@9:15 - After you xr 934hh w K9 you say your barreling range is TT+ and you x Js turn. Do you have TT here in bb vs HJ often (assuming not). If not what type of hands would you be barreling? Bd fds, Jx, and Bdwy bd sds?
Jan. 28, 2021 | 10:30 a.m.
Makes sense. As an aside, I don’t think he’s range betting 1/3. That’s just the go to sizing (though I’m sure leads to range on certain textures).
Dec. 23, 2020 | 2:56 a.m.
I recently saw Tyler Forester say he bets 1/3 on almost every flop bc the EV he sacrifices is made up for by having a better understanding of how to play turns (and he doesn’t feel he gets terribly exploited). I feel like this line of thinking is supported by your thesis to a degree. Thoughts?
Dec. 22, 2020 | 11:55 p.m.
DNegs98 I find that humans rarely mimic solver river outputs. They're just too complex. Does this tie into what you are saying regarding turn play?
Dec. 22, 2020 | 1:35 p.m.
Good debate and informative read. My advice to lIlCitanul would be to really look at your tone in this back and forth. Benefit of the doubt is it's unintended, but it comes across very passive aggressive and argumentative. Please don't get defensive just being real here.
Dec. 22, 2020 | 1:32 p.m.
When you say you simplify the majority of 3b pots to 1/3 cbet sizing do you compare the EV of that strategy to other strats (for example board textures that pio suggests using a predominantly bigger sizing of 75%)? Do you have an acceptable EV loss threshold? Or do you just find in general people play worse against 1/3 since they have to defend some uncomfortable hands and it's easier for you to execute thus you stick with 1/3 across the board?
Keep up the good work.
Dec. 16, 2020 | 12:33 a.m.
Good vid. @21:15 villian bets a high % in sim on K turn. This includes 99/TT/JJ. Can you explain why the sim bets 99-JJ here? What does this bet accomplish? Is pop or yourself betting in this spot in reality with that hand class?
Thx. Keep up the good work.
Nov. 24, 2020 | 1:47 p.m.
Good video. I’d like to see one filtered for deep stacks if posssible. It seems deep stack play is difficult to find on RIO.
40:28 - (742 ds with TT) sim has you mixing fold/call with 99 on flop but mixing jam/fold with 88. Any idea why this is the case?
Nov. 12, 2020 | 11:01 a.m.
Great vid Peter. Keep up the theory work. Super beneficial.
@27:10 - you bring up EV loss in simple trainer is a misleading column. It seems that in SRP when training cbets/delay the EV loss is usually going to be small/trivial vs 3b pots/turn barrels/etc where the pot is bigger and thus EV loss will be much more impactful. Do you look at EV loss in those scenarios (bigger pots) as a way to gauge play?
What do you use as an EV difference threshold to determine acceptable loss?
Oct. 30, 2020 | 9:58 a.m.
Great vid. You do a great job articulating your thought process. I think it would be beneficial to the community if you made a theory series discussing some positional matchups (ie btn v bb, srp oop, etc). Just a suggestion. Keep up the great work!
Oct. 27, 2020 | 10:07 a.m.
Great vid as normal @Oxota. On AK4 one of the main reasons for a larger flop Cbet is bc of the dynamic nature of the board so you want to get money in the pot now while the range interaction allows you to do so.
Can you briefly articulate how this concept changes when you are oop with a deeper SPR? Looking at SB 3b vs Btn flat a larger bet size is used less often on a suited vs rbw variety of the same flop. Obviously on the suited version the board is going to change a lot more often yet we bet smaller. Is this just purely a function of being out of position and deeper?
Highlighting these differences could make for an interesting vid, keep up the great work.
Aug. 31, 2020 | 10:27 a.m.
