top seeks to gain:
(+5? from villain regarding lines) and 17 royalties

v jason we gain 17 royalties and maybe go to -2?! on line war

so in sum we seek to gain 21 from btn, and 20 from jason, so we are risking 8 to win so well need to improve ~16-16.3% of time in order to justify our gamble.

hit 4 outer and not 5 outer: 14.131% = 1- (not hitting 4 or 5 outer + hitting just 4 outer w/o 5 outer +hitting just 5 outer w/o 4 outer

so on the face of it its not a gamble. but tweak the current value w either jason or btn by 1 point, and make us -1 w jason when we hit and we have enough to justify a gamble. if you have input on how my estimates of (-2) w jason's hand in the lines (i figured we are -1 w lines on avg, but some % still scooped)

if you're right w your estimate of 16%-20% then its an immediate gamble. but sway fantasyland to 8 points instead of 10 ( i noticed a switch from 10 a point in cash to 8 a point in this vid, coincidence its a tournament?)...and we need 17.8% so its really close, probably a close nit up spot.. interesting, my gut would be to always gamble for it here w such a trash hand, instructive!

18min: you say you should play J up top and not middle? i understand the reasoning for J up top, but isnt it more important that only 1 AKQ is out and it makes it easy to put all AKQ up top and maximize our chances for FL? if btn had 2 or we were further along in the hand, more akq were dead i think your argument holds more weight, but that means were going to have to put an AKQ in middle so if we 2 pair middle (with that card) and make our J up top, were missing out on FL. you were one to say for elegance earlier you liked another play, and J in middle seems to put all cards in their pace. unless you think drawing a pat pair is so likely here. can you expound on why you think J better up top?


jasons decsion to play A up top Q in middle. you noted AK is beating you up top, but the Q in middle also gives him more outs. given you only have 15 points, and if he plays to scoop you, that gives him 12, so hes risking FL for a max of 3 points vs you and you still have to play v the Land hand. you got there right after i typed it.

45 min: you now have 12 points, him fouling is a 50% bonus to your stack. just grinding you.--well the QQ blew my theory out of the water i guess?! it is quite a bit better, to play QQ up to, just i think it went against his plan when he showed he wanted to put Q mid Q back.

great vid! wish it was a bit more illustrative/ or had a slide on the side you could reference and we could see when talking about hitting the double draw or the like.

Jan. 29, 2015 | 8:36 p.m.

Per your decision to place KK in the middle on your KK9d draw (ABOUT 23 minutes in): I broke down the hand myself and reached quite a different conclusion. Ill show my work and how i reached such a conclusion then await your thoughts on my math/conclusions.

First we can see the only two plays worth evaluating are Kmid/9d btm, or KK mid as Kmin/9d clearly dominates K top;

Evaluating playing 9d btm, 9s Top
Villain fouls : 0.2242, qualifies mid (draws A,Q,8, 4,2): 0.7758

Should villian qualify, we must examine the line war
Evaluating "line war"
1. Villain wins bottom line: our score: -1
2. Top line: In order to win the top hero must draw: A/K+Q, or A/K/8+3+villian does not draw Q+T
P(A/K+Q (2 outer and 2 outer) AND he does not draw Q+T)=:3( 2/272/2623/25)=0.0157
P(A/K/8+3)=0.0287, 0.0287
P(villain draws Q+T): 1-32/2423/22=0.9515,

summing, we improve the top 0.043, we lose top 0.957 to give us a weighted value of: 1.0443+(-1).9556=(-0.9112)
3. The fun stuff- The middle line: (i understand the values for the villain's probabilities are slightly inflated because he can draw a Q and an 8 in my math. By leaving it as is, it overvalues villains hand, which will give us a lower bound on our score. If this is close to the other option, then i would go back and fine tune the math to get a much cleaner answer)

Card, # outs, % chance, # redraw outs, % redraw
Q, 2, 0.2137, 3, 0.3188
8, 2, 0.2137, 4, 0.4977
4, 3, 0.3080, 4, 0.4077
2, 2, 0.2137, 5, 0.5115
A, 1, .1022, any, 1.0

now i make a tree for each out w branches of our redarw outs and their value of the line and then sum up each final branch to give us the value of the middle line. I leave out the probabilties of hitting each card so i dont over count later (i will be multiplying by the 0.7742 villain qualifies), but i instead multiply it by the number of outs per card, to later divide by the total outs to give us a weighted value.

