theotherguy

I really learned a lot from the very last hand, as simple as it may have seemed. Thanks Phil Galfond!

Thanks, Phil Galfond . I have this worry. The worry is that the turn decision seems to be guided, at least in human form, by relative strength and equity considerations, using a pot size bet and check to create a polarized range. How can I know that the heuristics I choose to select turn barrels don't end up giving me bad frequencies or are inadvertently opening me up to some kind of exploitation? The KK, AA check back is a good example, where in Vision's equilibrium the split was a fairly even mix, which essentially states that all options have the same EV - because the opponent's counter to any other more pure strategy makes it so. Is this worth the concern or is vacuum style evaluation an OK place to begin?

I wonder how players rate/evaluate the pair value of 88 in this spot. Is checking behind a decent option to keep the villain's range the very widest?

I think you are asking whether or not it is a good flop to float to steal later, and if it is a good board to bet when checked to with your range and/or your hand.

Useful starting information to have would be:

1) A guess at the MP open range for this villain.
2) The probability of that range flopping a flush.
3) The change in probability of that range flopping a flush given that you have the Td.

Other things that would be great to know are:

1) Your own cold calling range on the button vs. MP open.
2) A guess at the probability that you have flopped strongly relative to MP on this board.

I don't know the answers to any of these questions unfortunately, but this is what I would like to know.

I have seen many posts/comments about high rake at the microstakes. Find the middle way. Select the first stake where you are able to learn and compete effectively, without being suffocated by an unreasonable rake.

Thanks, Phil. I don't have any PLO software or solvers so I really enjoyed the ride along! Seeing these computer frequency mixes is so daunting! You did a great job giving your best guesses as to why some things were structured the way that they were.

It was especially interesting to me to see how on the dry texture IP's value and bluffs seemingly blended into each other with both groups revolving around using pairs.

The end result vs OOP check raise seems important, and unfortunately I didn't quite get there understanding. Versus what feels like would be a deeply polarized range on the dry texture, it seems silly to re-raise, but with a card to come I guess some hands can still gain more value and protection?

What does a pot size bet represent? What is there a limit to what amount you can check call if you believe you have too much equity to bet half pot fold?

At around the 10:30 mark there is a discussion on the best check raise sizing with a wrap on 45Kr. Phil states that while pot is OK, a smaller size might be best and better for range. Why is this so? He says that vs a tougher opponent the smaller raise is best. What are the factors that are moving the needle on this raise size between seemingly close amounts? Jonna102 ultimately chooses 14. I'm lost on this nuance. Please help! Thanks guys.

What percent of players do you think are using these preflop solutions?

With regard to the vision quiz, is your (or the tool's) assumption that choosing the line that has greater than 50% frequency is "correct"? If so, why do you think that is true? Thanks!

Playing the part of "the other guy". :)

I was bummed to only get one decent flop!!

Cool video, thanks Patrick Cronin for helping keep poker fun!.

The discussion at ~35 min was confusing for me. In the cases where the BB is not continuing aggression with his thinner value hands (e.g. T9) wouldn't that make BB more likely to be bluffing, not less? Really enjoyed this video. Thanks Patrick Cronin!

Thanks, Patrick Sekinger - I've just discovered your videos and I am enjoying the content.

A general comment/question on the usage of PIO. When reviewing the solved output, you say things like "PIO prefers action X vs action Y" when the frequency of one action is larger than the other. For example a call vs a fold, or a bet vs check, or one sizing vs another. It seems very wrong to me to suggest that hands employing mixed strategies have preference one way or the other. Am I wrong?

Near the end, when you review bet sizes on the wet/dry spectrum chart, you talk about how on a board like K9x, a small bet wouldn't be effective at deny the equity of overcards since there are so many gut-shots between the K and the 9. You suggest a larger size instead, maybe 2/3p. Is this always in the context of using a single bet size within a check or bet strategy? Would those 9x hands be included in the 2/3p bet range?

A really great video. Thanks for sharing.

"In this river spot I'd say if you want a sizing to valuebet 7x+ 30% pot or so probably works"

What does this translate to? I don't follow the 7x reference.

Thanks!! Great comments.

What happens if you choose to bet less than all-in?

I thought this was an excellent expansion on the original from Sauce123. Specifically the idea of exploring the difference between using frequency instead of face value to evaluate the effectiveness of a candidate bluffing hand.

I have a very difficult time keeping my full range in mind. Do you have any ideas for improving in this area efficiently? It seems to be the primary prerequisite skill for being able to make these types of evaluations.

Hmm.. no takers.

Ctrl-end

I'm interested in this as well. Is there any material out there on what exactly H2N does so well as a study tool?

On the last hand, you talk about hero being uncapped. My initial thought during the drill was that hero is entirely capped at A little given preflop, flop, and turn play. Can a capped range become uncapped on the river? Thanks for the video. Great idea to add clock to away from table analysis.