BETTING: GAINING AN EDGE + Fausto

AustinAustin Red Chipper Posts: 5,483 ✭✭✭✭✭
https://redchippoker.com/pro-video-valdez006/

@Faustovaldez123 much improvement since your first couple of videos. Despite not getting into bet sizing, which you mentioned will be in future videos. You touched on almost all the points on how betting gives you an edge. Loved that you included some examples as well.

I wanted to discuss the last hand a bit and some of your comments.

cayl2hhd0mb8.png

*I did catch one error, not sure how it happened, but apparently UTG took their turn bet bet of $70 back and the pot doesn't match the bets.

utg ($1,000) $20
MP2 Fausto ($1,000) :AS::JS: calls $20
flop ($47) :8s:7d:2s
UTG ($980) bets $30
Fausto ($980) calls
Turn ($107) :6h
UTG ($950) bets $70
Fausto raises to $250
UTG calls
River ($607) :4d
UTG ($700) checks
Fausto ($700) bets $450
UTG calls or folds?
Results were not shown

On the flop you mentioned the board does not favor either player. This would mean hero is under the impression villain is opening 65s+ and 22+ for their UTG range, which at 200bb I think is reasonable if the table is not super aggro.

I like to look at combos when I analyze hands. When you just call the flop I would take out quite a few sets from your range. On the flop you can rep 9 combos of sets [22,77, 88] and 2 combos of 87s [8h7h, 8c7c], so 11 value combos, then mix in some bluffs T9s (4), 65s (4), A10s-AJs (2). *I think you would 3 bet AQs+ preflop.

Since you just called lets go to the turn.
:8s:7d:2s:6h

When you raise this turn since sets are already discounted, lets say you slow play 1/3 of the time with sets, so you have 3 combos of sets. Now you are repping 4 combos of T9s, 2 combos of 76s, and ... not much else.

Now your point was leveraging stacks, taking initiative, etc. The part of the game plan was done fine. I just don't think the range aligns with your plan very well. Just my opinion though. If your calling all your sets on the flop, I think I would be under the believe that villain doesn't raise hands like 22, 87s, or 65s UTG making your calling range less vulnerable. Either way it is going to be tough for villain to call here.

There was an old video or HH that @Christian Soto posted that reminds me of this hand....
https://forum.redchippoker.com/discussion/10553/one-5-10-hh-from-me/p1

After writing all this I guess my only question is on the flop regarding your range on why you decide to call instead of raise. In my mind it only makes sense if you don't have a raising range on this flop.
«1

Comments

  • kenaceskenaces Red Chipper Posts: 1,592 ✭✭✭✭
    It might be a little unfair of me to comment as I didn't see the video, but I can't help myself.

    My from a GTO perspective this hand was played poorly on all streets except the flop call. Given that one has to have some very clear reads/assumptions to try to justify this line. Like I tried to explain a little in other thread your assumptions to make hard deviations from GTO have to be right in multiple lines of the game tree to be "right". I think it is much hard to do this than most realize.
  • RCP Coach - Fausto ValdezRCP Coach - Fausto Valdez RCP Coach Posts: 859 ✭✭✭✭
    Austin wrote: »
    https://redchippoker.com/pro-video-valdez006/

    @Faustovaldez123 much improvement since your first couple of videos. Despite not getting into bet sizing, which you mentioned will be in future videos. You touched on almost all the points on how betting gives you an edge. Loved that you included some examples as well.

    I wanted to discuss the last hand a bit and some of your comments.

    cayl2hhd0mb8.png

    *I did catch one error, not sure how it happened, but apparently UTG took their turn bet bet of $70 back and the pot doesn't match the bets.

    utg ($1,000) $20
    MP2 Fausto ($1,000) :AS::JS: calls $20
    flop ($47) :8s:7d:2s
    UTG ($980) bets $30
    Fausto ($980) calls
    Turn ($107) :6h
    UTG ($950) bets $70
    Fausto raises to $250
    UTG calls
    River ($607) :4d
    UTG ($700) checks
    Fausto ($700) bets $450
    UTG calls or folds?
    Results were not shown

    On the flop you mentioned the board does not favor either player. This would mean hero is under the impression villain is opening 65s+ and 22+ for their UTG range, which at 200bb I think is reasonable if the table is not super aggro.

