twinskat 's avatar


114 points


could you leave the Sim details in the comments section please? It would be a lot easier if you wanted us to check out other flops if we are comparing 'apples to apples'...



Sept. 11, 2019 | 1:32 p.m.

Comment | twinskat commented on Look Inside, Listen

One of your strongest videos so far Chris!

I can almost feel your excitement in presenting this. Any chance you can get this excited for the rest of your vids?

THAT would be awesome :)


June 6, 2019 | 1:38 a.m.

Comment | twinskat commented on nl200 utg/sb

"Villain- weak reg"....

how so? Was he passive bad? If so, what do you think he is check raising PSB on Flop? Followed up by big but not huge Turn bet?

Smells a lot like a set, turned FH if he is passive type...

so, is he that type?


June 6, 2019 | 12:04 a.m.

Comment | twinskat commented on weird results in pio

Hemi is Greek, demi is French and semi is latin for half.

Kalupso is too smart :)


PS thanks for the AQh info, I think PIO is again showing us how we undervalue blockers, or rather, the interplay between ranges....

June 5, 2019 | 1:35 p.m.

RIT writes: "

I tried doing the $25+$5 for a couple sessions and was hovering up or down half a buy-in most of the time it seemed. It did work on getting folds or heads up going postflop. Just felt I wasn't really making much money. Also having to tighten my range with 5bb+1bb sizing didnt feel good to me, profitable but boring. Not sure if that is best way to beat my games in terms of maximum profit.

Not sure a couple sessions is anywhere near enough time to figure out if a strategy is working?

Your opponents are barely noticing what you are doing, it may take them a while to adjust?

I will admit to having the same feelings though, "profitable, but boring...." and struggle with this idea on its own. I mean, "Profits" is what I am aiming for, and should I really turn my nose up at 'boring' ? "Boring" to me implies less variance, and perhaps that is also not something to be dismissed too lightly?

Not saying any of this affects you the same way, just that you are not alone in facing these decisions. Good luck on the felt!


PS PokerSnowie would be very suspect in my mind for any type of multiway spots. If you check out Snowie's assumptions about ranges multiway, you will see how quickly they skew towards 'really really tight', which impacts the decisions greatly

June 5, 2019 | 1:26 p.m.

I like a larger sizing on the Flop as well, since it is a dynamic board with lots of straight and flush draws.

the min raise seems strange, in your experience, can the SB (who has not gotten 'out of line" raising" ever really have a strong hand with this sizing?

Would a passive player bet tiny to induce? (not in my pool)

I like the Flop call, wait for a safe Turn card, and your sizing seems decent as well.

If you try and pot control IP after a flop min check/raise, I think you are playing into the hands of SB who may be doing this with a draw? He should be weighted toward draws and weak pairs in my experience, and the river could be trouble.

What were your plans for a suited River, or a possible straight if the SB shoves into you?


May 21, 2019 | 4:25 a.m.

at 31:43 you mention going with a "bit smaller sizing holding KsTd on a Js6s5s Qd board" and then continuing that the player pool 'plays too capped on this flop..."

you were PFR in SB and BB flatted, the checked back Flop

two questions:

1/ "i am going to go with a little smaller sizing, sometimes I overbet..." turned out to be 75%?

does this mean that since overbets are the big ones, and 75% is the 'smaller sizing' that you are not really going lower? I would have thought 75% to be on the larger or at least medium size?

2/ When you are two tabling would you mind saying "on the left" or "on the right" when talking about a spot rather than "On this one..."

I am old, and zoom tables go really quick for me, let alone two at the same time. I cannot see your mouse. Many times I can figure it out, and admittedly I can always pause and rewind, but "left" or "right" would make my life a lot easier...

so, "Please" .....if that helps :)


Really like all of your videos, like everyone else, but the "rolling" concept is a fresh take for me, so thanks for that !!

May 21, 2019 | 2:50 a.m.

PioSolver has a discord channel that has plenty of offers of Pre Flop ranges. You could even have someone custom make ones for you based on your exact rake structure.

If you have PIO Pro, you could also tweak and retweak your post flop calcs to come up with decent pre flop ranges, and you might even learn something about Ranges/Pio in the process?

