Found you through Kruzer's channel. You both have a real talent in breaking down hands and explaining them super clearly, really appreciate this video and can't wait for more uploads :)
Awesome video! Just a quick suggestion, would be nice if you use the nodelocking feature in your videos to explain how the strategies shift. For instance, in the KK hand, the audience would be able to see (as you described verbally) how the strategies shift from jam to fold if you nodelock away the bluffs in the block sizing and villain pure calls every set to a jam :) Both you and kruzer are awesome at articulating your thought processes, keep up the good work!
Love it. The K9 river give up was the most interesting part for me. I'd love to see breakdowns of more exploitative spots against different player profiles and especially stuff where you're completely off-book like fish cold calls a 3bet. Curious to know how much time you spend reviewing these kind of hands and what your approach is when the solver isn't so helpful!
First hand was very interesting for a checked down pot. Its a good example of why protecting your checking range is important in GTO, The solver can bluff this river with K9 because it has checked enough value on flop & turn. humans are not protected enough on the river to bluff K9
Yep, this is part of the problem! If I was in villain's shoes and faced a bet then I'd probably station all of my AQ too! The lesson is to get some value into these lines, but it's a lot easier said than done.
The last point about the out of position player checking so much with his 2 pairs and sets is very interesting. I think that the frequency of these checks may depend very much on the fact that the In position player is betting for the full amount of the pot after being checked to. I'm wondering if that is still the case when the in position player instead only bets for a lower size like 66% of the pot, which I think is more common, and also if we reduce IP check back % with gutshots on the flop
K9s: First thought with the K9s was b150 is very good on river but I like jam too. You're putting a lot of emphasis on him being a Brazilian who can call down, but in his shoes AJs/AQo type stuff can't feel very good when we would have to x twice with K/Q high then run it in a spot (in my games anyways) people prefer to bluff earlier and go 2 streets. Also, you're gonna want to jump in front of a bus when he Xs back KQo so might be worth it just to avoid that outcome. Great format, would love to see more of this type. Nice to explore hands in depth vs the rapid fire nature of play and explains.
Yeah, it's very close and this is the problem I have with the river sometimes when I'm putting myself into an exploitative mindset. Like, this is his range, can I really make that fold? The answer is almost always "I don't know" which is definitely an argument for just going ahead and bluffing here, isn't it.
@@pkrelmo Ya I mean it's obv quite close and it can't matter too much either way. You made an assumption and ran with it; the only way it can rise to the level of a leak (imo) is if you don't carry the same assumption through when you have a value hand. Do you think AK is worth a value bet? That's where I constantly find my own thought process leaks. Thinking "he never calls AJ" when I have AK and "he always calls AJ" when I have K9.
In the K9 hand. Hands like aq/aj bet small here on the river as like a merged value bet, so if the guy is call happy with his aq/aj's, then a block size is great with AK on this river. If you think they're never folding the aq, aj, even to a bigger bet... then you were probably right in giving up. Here's the big balls exploit... if you think with aq/aj to a small size, and a 70% size... and has an abundance of these hands... but fold those hands to a shove size... then shove is the play
Shove is definitely a fun option and one that I think could be very good in reality, especially if we decide to shove our Tx and put more value into this line in general 😎
@@pkrelmo Exploitatively, would it not make more sense to keep Tx in the 70% size because we agree that they call too often vs that size, and overfold vs the shove?
@@jeegee-cx7ss it depends if he still calls A high vs the shove haha. I personally don't like having a bluff size and a value size vs regs as it can get worked out and then we're fucked. Instead I prefer to pick the size which forces the indifference and then put everything into that size (within reason)
i prefer ur check give up on river instead of an overbet against an agressive caller, he was putting him on aj aq and the curiosity of a human happy caller would probably call that river at 30 bb... i prefer the give up plus in the future he will be less happy to call you with a bluff catcher on the river cause he know u can give up.. good for your balance overall
its so annoying when u move your head while talking xD Every time I feel like I've set the sound wrong because sometimes it's louder, sometimes quieter, sometimes I hear better, sometimes worse.
From an exploitative point of view, in your opinion, in the second hand, if OOP overbets too frequently both with semibluffs (flush draws and straight draws) and with top value hands (sets and two pairs), how does this change IP strategy? I was thinking: 1. IP may start raising all in on the turn 100% of the times with hands like A8, JJ/QQ with no hearts for protection (make OOP fold good equity hands); 2. If OOP checks, IP destroys him with overbets turn and river (are small bets here IP designed to make OOP draws indifferent, thus it does not make sense to use this bet size here?)
Yeah, you've nailed it mate. Just nodelocked this into the solver and it does exactly as you say. Think I would definitely have understood the first part about jamming wider with our 8x and JJ type stuff but I don't think I'd have found the overbet facing the check. That's super interesting and makes a lot of sense.
I've not played in them but I've seen a few hands that have gone down in those games. There's definitely lots of fun dynamics with pre flop being very different and then lots of deep stacked stuff post. Reminds me more of a live environment in a way. Whether there are bigger WR's there remains to be seen, I think!