    I like to look at combos when I analyze hands. When you just call the flop I would take out quite a few sets from your range. On the flop you can rep 9 combos of sets [22,77, 88] and 2 combos of 87s [8h7h, 8c7c], so 11 value combos, then mix in some bluffs T9s (4), 65s (4), A10s-AJs (2). *I think you would 3 bet AQs+ preflop.

    Since you just called lets go to the turn.
    :8s:7d:2s:6h

    When you raise this turn since sets are already discounted, lets say you slow play 1/3 of the time with sets, so you have 3 combos of sets. Now you are repping 4 combos of T9s, 2 combos of 76s, and ... not much else.

    Now your point was leveraging stacks, taking initiative, etc. The part of the game plan was done fine. I just don't think the range aligns with your plan very well. Just my opinion though. If your calling all your sets on the flop, I think I would be under the believe that villain doesn't raise hands like 22, 87s, or 65s UTG making your calling range less vulnerable. Either way it is going to be tough for villain to call here.

    There was an old video or HH that @Christian Soto posted that reminds me of this hand....
    https://forum.redchippoker.com/discussion/10553/one-5-10-hh-from-me/p1

    After writing all this I guess my only question is on the flop regarding your range on why you decide to call instead of raise. In my mind it only makes sense if you don't have a raising range on this flop.

    1) good catch on the turn, i have no idea how that $70 disappeared on villains end

    2) i said the flop could go either way for villain or me, NOT that it doesn't hit neither of us, big difference

    3) I think the range and how you predict me continuing is off. I would approach post given certain variables but in the video i wanted to demonstrate how i could use run outs to help my perceived range and allow me to construct a pot that will be leveraged against the opponent by the river. The ranges i could show up will include some 9x, 8x and 7x that touch me much more when the 6 rolls off than the opponent.
    COACHING NOW AVAILABLE HERE
    MY COACHING REVIEWS HERE
  • RCP Coach - Fausto ValdezRCP Coach - Fausto Valdez RCP Coach Posts: 859 ✭✭✭✭
    kenaces wrote: »
    It might be a little unfair of me to comment as I didn't see the video, but I can't help myself.

    My from a GTO perspective this hand was played poorly on all streets except the flop call. Given that one has to have some very clear reads/assumptions to try to justify this line. Like I tried to explain a little in other thread your assumptions to make hard deviations from GTO have to be right in multiple lines of the game tree to be "right". I think it is much hard to do this than most realize.

    what would GTO do here kenaces
    COACHING NOW AVAILABLE HERE
    MY COACHING REVIEWS HERE
  • AustinAustin Red Chipper Posts: 5,483 ✭✭✭✭✭
    On the flop you mentioned the board does not favor either player.
    i said the flop could go either way for villain or me, NOT that it doesn't hit neither of us, big difference

    I think we're saying the same thing? @Faustovaldez123 Both players have 87s and all combos of sets. I just think by calling you are slightly capping your range. Since you have an aggro image, I don't see the point in slow playing sets, thus capping your range.
    3) I think the range and how you predict me continuing is off. I would approach post given certain variables but in the video i wanted to demonstrate how i could use run outs to help my perceived range and allow me to construct a pot that will be leveraged against the opponent by the river. The ranges i could show up will include some 9x, 8x and 7x that touch me much more when the 6 rolls off than the opponent.

    Bold print came across clearly. I understand what your trying to do.

    For this particular hand and against this particular villain, I don't see how 7,8,9 can help you more than villain when the flop hits you both the same? Wouldn't that mean 7,8,9 also hits the villain? In general I think UTG will have a tighter range if we're playing against the player pool and the run outs will favor you. I just disagree with range advantage against a loose UTG open unless you have a really wide MP2 calling range.

    :8s:7d:2s:6H:

    Would you slow play 88, 77, 22 on the flop? If not, villain has range advantage on the turn right? As she can have AA-22 for all pairs and you mentioned you both have 65s+.