At 18:20 this calc is detailed. Basically difference in EV between sims is 1 (81.32 - 80.18). He estimated the bb is 20 (normally you’ll know this but he backs in using 100 pot size used in sim of bb defend vs button open). So 1/20 means in this trial you’re losing 5% of a bb. If you played this hand 100 times you get to -5bb/100.
Aug. 31, 2020 | 10:18 a.m.
This is definitely a subjuect I'd like to see more theory video's on. I remember sauce saying in a video that 3b AQo oop 200bb deep is a mistake that a lot of regs make. This makes some sense as flopping a one pair hand very deep oop isn't a great situation. At the same time AQ is way ahead of a button open range so seems a little weak to just flat sb or bb with this hand.
Does anyone know any videos where this topic is covered more in depth?
Aug. 22, 2020 | 8:44 p.m.
Understanding online concepts and theory is highly applicable to live play in order to develop sound strategies. Obviously you are going to deviate from this in a live setting as you gain reads on player pool and since you are one tabling. But without knowing the baseline you won't understand how much you are deviating and how/when you are being counter exploited. So the long answer is studying online play is going to immensely help your live game if you put a lot of time in on theory work and those videos/concepts are available.
Aug. 17, 2020 | 12:52 a.m.
Appreciate the response Owen. That helped crystalllize.
Aug. 10, 2020 | 11:47 a.m.
Sorry I’ll clarify in thread but this is a srp bb call vs button. I’m looking at button Cbet strat
Aug. 9, 2020 | 1:11 a.m.
Looking at Btn vs BB flat in pio and am trying to get a better grasp of when to cbet big (66%) vs small (33%) on high card boards. I'm using a BB strat that 3bets 99+/AK, AJx/AJo (75%), AQo (75%), AQx (90%), KQx/KQo (75%), Bdwys/SCs/A2x-A5x (25% each).
Majority 66% sizing: Ad Js Ts; AcKhJd; As Kd Qs; KcJcTh (40% big/25% small)
Majority 33% sizing: Ks Qd Ts (40% small/20% big); KdQsTs; KcQhJd
It seems that the K high boards have a tendency to use the small sizing vs the A high boards. Can anyone help articulate as to why this is the case?
To illustrate range breakdown of a big size and small size example:
AcKhJd IP 52.3% EQ, bets 2/3 52% and 1/3 3% -- Strt (3.3%), Set (1.8%), 2pr (5.5%), top pr ( 22.6%)
OOP Strt (3.4%), Set (0%), 2pr (3.3%), Top pr (24.1%
KcQhJd IP 52.5% EQ, bets 2/3 10% and 1/3 41% -- Strt (6.3%), Set (1.8%), 2pr (5.3%), top pr (13.5%)
OOP Strt (6.8%), Set (0%), 2pr (5%), Top pr (11.3%)
Aug. 7, 2020 | 4:01 p.m.
Appreciate the comments. Very helpful and insightful.
On this board, the GTO strat has bb calling sets 25-40% and slowplaying 2pr at 65-90%. On K72 rbw bb doesn't slowplay 2pr+.
Can we use the heuristic that on boards that feature a polar/large size cbet strat BB should be slowplaying more? And on boards that feature a high freq/small size cbet strat BB should slowplay significantly less?
Aug. 6, 2020 | 5:08 p.m.
I'm looking at Button vs BB on 9c7c5s and was surprised by the results of node locking BB response to Button. I pure raise all sets/2pr and pure call 9x as opposed to having some raises with top pair. In doing so Button cbet % goes from 51% (majority 2/3 with some 1/3) to 71% (almost pure large size).
I feel this is indicative of most live games as most villian's won't slowplay on this board and won't xr top pair. I didn't adjust some of the light backdoor peels that would increase cbet frequency even more.
Does this make the case for range betting this board a high % of the time vs most villians? What other takeaways/heuristics can we apply using this info? On a side note, how will this change 200bb deep?
Aug. 1, 2020 | 5:41 p.m.
Probably the most well thought out and structured response I’ve ever seen in a forum. Much appreciated for putting that together.