Good luck


PS most live games do not go head up to the Flop, so not sure how much help a PIO Pre flop chart will be

May 20, 2019 | 1:12 a.m.

The way I think about it is to wonder how strong a hand I will need to show down vs how many players?

For example, in a 5 way pot to the river, one pair , even AA may not be something I am proud to shovel money in with.

On the other hand, if I expect the hand to be head up or perhaps 3way at most by the river, I can start to think of one pair being good, as well as Fold Equity helping me out.

The other thing I try and keep track of is the tendency of the remaining players to play versus my range with dominated hands: will they flat T9o and then get to the river on a Ten high board? This gives me a chance at their stacks with AT-JT.

The more willing the player pool is to stack off with Top Pair weak kicker, the more I am willing to raise Pre with hands that can take advantage.

TL/DR It is not just the opponents' pre flop actions (do they call too often?) that is important. It is also are they reaching showdown versus the PFR often, or are they playing fit/fold on the Flop or Turn that impacts my strategy.

Good Luck with this timeless question....


May 20, 2019 | 1:07 a.m.

Pretty sure this is how/why Hand2Note software came about.

Like BigFiszh said, PT4 bogs down too much for database stuff like this.


look for Nick Howard stuff/ ddogkillah / arizonabay (sp?) for posts about this

May 17, 2019 | 7:15 p.m.

R I T -

Here is something that always stuck with me.... an idea presented by Grindcore, an online beast way back when:

If you were to take an AX hand versus an opponent's average AX hand where would the middle fall? So I would have expected Equity of A6 or A7 to be somewhere in the middle of all AX hands, since A2-AK is the range I am looking at.

Here is where the true "Middle" is with an AX hand vs a Range of A2s-AKs

So A8s, even with its flush potential is still a dog to his average AXs hands, and that assumes he 3bets ALL of his AXs.


May 17, 2019 | 6:06 p.m.

R I T-

When I saw your post, the first thought I had was "How do I expect to get paid?"

You have a hand that wants implied odds, but you are out of position.

If the Flop comes AXX, how will ever win more than the minimum, or lose lots more?

If the Flop comes XXX tt with your suit, how do you expect the various lines to play out? You are against a value heavy range in a player pool that is scared to death of flushes?

The reason Pocket Pairs work so well, is that you know instantly whether your equity is high, while the opponent is guessing.

When you are have a straight draw or a flush draw, you are the one guessing on whether opponent will pay you off, or force try and force you off your equity.

being OOP is bad, and I would think draws lose more value than most categories of hands in this spot.


May 17, 2019 | 5:49 p.m.

Ryan writes: "Before these last 100 or so hours I was winning 72% of my sessions this year, even higher last year, but seem to be taking a cliff dive recently only winning about 47% of my sessions the last 3 weeks. "

three weeks of live play is an unrealistically small sample to base any type of strategy deviations on. You get to see 30 hands an hour max, so if you were playing 8 hours a day you would have 30x8x21= 5040 hands. And that is already assuming a lot.

Something to consider is "why are you 3betting?"

If it is to get folds, are you in fact getting the folds from the type of hands you expect? Do not just go by percentages, but if opponents are raise/calling with KJo then you know your light 3bets are not really doing what you expect. Might be time to 3bet more often for value, less with a bottom end of your range?

Another thing to notice is how do my opponents react after I 3bet. Do they 4bet? If so, light or value heavy? If they only call, how do they play postflop? Are they making fit or fold mistakes post flop that might make up for your 3betting light pre?

Notice how the opponents react to SPR. If they playing shallow SPR spots the same way as deep (many do), you can tweak your strategies to take advantage of this as well.

Sometimes the value of a 3bet is as much getting others out of their comfort zone as particular range match ups.

Lastly, how do opponents react to you after they realize you are 3betting more than the other players in the game? Are they starting to raise less to begin with? Are they carrying over their perception of you into other areas of the game? (for example, when you play limped pots, do they react to more as a maniac than you really are, just because of your pre flop aggression in certain spots?)

lots of stuff goes into a poker strategy, and I am sure others can add even more things to consider.

