Well, another piece of why solver behave this way is behind us thanks to this video. I have recently implemented 4bet-pushing with AKo and some medium pairs according to positions, but never put the time to understand why the solver suggests to shove some brodway suited combos, and so never done it. Until now, I guess :D, great explanation, thank you.
really nice video. this principle is super important in MTTs. the same pattern emerges where different hand types are acting in “harmony” with one another, simultaneously denying equity and monetising the weaker hands that the opponent is forced to call with. it’s been understood naturally but i haven’t heard it articulated quite as well as you have in this video
lol, what an amazing video on an underrated concept. 4bet jamming the strongest bluffs and at the same time the weakest hands that beat the bluffcatchers to those bluffs. I think I did the jamming bluffs part once, I was vaguely aware of why I had to do it, but I couldn't articulate. Even though I misapplied the dynamic (4b jam KQs from UTG vs UTG+1 3bet, because the other guy had some AQ/AJ in his 3b range that I don't want to call and play OOP against), the other guy folded.
Wish I could like this vid more than once, such a sick way to clearly explain how balanced strategies or balanced bet ranges or w.e contribute to your overall strategy and ev thx 4 makin merry xmas
Ahhhhh can't believe,this is literally what I was wondering when I check it and not sure if should follow it when play;also whenever I think why,the next sentence you have a clear answer;another amazing video for sure!
Nice video man . The only part I don’t understand is if you don’t want to ever jam a hand like AJ so you can keep dominated hands like KJ/QJ in , by that same logic wouldn’t AK prefer a non all in 4 bet to let hands like AQs/AJs peel ?
Good question! The main difference between AK and AJ is that AK has much better equity when called. It also denies a lot of equity by jamming, so we don't care that much if we fold out the occasional dominated hand. AJ on the other hand lacks equity when called, AND folds out many dominated hands. So jamming is out of the question :)
Great video! You don't explain why QJ jams but not JT or QT which have similar characteristics. I guess it's because QJ is ahead of more pocket pairs when called?
I haven't tested this, but I wouldn't expect it to add much EV in theory. A clairvoyant opponent will be able to adjust perfectly against our strategy, eg if we jam all our AK, then our normal 4bet range lacks coverage on A and K-high boards. And solver will be able to adjust by calling lighter on those boards. If a real opponent will still overfold vs our cbet though, then the EV gained by jamming could be much more significant. Just an example!
I enjoyed the video. Really nice explained. My one question, the title says punish aggro 3-bettors. But by replicating the GTOw chart, would it really punish them as much as we could if they are indeed 3-betting more aggressively than they should? I wonder how you would go about expanding your range if you know villains 3bet is say 5% higher than it should be for a given position. Really good explanation of the GTO combo selections still. Thank you!
Against a wider 3bet range, we can definitely call more and 4bet more. I think 4bet jamming is useful particularly if villain is 3betting too many suited connectors. Those hands actually have some EV vs a small 4bet, but are 0EV vs the jam.
Thanks for the response@@PokerGiraffe. I guess then if our opponents are 3betting at a frequency that's above equilibrium for the specific formation, we can counter by shifting our calling /4betting range to one that is closer to one position later. In that way we call wider and 4bet more.
Instead of memorising the exact solver frequency, we want to think a bit more exploitatively. Is villain folding too many pairs like 88/99 vs the jam? If so, just jam AK all the time, and 4bet small with JJ/TT. Is he stationing with those pairs instead? If so, just do the opposite.
If we know for sure that our opponent will not adopt by calling our jam with AQ/KQ, should we leave the jam range with only JJ/TT and move AK to 4-bet or even call3-bet range?
@@PokerGiraffe I meant that his adjustment to the jam-range of only TT/JJ should be calling of KQ/AQ. AK is preventing from that adjustment. So if we know for sure that he will not adjust like this (anonymous pool for example), should we move AK elsewhere?
Ah, I understand now. I think we still jam AK tho - like I mentioned in the video, AK is jamming for its own reasons (like equity denial). Folding out AQ/AJ is just a side effect of that, one that happens to benefit our JJ. The actual equilibrium is very intricate, with many moving parts. So it’s sometimes difficult to separate cause and effect.
Awesome explanation. I don't know what's your target audience, I just got here, but there's something I believe should be kept in mind: what if our opponents are unable to fold AQ ? Depending on limits your audience plays on, this should be a concern, no? Keep it up, best regards.
The extra EV you gain every time you jam with AK and they call with AQ offsets the loss when you run into AQ with QJs Of course if you think your opponent is really unable to adapt their play and will call off a jam with AQ no matter what your jamming range is, then just jam hands that have good equity vs AQ+
You can use the solver frequencies as a baseline, and adjust according to what your opponents are doing. Eg if you think they are never folding any pair vs the jam, then you can jam JJ/TT and 4bet small with AK.