July 28, 2020 | 1:43 a.m.
RaoulFlush This makes some sense but the counter to that argument is that we'll always slowplay top 2 on any board since we'll be blocking a lot of villain continue range. This clearly isn't the case.
Are there any heuristics for the types of boards we should slowplay top 2 vs pure bet? Do we slowplay to protect our x back range when we're betting polar on dynamic boards (this particular flop example)? Vs boards where we have a huge range advantage and bet small at a higher frequency?
July 26, 2020 | 5:15 p.m.
I've been running a bunch of Button vs BB sims in PIO and am trying to understand why PIO checks back some strong hands on dynamic boards? Example of a button vs bb 2.5x open/defend:
Flop Td7c6c - PIO decides to bet 66/77/67x almost pure while x back TT (30%), T7x (50%), T6x (pure)
Can anyone help shed light on why PIO decides to check back some of it's strong value range (2pr+) on this flop? A side note question is why slowplay T7x but pure bet 67x?
July 25, 2020 | 4:52 p.m.
Good video. Would be interested in seeing more of these detailing other spots btn vs bb (i.e. monotone, A high, etc.). Maybe redoing agg report videos from 2-3 years ago would be a nice refresher as the game has changed since then.
You are using new ranges vs the last time you did aggregate reports videos (a couple of years ago I believe). I ran 456 board using old and new ranges and the results change the IP strategy to x 70% with new ranges vs 45% with old.
It's obvious that ranges drastically affect strategies/models so my question is how do you keep your strat in check over time? Are you constantly rerunning ranges? Do you have different types of player ranges in your head and thus have multiple strats vs diff villians (i.e. some 3b QJx and some always flat, some 3b 67x 25% and some 75%)?
I can pick up general concepts from PIO and have learned a lot but when I start moving ranges around my head feels like it's going to explode. Any tips?
July 8, 2020 | 8:27 p.m.
Hey @Sauce123. Solid vid:
28m - You mention in comments you favor calling down w/ KhKd. Can you elaborate on why that is? My subpar poker brain think KsKc allows more FDs and less KQx in villians range and thus would make a better bluff catcher. I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess my logic is not correct here. Also what are villian's top bluffs in this spot for that sizing on river? Appreciate any feedback.
June 25, 2020 | 5:25 p.m.
I seem to have answered my own question. The equity advantage vs the wider 55% defense range is significantly greater than the tighter 40% defense range (58% equity vs 52%). I guess I just have to keep these ranges in mind and probably cbet a lot less vs a tighter range in this spot to stay in line w/ equilibrium strategy. This probably means vs a 2.5-3x open the strategy is going to be very different than 2-2.25x strat.
June 13, 2020 | 9:12 p.m.
Great Video Ben Sulsky . I have one question regarding how ranges affect this strategy and how to know what to incorporate into my game:
A. Sauce Range: Defend 55% vs 45% Btn open, x 45% IP
*Favor small size, slowplay KQx, mix some other slowplays
B. Elusive Mark Range: Defend 40% vs 45% Btn open, x 80% IP
*Split small/big size, bet most Kx flushes, slowplay majority Tx and below
What is the lesson/takeaway from how these ranges affect strategy?
I get confused sometimes when studying PIO on "memorization" vs "theoretical takeaways." If memorizing I would potentially misapply vs a tighter defense range (i.e. bet more, slowplay KQx...). If purely theoretical I would say I'm supposed to slowplay more flushes so I have a better multi street strategy but I wouldn't know how to randomize or play strategy in an optimal way.
Any help on how to approach these situations would be much appreciated.
June 13, 2020 | 5:07 p.m.
Great video. Is there any way you can post a screen shot of the Btn call vs BB 3b (if you still have). You show button 4b response in PIO grid but never show the call range (unless I somehow missed it). This would be helpful when trying to understand further how the ranges interact.