    On the other hand I think you can still use position to your advantage. For example, if you float a hand like AsQh and turn is a spade, i think you can easily turn your hand into a bluff if calling with AsJs is your default, then gives you some good bluff opportunities with AsQx - AsJx. Not sure if you play A10o or not.

    You see me write P.I.C.S quite often in the form.
    Position
    Initiative
    Card advantage
    Skill Edge

    I don't think you have card edge here by calling the flop, but I do think you have 3 out of the 4.

    Let me know if you disagree with any of this.
  • kenaceskenaces Red Chipper Posts: 1,592 ✭✭✭✭
    kenaces wrote: »
    It might be a little unfair of me to comment as I didn't see the video, but I can't help myself.

    My from a GTO perspective this hand was played poorly on all streets except the flop call. Given that one has to have some very clear reads/assumptions to try to justify this line. Like I tried to explain a little in other thread your assumptions to make hard deviations from GTO have to be right in multiple lines of the game tree to be "right". I think it is much hard to do this than most realize.

    what would GTO do here kenaces

    I didn't run solve but this what I would expect to see:

    No such thing as pure GTO preflop but monker/pokersnowie/DB analysis would support a 3B or fold spot preflop.

    flop is call - turn is call

    not bluffing this combo on blank rivers as you have wrong blockers
  • persuadeopersuadeo Red Chipper Posts: 4,393 ✭✭✭✭✭
    A solve would likely show few cbets, especially at 60%, from the PFR so the wheels are already off this hand. And if it is subject to range assumptions, all the more doubtful a point.

    A forced bet from the PFR is an inefficiency, so likely the solver would find some raises in response with a nut making hand.

    You're right about the river in general. That said, forcing "GTO" onto a nine-handed preflop spot, or uber-tight Snowie onto whatever these guys are doing has little to do with their play. 3b/folding a hand that plays well deep against a human is probably more of a mistake than finding a way to take it post.
  • RCP Coach - Fausto ValdezRCP Coach - Fausto Valdez RCP Coach Posts: 859 ✭✭✭✭
    I think we're saying the same thing? @Faustovaldez123 Both players have 87s and all combos of sets. I just think by calling you are slightly capping your range. Since you have an aggro image, I don't see the point in slow playing sets, thus capping your range.

    there's no reason think i wont show up with sets on the turn
    For this particular hand and against this particular villain, I don't see how 7,8,9 can help you more than villain when the flop hits you both the same? Wouldn't that mean 7,8,9 also hits the villain? In general I think UTG will have a tighter range if we're playing against the player pool and the run outs will favor you. I just disagree with range advantage against a loose UTG open unless you have a really wide MP2 calling range.
    :8s:7d:2s:6H:

    Yes we both could hit but it helps me more with how my expected range will be given the action when we arrive on the turn.

    COACHING NOW AVAILABLE HERE
    MY COACHING REVIEWS HERE
  • RCP Coach - Fausto ValdezRCP Coach - Fausto Valdez RCP Coach Posts: 859 ✭✭✭✭
    kenaces wrote: »
    kenaces wrote: »
    It might be a little unfair of me to comment as I didn't see the video, but I can't help myself.

    My from a GTO perspective this hand was played poorly on all streets except the flop call. Given that one has to have some very clear reads/assumptions to try to justify this line. Like I tried to explain a little in other thread your assumptions to make hard deviations from GTO have to be right in multiple lines of the game tree to be "right". I think it is much hard to do this than most realize.

    what would GTO do here kenaces

    I didn't run solve but this what I would expect to see:

    No such thing as pure GTO preflop but monker/pokersnowie/DB analysis would support a 3B or fold spot preflop.

    flop is call - turn is call

    not bluffing this combo on blank rivers as you have wrong blockers

    good thing they're not playing GTO
    COACHING NOW AVAILABLE HERE
    MY COACHING REVIEWS HERE
  • persuadeopersuadeo Red Chipper Posts: 4,393 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited August 2018
    Austin, if the PFR is tight, his UTG range doesn't have to have 22 and his pairs may start at at 44 or 66. 87s is also not guaranteed to be there.