I was thinking about this spot the other day and thats how i found your channel and video. My conclusion was that jamming JQ will block too many AQ-AJ 3-bets and i would want my opponent to have a hand like that if I 4-bet. Can you explain why im wrong? Because i thought QJ was blocking too much in a bad way
Blockers are usually least important on the flop, where ranges are most wide. Stuff like folding out hands that dominate us (AQ, KQ) tends to a bigger consideration.
When we hold Q, we reduce QQ combos in our opp range from 6 to 3, how could it happen that his QQ+ portion decreased only by 1.7% from 30 to 28.3? Shouldn't it be more? Thanks for vid. Its better than Christmas when you post.
Im a bit confused tho. Why do we create this Jamming range when the EV between calling and jamming QJs is the same? Literally every hand in the 4B Jam range is mixed with another equal in ev option. So my question is why do we bother with this 4b jam range and the added complexity it brings when it doesnt seem to have a greater ev than the other options? Great vid tho. I learnt alot :)
Think about it this way: when you are OOP on the flop with any kind of checking range, every hand in your betting range will be equal in EV to checking. But it doesn’t mean that checking entire range is a good idea :)
@@PokerGiraffe is it really not a good idea to just have a 4b or call range ? And not use a 4b , call or jam range? I don’t see how we get exploited really?
We don't, but we also lose out on the chance to potentially exploit our opponent, and also the chance to gain a little bit of EV for not much effort. I'm not a fan of splitting ranges on the flop and turn, because it complicates your gametree downstream. If you're jamming preflop however, I don't think the same argument applies.
I still think it’s very hard to be balanced with your AK and KK jams for example. People are greedy, and are more likely to non 4b all in with KK, so you can exploit that by calling off with your pairs vs their jams since they’ll have AK every time. Wouldn’t it be better to just 4b not all in with both hands? Especially if you’re ip and have a post flop edge.
If someone is calling off all their pairs, I think KK will gain a ton of EV by jamming. And we don’t have to jam with AK of course. The point is not to jam a balanced range, but rather to have more options to exploit our opponents with.
@@PokerGiraffe yeah I know, and GTOW is very very nice, but I kinda don’t believe in subscription models for software unless they are trivial per year. I believe in buying once and owning. Buying and playing around with software unlimited time for $300 beats $30/month, and isn’t GTOW way more than that?
I think most of the EV gain is passive, since many of our hands get to realise more equity. We can also fold a bit more in 4bet pots on A and K-high boards, since the AK that doesn’t jam mostly ends up in the small 4bet range.
This video assumes people play anywhere near GTO and that they can track our play and actually understand the we jam JJ TT QJ and AK, thereby putting them in tough spots. None of that is going on in the real world.
Such an awesome video, incredibly well explained and presented!
Thanks! Love your videos too :)
Well, another piece of why solver behave this way is behind us thanks to this video. I have recently implemented 4bet-pushing with AKo and some medium pairs according to positions, but never put the time to understand why the solver suggests to shove some brodway suited combos, and so never done it. Until now, I guess :D, great explanation, thank you.
really nice video. this principle is super important in MTTs. the same pattern emerges where different hand types are acting in “harmony” with one another, simultaneously denying equity and monetising the weaker hands that the opponent is forced to call with. it’s been understood naturally but i haven’t heard it articulated quite as well as you have in this video
such a good explanation of what it means to be GTO-balanced with that graph of EV between AK and QJs
absolutely underrated channel. love the work. please continue posting.
I'm glad I found your brilliance and coaching phenomenal
lol, what an amazing video on an underrated concept. 4bet jamming the strongest bluffs and at the same time the weakest hands that beat the bluffcatchers to those bluffs.
I think I did the jamming bluffs part once, I was vaguely aware of why I had to do it, but I couldn't articulate. Even though I misapplied the dynamic (4b jam KQs from UTG vs UTG+1 3bet, because the other guy had some AQ/AJ in his 3b range that I don't want to call and play OOP against), the other guy folded.
Very well explained and really leaned a lot, it's not just about this particular hand but the logic in behind.
Wish I could like this vid more than once, such a sick way to clearly explain how balanced strategies or balanced bet ranges or w.e contribute to your overall strategy and ev thx 4 makin merry xmas
Merry Christmas to you too!
Ahhhhh can't believe,this is literally what I was wondering when I check it and not sure if should follow it when play;also whenever I think why,the next sentence you have a clear answer;another amazing video for sure!
Well explained. The why is more important then the what imo
One of the best little poker videos I've ever seen.
Thank you!
Thank you so much for the new video :D Long~~~~ waited!
this video shows how beautiful this game is
Love those videos, keep going!
really good video and incredibly well explained! two thumbs up!
🤝
Another banger as always.