TL/DR It is almost impossible to take a single play out of context and have a clear idea of what overall changes result. ie: changing 3bet ranges

good luck

to be clear, I struggle with this as well

May 17, 2019 | 5:31 p.m.

Comment | twinskat commented on Home Alone

this video was great, but at first thought it was too basic.

Then I started thinking about it, and saw myself way too often to be comfortable.

May 14, 2019 | 3:51 a.m.

Comment | twinskat commented on Playing Hide and Seek

very cool ideas in this video, thanks....

I really like the minimal way you have info on the screen. A very unique style. Don't think I will ever see a powerpoint with these type images and not be reminded of Chris Pimmer


May 9, 2019 | 5:02 a.m.

Comment | twinskat commented on x

S & F-

I used Snowie for years but stopped before they introduced their latest ‘training’ mods

One thing that was very difficult to remind myself if was how Snowie’s ranges were so different than what I was used to seeing in opponent’s play

It is a great tool imo with the major flaw of only ever presenting its own Ranges. For example have EP Opn then two flats and see recommendation for Btn continuing range, it is insanely tight, but probably correct given its assumptions about the flatting ranges

TL/DR - Snowie can teach you a lot as food for thought, but in low stakes games it may be difficult to implement


April 18, 2019 | 4:58 a.m.

Comment | twinskat commented on Food for the mind

AT5r would be one suggestion of mine...

For a Turn to never be static there might be two views of a Flop:

1/ Find a dynamic Flop that leaves few ‘holes’ for dry Turn cards

2/ Find a bone dry Flop where any Turn helps some part, no matter how small


April 18, 2019 | 4:41 a.m.

Comment | twinskat commented on SIGH call, 200z

could have same hand? Perhaps KQ? Bluff? Could also have various full houses...

Two Questions:

1/ You bet bigger on River- what calls that you beat for that sizing?
2/ If you are folding here- what are you bet calling with?


April 2, 2019 | 3:32 a.m.

Rake not being taken Pre Flop would be huge for me in this game, and it does not seem to be getting the respect it deserves IMHO.


March 17, 2019 | 2:43 a.m.

if you 3bet this hand, you will [usually] chase out the OMC, or should we say Old Man Tea (Asian?), and really only worry about the young guy.

So what type of young guy is he?

1/ If he can raise / fold OOP previously he may already be better than average in a Bayesian sort of way.
2/ If he had a good hand, would he really have Raised to isolate to a size of less than Pot?
3/ What is his aggression/stickiness like Post Flop as a Caller?
4/ What is the chance he is Raising Small, but 4 betting you?
5/ Does he have a commitment threshhold? If you 3bet him to 12 BBs will he realize his 4bet puts him in a tough spot Post Flop?
6/ Think he will fold to your 3bet in the first place?

These are the kinds of things I would wonder, and then decide ingame>....


March 17, 2019 | 2:40 a.m.

Comment | twinskat commented on Nut Advantage

Check out this thread.

Big Fizsh lays it out pretty cleanly with the maths.

Video poster even used the same board.


March 17, 2019 | 2:24 a.m.

I guess my general line OOP is to keep a pot small on a dynamic board where I cannot keep opponents from realizing their equity. It would be hard to get the money in good here, and since I cannot, I probably check a lot on this Flop.

I may not explain this exactly the way I want to, but I am trying to get at the idea that although we have a pretty good hand Pre, this Flop multiway seems to be a disaster. OOP it gets worse since we will be hard pressed to tell who wants pot odds and who want Fold Equity...

This hand seems like more of a a Bluff catcher than a hand I want to press Equity advantage with now on this board, and my usual response would be to keep the pot as small as possible.

You seem more prone to squeeze the players who have too much hope though... although that may be reading too much into it.

If you bet, and get called, a brick shows up on the Turn, you plan on bet/folding? bet/calling depending on size and number of opps?

If you bet the Flop and get raised, what is your plan?


March 17, 2019 | 2:03 a.m.


In your experience, with over a third of the deck appearing to help someone, what size would you think you need to bet flop to induce folds from hands you beat?