    On Fausto's end, since he's being judged by what the solver does, it will not raise all sets here, most likely, especially 22, as the large bet from a solver on a board it doesn't like will trend very small in frequency and very strong.
  • Christian SotoChristian Soto RCP Coach Posts: 2,195 ✭✭✭✭
    Austin wrote: »
    https://redchippoker.com/pro-video-valdez006/

    @Faustovaldez123 much improvement since your first couple of videos. Despite not getting into bet sizing, which you mentioned will be in future videos. You touched on almost all the points on how betting gives you an edge. Loved that you included some examples as well.

    I wanted to discuss the last hand a bit and some of your comments.

    cayl2hhd0mb8.png

    *I did catch one error, not sure how it happened, but apparently UTG took their turn bet bet of $70 back and the pot doesn't match the bets.

    utg ($1,000) $20
    MP2 Fausto ($1,000) :AS::JS: calls $20
    flop ($47) :8s:7d:2s
    UTG ($980) bets $30
    Fausto ($980) calls
    Turn ($107) :6h
    UTG ($950) bets $70
    Fausto raises to $250
    UTG calls
    River ($607) :4d
    UTG ($700) checks
    Fausto ($700) bets $450
    UTG calls or folds?
    Results were not shown

    On the flop you mentioned the board does not favor either player. This would mean hero is under the impression villain is opening 65s+ and 22+ for their UTG range, which at 200bb I think is reasonable if the table is not super aggro.

    I like to look at combos when I analyze hands. When you just call the flop I would take out quite a few sets from your range. On the flop you can rep 9 combos of sets [22,77, 88] and 2 combos of 87s [8h7h, 8c7c], so 11 value combos, then mix in some bluffs T9s (4), 65s (4), A10s-AJs (2). *I think you would 3 bet AQs+ preflop.

    Since you just called lets go to the turn.
    :8s:7d:2s:6h

    When you raise this turn since sets are already discounted, lets say you slow play 1/3 of the time with sets, so you have 3 combos of sets. Now you are repping 4 combos of T9s, 2 combos of 76s, and ... not much else.

    Now your point was leveraging stacks, taking initiative, etc. The part of the game plan was done fine. I just don't think the range aligns with your plan very well. Just my opinion though. If your calling all your sets on the flop, I think I would be under the believe that villain doesn't raise hands like 22, 87s, or 65s UTG making your calling range less vulnerable. Either way it is going to be tough for villain to call here.

    There was an old video or HH that @Christian Soto posted that reminds me of this hand....
    https://forum.redchippoker.com/discussion/10553/one-5-10-hh-from-me/p1

    After writing all this I guess my only question is on the flop regarding your range on why you decide to call instead of raise. In my mind it only makes sense if you don't have a raising range on this flop.

    My hand is way more gangster. LOL
  • kenaceskenaces Red Chipper Posts: 1,592 ✭✭✭✭
    persuadeo wrote: »
    On Fausto's end, since he's being judged by what the solver does,

    Like other thread, I am only saying when one makes hard deviations one should have VERY clear reads/assumptions about the villain. When playing live poker I often take lots of "non GTO" lines.

    I am not really judging Fausto as I haven't watched the video.

  • kenaceskenaces Red Chipper Posts: 1,592 ✭✭✭✭
    persuadeo wrote: »
    3b/folding a hand that plays well deep against a human is probably more of a mistake than finding a way to take it post.

    Maybe.

    I have spent a lot of time looking at this in the context of 6m online. In a spot where I am deciding whether to CC and allow fish in blinds into hand VS 3B. In that context, I feel confident that 3B is in general better than CC.

    How much this transfers or doesn't transfer to 9 handed live poker is an interesting question.

  • persuadeopersuadeo Red Chipper Posts: 4,393 ✭✭✭✭✭
    100 bb 6max is an entirely different animal.

    -Because the UTG is far lighter in that game, if you CC in the field with the merge you face more squeezes, whereas in FR raising into a sound UTG range is far more likely to see a 4 bet or heavy continue.

    -Without depth at 6max, the spr is bad for your hand when the BB joins.

    -Worse, he suffers the effects of relative position that the depth won't cover up. The garbage the BB will mistakenly "defend" won't be punished as much.