This is a brilliant video
Nice video man . The only part I don’t understand is if you don’t want to ever jam a hand like AJ so you can keep dominated hands like KJ/QJ in , by that same logic wouldn’t AK prefer a non all in 4 bet to let hands like AQs/AJs peel ?
Good question! The main difference between AK and AJ is that AK has much better equity when called. It also denies a lot of equity by jamming, so we don't care that much if we fold out the occasional dominated hand.
AJ on the other hand lacks equity when called, AND folds out many dominated hands. So jamming is out of the question :)
You're the best poker teacher.
I can attest to that :)
I can second that. The best by far and it's not even close.
Great video! You don't explain why QJ jams but not JT or QT which have similar characteristics. I guess it's because QJ is ahead of more pocket pairs when called?
Exactly :)
Thanks for another amazing video. Looking forward to seeing more in 2024
Great video. How much EV do you thinking including a jam size adds to our strategy though?
This is the big question here. I'd like to know as well.
I haven't tested this, but I wouldn't expect it to add much EV in theory. A clairvoyant opponent will be able to adjust perfectly against our strategy, eg if we jam all our AK, then our normal 4bet range lacks coverage on A and K-high boards. And solver will be able to adjust by calling lighter on those boards.
If a real opponent will still overfold vs our cbet though, then the EV gained by jamming could be much more significant. Just an example!
I enjoyed the video. Really nice explained.
My one question, the title says punish aggro 3-bettors.
But by replicating the GTOw chart, would it really punish them as much as we could if they are indeed 3-betting more aggressively than they should?
I wonder how you would go about expanding your range if you know villains 3bet is say 5% higher than it should be for a given position.
Really good explanation of the GTO combo selections still. Thank you!
Against a wider 3bet range, we can definitely call more and 4bet more. I think 4bet jamming is useful particularly if villain is 3betting too many suited connectors. Those hands actually have some EV vs a small 4bet, but are 0EV vs the jam.
Thanks for the response@@PokerGiraffe.
I guess then if our opponents are 3betting at a frequency that's above equilibrium for the specific formation, we can counter by shifting our calling /4betting range to one that is closer to one position later. In that way we call wider and 4bet more.
Very interesting. What % of AKo, JJ, and TT are we jamming?
Instead of memorising the exact solver frequency, we want to think a bit more exploitatively. Is villain folding too many pairs like 88/99 vs the jam? If so, just jam AK all the time, and 4bet small with JJ/TT.
Is he stationing with those pairs instead? If so, just do the opposite.
If we know for sure that our opponent will not adopt by calling our jam with AQ/KQ, should we leave the jam range with only JJ/TT and move AK to 4-bet or even call3-bet range?
He's actually supposed to fold AQ/KQ, so no need for us to make any adjustment :)
@@PokerGiraffe I meant that his adjustment to the jam-range of only TT/JJ should be calling of KQ/AQ. AK is preventing from that adjustment. So if we know for sure that he will not adjust like this (anonymous pool for example), should we move AK elsewhere?
Ah, I understand now. I think we still jam AK tho - like I mentioned in the video, AK is jamming for its own reasons (like equity denial). Folding out AQ/AJ is just a side effect of that, one that happens to benefit our JJ.
The actual equilibrium is very intricate, with many moving parts. So it’s sometimes difficult to separate cause and effect.
Great video QY!
Awesome explanation.
I don't know what's your target audience, I just got here, but there's something I believe should be kept in mind: what if our opponents are unable to fold AQ ? Depending on limits your audience plays on, this should be a concern, no?
Keep it up, best regards.
The extra EV you gain every time you jam with AK and they call with AQ offsets the loss when you run into AQ with QJs
Of course if you think your opponent is really unable to adapt their play and will call off a jam with AQ no matter what your jamming range is, then just jam hands that have good equity vs AQ+
Then your AK and JJ gets more value when called
I agree with @aldent8892, we can just jam AK and make a smaller 4bet with JJ/TT.
how do we calculate the right jamming ratio QJs, TT, JJ and AK or do we just copy the solver freqs?
You can use the solver frequencies as a baseline, and adjust according to what your opponents are doing. Eg if you think they are never folding any pair vs the jam, then you can jam JJ/TT and 4bet small with AK.
nice video ! keep up the good work !
I was thinking about this spot the other day and thats how i found your channel and video. My conclusion was that jamming JQ will block too many AQ-AJ 3-bets and i would want my opponent to have a hand like that if I 4-bet. Can you explain why im wrong? Because i thought QJ was blocking too much in a bad way
Blockers are usually least important on the flop, where ranges are most wide. Stuff like folding out hands that dominate us (AQ, KQ) tends to a bigger consideration.
When we hold Q, we reduce QQ combos in our opp range from 6 to 3, how could it happen that his QQ+ portion decreased only by 1.7% from 30 to 28.3? Shouldn't it be more? Thanks for vid. Its better than Christmas when you post.