)Q-a. 0.3188 (A/K), 1---- 0.3187 2
b. 0.6812 (1), -1----- (-0.6813)
Ill just give the finale values for each card +/- i get, instead of drawing it out
8 a. 0.4076, b. (-.5924) *2
4 a. 0..4078, b (-.5922) *3
2 a. 0..5117, b (-0.4900) *2
A a. 1 (he qualifies but we always win middle) *1

summing up these numbers we find a value (-0.5846). now we divide by 10 the get the weighted average value of the middle line: (-0.0585)

summing the top, middle and bottom values for the line we obtain (-1.9697) as our value of the line war when he qualifies.

Total EV (line war)= (-1.9697).7758+6.2242=(-0.1829)

This is our value in The line war (-0.1829)

We have our flush 100% of the time for +4
Fantasyland: we need to draw A/K+Q: we figured this in the above part to be (2/272/2623/25)3=0.0157
QQ+FL value about 17pts (10 for FL using Jen's approximation), EV (hitting FL)=17

Royalty points: 4.2669

Total Expected additional points of 9d, K placement: +4.084

Evaluating KK in Middle
Here its easier to write out the royalty section first:

As state in video hero hits flush 0.6103.
now here can hit flush and fantasy land for additional royalties (only other royalties possible): = (7/272/2618/25)*3=0.0431.

Thus hero will hit fantasy land 0.0431/.(.6103)=.0706 of the time she hits a flush. so we can calculate the royalty section as such:This is to properly weight hitting flush, and not FL and hitting flush and FL
EV (flush)= 4.6103(1-0.706) = 2.2688
EV (flush and FL)= 21.0706.6103=0.905

Royaties: 3.5928

Line War
Here its easiest to make a grid with the probabilities for each mix of outcomes and evaluate the scoring lines:

P1 fouls 0.2242, P1 qualifies: 0.7758
P2 fouls 0.3997 P2 qualifies: 0.6103

Both foul (0.22420.3997) * 0 pts (value for hero)=0
P1 foul, p2 (hero) qualifies =0.2242
.61036=.1368 *6=.8208
p1 qualifies, p2 fouls= .7758
P1 and P2 qualfy=.7758

x being the sum of the line value for p2 (hero). Plainly if both qualify hero wins middle, villain wins the bottom, so its entirely up to the top line.

Hero is currently behind and would need to Draw A/Q/3 (5 outs) and diamond

P(A/Q/3 + d)= (5/277/2614/25)*3=0.0838. now since we already stipulated hero had drawn the diamond we have to determine what percentage of the time he draws AQ3 given he drew a diamond (wording may be slightly off, but....) = 0.0838/.4735=0.1769

Of this time we need p1 not to draw Q+T which from part 1 is .9515, thus hero wins the top: 0.1769*0.9515=0.1683, villian wins 0.8317

Ev top line given qual/qual= 1.1683-1.8317=(-0.6634)

Both foul (0.22420.3997) * 0 pts (value for hero)=0
P1 foul, p2 (hero) qualifies =0.2242
.61036=.1368 *6=.8208
p1 qualifies, p2 fouls= .7758
P1 and P2 qualfy=.7758

we sum for the total line war value: (-1.3538)

Thus the total additional value for KK is: +2.239

Even without doing the fine tuning math we can still see 9d, K is far superior (by almost 2 points) 4.089 to 2.239
The play should be 9d btm, K middle

Jan. 16, 2015 | 6:16 p.m.

math is idiotic...

Nov. 9, 2014 | 9:47 a.m.

True. Tough to watch this while eating cereal

Nov. 9, 2014 | 9:34 a.m.

30 min hand: flush draw/trips mid vs flush/pair- want a quick check on my shortcut/thinking

given its a Wa/Wb situation and villian will either qualify (draw A what 40-45%? if you drawing 1 out is 18%, him drawing 1/3 A has to be ~40-45% w/o doing math).

a back of the napkin calculation can quickly be done for the ev of the aggressive v conservative route to demonstrate which is better:just

aggressive: 25% foul/75% qualify

conservative: we are guaranteed 4, so quickly on our side we can see conservative route is much better even before we look at his hand we can get a quick comparison. we can see the penatly for him qualifying is -11 while hell still foul ~40%?! (45% A, 15% 56?! random guess before doing math), keeps approximately the same cost of fouling.

Oct. 22, 2014 | 6:15 a.m.