    Hence the 3b/f in 6max in this formation is both light years better and different.
  • RCP Coach - Fausto ValdezRCP Coach - Fausto Valdez RCP Coach Posts: 859 ✭✭✭✭

    My hand is way more gangster. LOL

    no argument there, you win :D
    COACHING NOW AVAILABLE HERE
    MY COACHING REVIEWS HERE
  • kenaceskenaces Red Chipper Posts: 1,592 ✭✭✭✭
    persuadeo wrote: »
    100 bb 6max is an entirely different animal.

    -Because the UTG is far lighter in that game, if you CC in the field with the merge you face more squeezes, whereas in FR raising into a sound UTG range is far more likely to see a 4 bet or heavy continue.

    -Without depth at 6max, the spr is bad for your hand when the BB joins.

    -Worse, he suffers the effects of relative position that the depth won't cover up. The garbage the BB will mistakenly "defend" won't be punished as much.

    Hence the 3b/f in 6max in this formation is both light years better and different.

    Of course, we can go back and forth with it depends on arguments, but I think this will just waste our time because after we filter all the different assumptions we are more likely to agree than disagree.

    The only thing I think we might really disagree on is the degree of importance of stack depth. Of course stack size matters but I think you/soto/fausto think the game changes WAY more than I do at 200bb+ stacks. But even this argument is just a matter of degrees.

    -Yes 6m UTG opens might be 15-20% of hands and many live guys open 5-10% UTG which might lead me to just folding AJs depending.......

    -In either case, by CCing we risk bad relative position which gets worse for us as we are deeper - right? or does "he" mean the BB? I am just not sure what you are saying?

    - Yes, I agree generally 3b>CC in 6m context as I already said. And yes FR live poker is a different context. I think how much it transfers or doesn't is an open question as there is no way to really know. I have my opinions but they are loosely held.
  • Christian SotoChristian Soto RCP Coach Posts: 2,195 ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 2018
    100BB online play and 250+BB live play is a different poker game.

    For what it is worth, I’m not folding AJs facing some live player opening 5-10% of range at depth (If anything the implied are too high + they make errors) but we may have to at 100BB in both arenas.

    By cold calling we risk bad relative position, but if we are good at using positional leverage postflop we can regain some of that lost edge back.

    I personally think deep live is a completely different game than 100BB 6max online.

    In my opinion, I think the online group is more mechanically sound, but how good that transfers in a game where exploiting is greatly rewarded, and understanding leverage points is more important than understanding correct candidates, is a question that I think is up for debate.
  • persuadeopersuadeo Red Chipper Posts: 4,393 ✭✭✭✭✭
    "He " is the subject of our talk - our guy with AJs. The BB is the BB.
  • kenaceskenaces Red Chipper Posts: 1,592 ✭✭✭✭
    100BB online play and 250+BB live play is a different poker game.

    For what it is worth, I’m not folding AJs facing some live player opening 5-10% of range at depth but we may have to at 100BB in both arenas.

    By cold calling we risk bad relative position, but if we are good at using positional leverage postflop we can regain some of that lost edge back.

    I personally think deep live is a completely different game than 100BB 6max online.

    In my opinion, I think the online group is more mechanically sound, but how good that transfers in a game where exploiting is greatly rewarded, and understanding leverage points is more important than understanding correct candidates, is a question that I think is up for debate.

    I don't think anyone disagrees that live 250bb+ deep is different than 100bb 6m online. I just happen to think you guys overestimate the difference. It is not like playing 200bb+ deep online isn't part of that game.

    To me the difference is WAY more about live poker vs online poker. When I play live most pots are multiway. When I play online most pots are HU.

    I also don't think that being "mechanically sound" means you can't exploit weak players. I wasn't trying to hi-jack this thread to create another online v live debate. I do agree that how to best apply lessons learned online to live game is up for debate, and an interesting question. But really too broad for just one thread.

    I do disagree that CC AJs in MP in FR vs a tighter UTG range is a mistake at 100bb. I am 100% sure of this in an online context, and pretty sure that this is also the case in most live games(yeah we can think of exceptions with huge whales behind us). You will be a big equity deficit to original raisers range, very likely have poor relative and absolute position, and have a hard time generating much "skill" edge in the most likely scenario of a 4-way pot. I do agree that as stacks get deeper and players get worse this can become a +EV call but I have no way of knowing how deep and/or how bad they have to be.
  • Christian SotoChristian Soto RCP Coach Posts: 2,195 ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 2018
    I agree at 100BB we can fold AJs facing that range.

