The Course Ranges Panned on YouTube

Chris_VillalobosChris_Villalobos BoiseRed Chipper Posts: 36 ✭✭
Thought this guy unfairly analysed The Course's Loose Ranges. He basically sets the range against a tight computer solver, added a high, rake then condemns the range.

Comments

  • persuadeopersuadeo Red Chipper, Table Captain Posts: 4,162 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Alvin is a great poker thinker and communicator, but as in all things, you must take them with a grain of salt and do some thinking on your own. The Course hasn't helped so many players get over the hump of entry level games because of some arbitrary, pre solver hand charts; it's a useful book for far bigger themes.

    This infographic shows a spread of ranges from tight to loose, and if you were actually employing them it would be novel, but not the actual point. As Ed Miller has publicly lamented many times, players love to race into a book and find the preflop ranges. They do this under the delusion that there is a simple answer to their problems.

    That's not how the game works, it's not how the book works, it's not how this fun infographic works. And you can know that and still be informed by Alvin's excellent thoughts on rake and vipipping here.
  • Chris_VillalobosChris_Villalobos BoiseRed Chipper Posts: 36 ✭✭
    I guess my reaction is if Alvin really is a great communicator he might have approached these ranges with more sophistication on what Miller was trying to do at the time. From my read, Miller was trying to keep currently losing players from being too loose and passive pre-flop while also keeping the ranges simple to remember and implement. I believe Miller even said he would probably change the ranges at a future date.

    Now, if Alvin had taken those thoughts into account and improved on Miller's ideas I would probably have been more sympathetic.
  • TheGameKatTheGameKat Posts: 2,612 -
    Alvin has created a little cottage industry in being rude about our products, following him being banned from this forum. This is unfortunate for all concerned, not least because Alvin is clearly good at poker. His ability to communicate thus gets compromised by his venomous personal attacks against this site and its coaches.

    Apart from that, what persuadeo said. Additionally, poker is constantly evolving. Ed's ranges worked well in the Vegas games he was playing when he wrote that book. The loose recommendations are less applicable today. We're in the process of updating that infographic to reflect this evolution.
    Moderation In Moderation
  • Jordan PowerJordan Power Red Chipper Posts: 505 ✭✭✭
    I am now eagerly looking forward to Red Chip’s foolproof range charts that will solve all my problems!
  • Chris_VillalobosChris_Villalobos BoiseRed Chipper Posts: 36 ✭✭
    TheGameKat wrote: »
    We're in the process of updating that infographic to reflect this evolution.

    Well that's interesting! I'm currently practicing with the info graphic. Should I be using something else? Also, since pre-flop strategies are more fluid than I originally thought, should I have different ranges for online poker vs live-poker? Since nobody on-line can see me I can just print out ranges and pin them to my wall not bothering to memorize them.

  • persuadeopersuadeo Red Chipper, Table Captain Posts: 4,162 ✭✭✭✭✭
    1) Even if I were to give you the very latest mw solved ranges for your typical stack size, it still wouldn't do you much good. You need to know what you are doing, what your opponents are doing, and why. 2) a common question, live vs. online ranges, but poker is still poker.
  • TheGameKatTheGameKat Posts: 2,612 -
    TheGameKat wrote: »
    We're in the process of updating that infographic to reflect this evolution.

    Well that's interesting! I'm currently practicing with the info graphic. Should I be using something else? Also, since pre-flop strategies are more fluid than I originally thought, should I have different ranges for online poker vs live-poker? Since nobody on-line can see me I can just print out ranges and pin them to my wall not bothering to memorize them.

    Again, refer to persuadeo's observations. The bottom line is that your preflop ranges should be designed to work with your postflop strategy. Differences between live and online tend to emerge organically in response to different opening raise sizes. Beyond that, if you're relying on preflop charts developed by someone else, it's probably a good idea to use the tight extreme of those recommendations, simply because the fact you're using them indicates a current cap on your skill level.
    Moderation In Moderation
  • Chris_VillalobosChris_Villalobos BoiseRed Chipper Posts: 36 ✭✭
    Well we know the average live player plays too many hands pre-flop and doesn't 3-Bet nearly close to game theory optimal. Even small stakes on-line seems to play this way but a little more tight aggressive than live games.

    I have some PokerSnowie printouts and if Snowie raises under the gun there is a better chance of it folding around to the BB or getting 3-Bet in position, From there the early raiser is very likely to Fold, or less likely 4-Bet, and even less likely call. Absolutely no low limit games play like this.

    It seems for now The Course's "tight" range will do since it does seem to take into account we will not be punished for opening lite early or just calling a early raise in the middle. Just curious on what you think changed between 2014 and now. I've heard talk of dropping the 55 - 22 early since not as many players pay off sets also Snowie tends to play more off-suit broadways than the Course.
  • TheGameKatTheGameKat Posts: 2,612 -
    edited November 2
    The short answer is multi-street solvers have happened since 2014. With OOP c-betting frequencies dropping as a result, one consequence is a tightening of ranges from EP.

    There are two other points that are explicitly mentioned in The Course that tend to get conveniently overlooked by detractors. The first is the issue of rake. Ed explicitly mentions not to worry about rake, since the whole point of The Course is to take players from $1/$2 to higher limits. Thus it's quite probable the ranges were always too wide for 100bb $1/$2, since the target game was deeper $2/$5 and up where rake is less significant. The second is the ranges dove-tailed with a specific postflop strategy which is now likely over-aggressive OOP because of this issue with c-betting frequencies.

    The more general point to make is that all of our content is under constant review as poker theory becomes deeper and more sophisticated. Since updating requires a certain amount of time, I imagine anyone sufficiently determined could zero in on small facets of our content and point out discrepancies with the state of poker theory in November 2019. This is precisely why we attempt to communicate how to think about the game and how the various moving parts come together to form a complete strategy.

    I wrote about this a couple of years ago: https://redchippoker.com/opening-ranges-seduction/

    The back and forth between Soto and myself in the comments may shed some light on the bigger picture.
    Moderation In Moderation

Leave a Comment

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