I know this is from a while ago but

@ 24min you talk about the value of your simul draws to boat/trip or boat/2pr middle and qualify.

your analysis seems a bit off thinking it adds points to the hand when in fact it doesn't. What it does do is add to the probability of getting to FL. If we are doing relative analysis, we're leaving both the bottom and middle open (putting q8 up top would be conservative), these points are going to be added to the hand in both the conservative and the aggressive way as both draws are live in both cases, so adding these points to the hand when analyzing just the aggressive way doesnt lead us to the right answer when we dont leave that option available for the conservative route. Unless you go back and redo the math on the conservative play, were not comparing apples to apples. This would increase the EV of the conservative play as well, in fact an equal amount to the aggressive play. This short hand allows us to disregard the added value as we essentially are solving for when EV(agro)>EV(cons), the same term will be on both sides, and cancel out.

It will however add 4% to the times we make it to FL, increasing our EV that way.

Oct. 21, 2014 | 10:12 p.m.

what's the deal with your various screen names?

Aug. 10, 2014 | 5:31 a.m.

No one gunna talk about the treadmill?

June 28, 2014 | 11:02 a.m.

id even include some t8/tj, weak 2pr hands, t8+fd, qj8+fd type hands, too

April 13, 2014 | 8:13 a.m.

the more check raisey he is the less i like the cb on the flop you dont have any sdv to call w and you're often having RIO in a blown up pot

April 12, 2014 | 8:50 a.m.

my next step suggestion wasn't to take that raw number, but look at the % of times he has the blocker type hands i listed. I assume hes not turning his entire non ak/k9 range into bluffs, hence why im looking for blockers without relative showdown value.

this way we can good a much better approximation of his bluff/vb range here as its an easy board to be polarized on. once we ask OO how often his hand matches ~aa/kk/99/a+pr+nfd we can get some ratio of bluffs to vb and compare that to pot odds given...then make our judgement to call or not

April 12, 2014 | 8:33 a.m.

quite interested in a bet/bet analysis as a semibluff/bluff line w smth like kk/Ac/Kc+ here

April 5, 2014 | 2:38 p.m.

Comment | rengonnaren commented on 5/5/25 Flop Spot

sted if whale is gambling then our lead+his raise really narrows others range and were in a spot we want to only be against one person. 

A lead acts in a pot control manner as well. Checking here to have the whale check is horrible for us, especially if btn bets, were not really in a spot to x/r/c. maybe x/r/f is an option of some sort, but id be more likely to xc the btn in either case, and then we are put in a bad spot relative position wise with the whale calling often enough to make our life hell

April 4, 2014 | 3:34 a.m.

then the next step with your OO sims/querys is to ask it how often villian has AA/KK/99/A+PR+oesd, K+pr+oesd type hands. id take each case individually and build and subtract hands that arent in such a range and compare that % to the 21% you got that he has a straight. then see how often he has to be turning those hands into bluff to see if callings +ev or not

April 4, 2014 | 3:31 a.m.

i really need to catch up on my OO syntax-- he views you as being able to bet turn to steal/bluff right? if so i think combinatorically you have to call given you block both AK/K9 so effectively w/ A9. Could be lazy thinking, but you haven't mentioned anything bout his sizing or timing to suggest otherwise, and you know he can use this line as a bluff, plus you block the most likely value hands, so readless im calling once.

April 2, 2014 | 3:42 p.m.

Comment | rengonnaren commented on 5/5/25 Flop Spot

I wouldn't expect fish to bet flop unless he hit heavily and same for reg otb, he's the most likely to peel in my mind. Checking lets it check through too often and doesn't clean up any outs

April 2, 2014 | 3:31 p.m.

The jack1067 hand, I came like 4 times watching that

Feb. 4, 2014 | 1:30 p.m.

no hate on the sizing chosen? given the sizing hero chose i think its more of a fold as i expect him to react more straight forward. id prefer something closer to 84ish if were intending to call a raise

Jan. 8, 2014 | 5:37 a.m.

lol k574 hand. that's why you;re the best phil

Jan. 4, 2014 | 11:58 a.m.

Hey Parker, is it a big mistake in the first hand with 77 to flat-pre, and then basically 4b/get it in OR Jam over if the squeezy big blind makes a 3bet? And also, which would you prefer? A 4b/call or just a Jam over his raise to like 40?  Thank you

Edit: Also, what would you do with 77 if the big blind ended up 4betting pre? Do you think it'd be a good play for the big blind to do that with a small pair? 

Dec. 24, 2013 | 1:16 p.m.

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