    But at 250BB I think we can justify entering the pot.
  • Christian SotoChristian Soto RCP Coach Posts: 2,195 ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 2018
    I guess your question is at what depth do we know for certain we can VPIP in said formation.

    I don’t know if there is an exact cutoff point.

    I think we have to multiply a couple of factors:

    How aggressively will OR press his equity/range advantage x how often will he let us over realize (kind of same thing) x how much implieds do we have x do we the ability to take away from this opponent on certain textures?
  • kenaceskenaces Red Chipper Posts: 1,592 ✭✭✭✭
    I guess your question is at what depth do we know for certain we can VPIP in said formation.

    I don’t know if there is an exact cutoff point.

    I agree these things are sort of unknowable.

    250bb deep on some tables I would fold/call/3B depending on situation/players...

  • persuadeopersuadeo Red Chipper Posts: 4,393 ✭✭✭✭✭
    - Yes, I agree generally 3b>CC in 6m context as I already said.

    I know you agree with yourself. I was making an argument for it to distinguish one set of circumstances from another.

    We were talking about this:
    My from a GTO perspective this hand was played poorly on all streets
  • kenaceskenaces Red Chipper Posts: 1,592 ✭✭✭✭
    persuadeo wrote: »
    - Yes, I agree generally 3b>CC in 6m context as I already said.

    I know you agree with yourself. I was making an argument for it to distinguish one set of circumstances from another.

    We were talking about this:
    My from a GTO perspective this hand was played poorly on all streets

    I don't always agree with myself :)

    Not much an argument about this not being GTO play just look at a few sims.
  • kenaceskenaces Red Chipper Posts: 1,592 ✭✭✭✭
    persuadeo wrote: »
    "He " is the subject of our talk - our guy with AJs. The BB is the BB.

    now that you edited your post I understand
  • persuadeopersuadeo Red Chipper Posts: 4,393 ✭✭✭✭✭
    it's not edited
  • AustinAustin Red Chipper Posts: 5,483 ✭✭✭✭✭
    persuadeo wrote: »
    Austin, if the PFR is tight, his UTG range doesn't have to have 22 and his pairs may start at at 44 or 66. 87s is also not guaranteed to be there.

    On Fausto's end, since he's being judged by what the solver does, it will not raise all sets here, most likely, especially 22, as the large bet from a solver on a board it doesn't like will trend very small in frequency and very strong.

    I think I pointed this out.... against a tighter UTG range not having 22-55 or 98s and below then it allows for more slow play with sets. Fausto was saying both hero and villain have the same combos, so it didn't make sense for Fausto to have range advantage on the turn. Make sense? Same range on the flop, how does one gain advantage on the turn?
    Yes we both could hit but it helps me more with how my expected range will be given the action when we arrive on the turn.

    Given the line taken I think Fausto just reps a really narrow range, which villain also has in their range, but villain also has all sets, where I think Fausto has discounted sets based on his aggro image.
  • AustinAustin Red Chipper Posts: 5,483 ✭✭✭✭✭
    kenaces wrote: »
    persuadeo wrote: »
    3b/folding a hand that plays well deep against a human is probably more of a mistake than finding a way to take it post.

    Maybe.

    I have spent a lot of time looking at this in the context of 6m online. In a spot where I am deciding whether to CC and allow fish in blinds into hand VS 3B. In that context, I feel confident that 3B is in general better than CC.

    How much this transfers or doesn't transfer to 9 handed live poker is an interesting question.

    I don't think its a 3bet / fold situation @persuadeo , but as @kenaces said a 3bet or call situation. On an aggro table AJs would serve better as the 3 bettor imo and on a loose passive table might serve better as a cold caller. I don't see AJs being a fold preflop, one could certainly argue AJo being a fold.