I think it's because we also decrease the combos of AQs and JJ. But it's possible I made a mistake lol
when masterclass ?
5:45 reminiscent of my saturday nights
Oh, you said cogs....nvm
At NL50, rather than NL500, the Same solver recommends jamming 5pc rather than 68pc? Why such a difference you think?
I know rake implications are different but such a gap?
I think it shows that the core of the strategy is not so much QJs, but rather AK + the appropriate pairs.
What about when we are 200bb deep and can't jam directly over a 3bet?
Then we revert to a normal 4-bet size :)
Im a bit confused tho. Why do we create this Jamming range when the EV between calling and jamming QJs is the same? Literally every hand in the 4B Jam range is mixed with another equal in ev option.
So my question is why do we bother with this 4b jam range and the added complexity it brings when it doesnt seem to have a greater ev than the other options?
Great vid tho. I learnt alot :)
Think about it this way: when you are OOP on the flop with any kind of checking range, every hand in your betting range will be equal in EV to checking. But it doesn’t mean that checking entire range is a good idea :)
@@PokerGiraffe is it really not a good idea to just have a 4b or call range ? And not use a 4b , call or jam range? I don’t see how we get exploited really?
We don't, but we also lose out on the chance to potentially exploit our opponent, and also the chance to gain a little bit of EV for not much effort.
I'm not a fan of splitting ranges on the flop and turn, because it complicates your gametree downstream. If you're jamming preflop however, I don't think the same argument applies.
I saw this after folding to a guy with queen jack suited, I had queen jack suited we would have chopped
Great expl!
hi is it the same for MTT? thank !
No - as far as I see it this is only applies for selected gamemode, stacks and rake settings
Idea is the same, but specific hands might be different
I still think it’s very hard to be balanced with your AK and KK jams for example. People are greedy, and are more likely to non 4b all in with KK, so you can exploit that by calling off with your pairs vs their jams since they’ll have AK every time. Wouldn’t it be better to just 4b not all in with both hands? Especially if you’re ip and have a post flop edge.
If someone is calling off all their pairs, I think KK will gain a ton of EV by jamming. And we don’t have to jam with AK of course.
The point is not to jam a balanced range, but rather to have more options to exploit our opponents with.
Its a giraffe!
🦒
this is so cool
So you mean we should 4b jam Doug polk wide?
"In Bert we Trust"
I liked my own comment above because I'm just that type of guy!
😆@@cheat2win816
but what should we do if the stacks are deeper? :(
At some point it becomes too deep to have a jamming range (worse risk-reward ratio)
Fascinating.
Appreciate the comments - even the weird ones :)
how about A5s A4s?
They are pretty similar to QJs, just there to take advantage of the fact that AQ/AJ are folding.
What stack depth is this?
100bb
@@PokerGiraffethanks. I play a lot of 200bb. I think im gonna need to buy a solver…
GTOW has 200bb ranges too :)
@@PokerGiraffe yeah I know, and GTOW is very very nice, but I kinda don’t believe in subscription models for software unless they are trivial per year. I believe in buying once and owning. Buying and playing around with software unlimited time for $300 beats $30/month, and isn’t GTOW way more than that?
dont do this NL25 and under or in a zoom environment. You will always see aces when called or occasionally KK.
Great video though.
how much bb deep are we talking about?
Usually we only do this for 100bb or less, but it really depends on the RFI and 3bet sizing as well. It's all about risk-reward ratio :)
so why jam a4s and a5s？
Same as with QJ, to capitalise on the fact that AQ/AJ is folding.
i love this
The explanation is very good, but toooooo theory oriented.
Also, we know vast majority of players dont have a 4bet shove.
How we can exploit that?
I think most of the EV gain is passive, since many of our hands get to realise more equity.
We can also fold a bit more in 4bet pots on A and K-high boards, since the AK that doesn’t jam mostly ends up in the small 4bet range.
So nice to understand, but do not do it at small stakes
If you pay 50NL rake, QJs mixes between call and fold. Oh poker you are never easy are you ;)
I just checked with GTOW and there is a very small (5%) sliver of jamming!
Looks good in theory only
This is so articulate to the point of being beautiful.
Yeah but in reality they show pocket aces
Thank you. Thank the Lord Jesus Christ.
Now you play vs a nit who only 3bets JJ+ from sb and you're burning money
That’s exactly why it’s important to understand the logic behind 4bet jamming. So we can adjust accordingly as the 3betting range changes.
This video assumes people play anywhere near GTO and that they can track our play and actually understand the we jam JJ TT QJ and AK, thereby putting them in tough spots. None of that is going on in the real world.
funny how early postflop mechanics also apply preflop
Good luck finding a game where people fold AQ
Please help me find that online game and stake where they do call.
Great content. Easy enough to follow 🎉. New sub
Welcome aboard!