I guess I am wondering if sometimes, it is just not possible to bet a reasonable amount to deny them odds. Especially if the first caller puts more dead money in for the second possible caller.

Cool to hear your thoughts as you work through the hand.


March 14, 2019 | 3:42 a.m.

a player I know set up an Aggregation report, which has both EV and EQ values for various flops.

He then figured out how to randomly select a flop texture, have an input text box, and once you hit enter, you could see the actual answer in a separate area.

I cannot remember whether he could add his results together, but it did make it easier to study, since it seemed to make a game out of it.

I think Equilab can also do that but for a specific hand vs a range that you get to choose. Equilab keeps track of your answers, and then after you are done will give overall results.

I used to grind those for 15 hands a day. Does not seem like much, but that is 500 hands a year that probably would not have happened otherwise.


March 14, 2019 | 3:17 a.m.


First thanks for posting all of this, was cool to see someone else going through issues, and how they resolve them.

Quick question?

You are killing the low stakes games. If your goal is to play 2/5 you should have the cash to at least play there on weekends and Friday nights? You do not have to always be at a certain level, just play a few sessions a month at 2/5 to see if you think you can hang....

I knew someone who was the most knowledgeable 1/2 player at the casino. Yet he never moved up. Was crazy to me. Why would you not want to race to the top? At least you get a feel for what you need to work on, what "good players" play like, what your winrate might be at stakes that are not rake traps.

Plus inflation is always taking it's toll. 2/5 today is not nearly as expensive as it was in 2004.

If you can figure out a way to sit at 2/5 in my opinion, you SHOULD.


March 14, 2019 | 3:09 a.m.

[it] is getting me thinking about hands and lines in new ways that I wasn't just a short while ago!

Whatever "It" was that triggered your new way of looking at spots is the most valuable part of anything in poker for me. It is so hard sometimes to get out of our own heads, and if some book, or poker app, or coach can get us to see things 'differently' it is usually a good thing.

Still need to be thinking critically about all the rest of the situation, but it is a great start to 'new learning' in my opinion.

March 13, 2019 | 3:06 p.m.

Actually, any casino can make any rule it likes. You get to decide if it matters enough not to play there.

I agree, that it seems odd. In my casino, unless the OOP players ALL check, thus NOT changing the 'action', the person acting out of turn gets to exercise all of his options.

But to be fair, as it typically plays out, the OOP player checks, forcing the bettor to act anyway, and then if OOP wants, OOP can then raise.

The only angle I can see for the OOP player, is to be able to bet just over 1/2 the pot and preclude the IP player from putting in the full amount.

But each interpretation has its shortcomings.

If you allow the OOP player to act out of turn but then get a free roll if any action precedes his, he gets to influence the action also.

For example, I am SB and want to bet out to squeeze the BB out, knowing the BTN still has to act. But because the BTN acted first, now I am forced to check, which allows BB to check, then when the bet comes around to me, I have the BB still acting, but LAST instead of second.

No easy answers here. Bay 101 seems to punish the IP bettor the most, giving more options to the other players. Does not seem inherently unfair.


March 13, 2019 | 5:16 a.m.

Comment | twinskat commented on GTO+/CardrunnersEV

for a take on how valuable CREV can be as an "addition" to solvers, not as a replacement you might want to ask BigFiszh (mid stakes NLHE mod). He seems to both know the program very well, and how to use it to enhance solvers, rather than compete with them.


March 13, 2019 | 5:03 a.m.

okay, I do understand the hesitations of the way OP phrased the question initially.

But when it gets down to actually answering the question?

How much EV is reasonable to give up to achieve Simplification?

Surely giving up 99% of the pot is too expensive, and giving up 1% seems like a bargain.

In general, if y'all are considering "simplifying your ranges and bet sizes", what is the general consensus of an acceptable loss of EV ?


March 13, 2019 | 4:59 a.m.

Comment | twinskat commented on Routinely You

I think it is an interesting technique to get yourself to painlessly "remind yourself" of all the things you wanted, but never seem to get around to actually remind yourself of....

So I guess, like most folks, I wish I could think ahead of time about a lot of stuff, and this random generator idea is a cool way to do it.



March 13, 2019 | 4:48 a.m.

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