    I am also not judging fausto based on GTO or solver player. I know little of either. Just use sound poker logic with ranges.
  • AustinAustin Red Chipper Posts: 5,483 ✭✭✭✭✭
    The only thing I think we might really disagree on is the degree of importance of stack depth. Of course stack size matters but I think you/soto/fausto think the game changes WAY more than I do at 200bb+ stacks. But even this argument is just a matter of degrees.

    @kenaces I think this is a good point because many people say because the open size being so large in live games of 4-6bb that 200bb live is closer to 100bb online.
    100BB online play and 250+BB live play is a different poker game.

    @Christian Soto Do you think 200bb live (Fausto's example) and 100bb online are similar? I agree 250bb+ is different. 200bb and under seem pretty close to me.
    I have my opinions but they are loosely held.

    its good not to be closed minded :-)
    understanding leverage points is more important than understanding correct candidates, is a question that I think is up for debate.

    @Christian Soto are you saying online guys don't know how to exploit players at 250bb? I would think they definitely know the correct ranges in terms of equity and blockers to use more so than a live player when trying to exploit a player. That is why people say $2/$5 zoom regs would destroy most live players.

    I agree at 100BB we can fold AJs facing that range.

    But at 250BB I think we can justify entering the pot.

    I think in both arenas at 100bb AJs is still a call / 3 bet vs a 10% range. IMO live players are just really easy to read and float. We will have range advantage on a lot of wet boards, so playing our range, not our hand will make up the difference in preflop equity. Fausto's hand example is perfect. On 87x6ss we can punish a 5-10% range preflop all day. Live players have unbalanced cbet and barrel frequencies that are just too easy to exploit where AJs will not be a fold. On Axx and Kxx boards against multiple barrels it becomes an easy fold despite being near top of your range, but there are many over pairs they will have to fold due to being oop and range advantage boards.
  • persuadeopersuadeo Red Chipper Posts: 4,393 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Ok, well final thought for me here: we have to make some assumptions about ranges to say what you are saying, Austin. It's possible that you are right, but the composition of what the PFR bets and now bet calls as opposed to some other line indicates that Fausto as an exploiter understands his opponent as more capped than you suggest.

    You may have heard Moldyfish on the Thinkingpoker.net podcast reference a very important point that added up to a big play from him in the discussed hand that flabbergasted Brokos - even good players tend not to protect their range very well when the board turns dicey.

    The solver argument just isn't very clear. It will not bet much on a board like this, yet the PFR has - think about what that range does on the turn. You can assume pretty freely that villain here is cbetting far more than GTO would like, but if you want to be conservative, Fausto's line is pretty liberal against it. That protection mentioned suddenly matters. As Ken and Christian both referenced, the blockers matter or don't matter, depending on all these assumptions or perhaps just how "correct" you want to be. Fausto's game, if you are following the videos, is OOL compared to current "standards" - but he clearly embraces that.
  • AustinAustin Red Chipper Posts: 5,483 ✭✭✭✭✭
    A solve would likely show few cbets, especially at 60%, from the PFR so the wheels are already off this hand.

    I think @persuadeo made a great point here in terms of playing exploitable vs GTO. Fausto can throw GTO out the window once villain plays non-gto.

    I don't think Fausto played the hand poorly. I think vs a tighter UTG range I would like Fausto's play more. Against a loose UTG range, I would prefer just calling flop and turn and possibly making a play on the river, but ace high does have some showdown value.

    utg ($1,000) $20
    MP2 Fausto ($1,000) :AS::JS: calls $20
    flop ($47) :8s:7d:2s
    UTG ($980) bets $30
    Fausto ($980) calls
    Turn ($107) :6h
    UTG ($950) bets $70
    Fausto calls $70
    River ($247) :8s:7d:2s:6H::4d
    UTG ($880) checks
    Fausto ($880) bets $450
    UTG calls or folds?

    If Fausto were to call down here there are many more slow played sets, two pairs, straights, etc in Fausto's range vs a tighter UTG open where an over bet on the river would make sense. Not sure if this would be GTO or just an exploit, but calling 2 streets and over betting the river makes a lot of sense to me on this run out. Fausto will only have a few combos of missed flushes and many more value combos. Stacks, don't really get leveraged until villain faces an over bet, but it is a exploit using range advantage texture.

    Thoughts?

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file