Amazing video! I have a question, why on boards like 9s8s7c does the solver start implementing a bigger bet size again? It actually slightly favours 75% and 50% over the small size and bets overpairs using all 3 sizes.
That’s a great question. My guess is that on 987, it’s actually the 2p+ region that is driving our betsize. We have way more of these combos (98o, JTo), and they’re able to bet bigger since they have more equity. We also have less overpairs since the board is higher, and many of them (JJ, TT) have a straight draw. So that allows them to bet a touch bigger too. Big and small are relative-if you compare 987 with 982, we still bet bigger on the latter (dryer) board. The only difference is that our betsizing shifts upwards due to our betting range being more polarized.
Hi. Even though I can't comment on this very specific board and not knowing the parameters of your sim, I can tell you than in general JTX, J9X, J8X, T9X, T8X, 98X, 97X, etc etc boards tend to favour bigger flop bet sizings because of the equity that broadway combos have. On most of these boards, most broadway card have a backdoor straight (Any A4o, K2s, Q4s, etc on JTX for example) and most broadway hands will have at least a gutshot. Which means that when the defender is facing a small cbet, he isn't really threatened that much as it is very easy to float KQo on J9X for example / We need to bet bigger to make J-Q-K high indifferent. The core of ranges being high card in general, most of our opponent range high card hands will have a very decent equity with lots of two overs + BDFD + BDSD on these boards. A very extreme case of this can be seen in SBvBU 3bet pots, where SB will want to cbet jam quite a lot of JTX boards while it never does it on J9X or T9X boards. The reason being that in this specific spot, BU has some KQo / AQo and suited broadway combos that can be put to the test directly by jamming the JTX flop while you don't need to jam the flop to pressure AQ on T9X. It's a very general concept but yeah, in general if the bulk of the high card hands of your opponent tend to have a lot of backdoors, the solver will like to size a bit to be able to deny their 20%+ equity.
@@pierre-yvesmimpontel6984 Thank you for this comment, I feel you've added another important piece of the puzzle. I remember a video by Fedor Holz explaining his thought process when deciding the cbet size, saying that it mainly revolves around making the large portion of his opponent's range indifferent between calling and folding. Of course there are other considerations, otherwise we would be betting 10% pot on AKx to make a lot of trash indifferent, instead of overbetting to target the narrower gutshot/Kx/Ax region.
Ah, so the fallacy is 'targeting' draws in villain's range when in reality even on the 'draw-heavy' board, a lot of his range is still marginal made hands, and versus those marginal made hands, our over pairs want to bet smaller because those hands have too much equity for us to be that far ahead when called, so we bet smaller to widen/weaken his calling range. This is fine, but how do I not spend all of my bankroll on cocaine after I stack a guy who flatted preflop in a single raised pot with AKs and then check-piled for 200bb when he flopped the NFD and I flopped a set? On the one hand, cocaine is expensive and often contaminated. On the other hand, once you reach your late thirties, it's difficult to stay awake at party after party in downtown Los Angeles and still have enough energy to keep drinking alcohol, making absurd claims and plans about your career in the entertainment industry, and trying to talk various celebutantes into bed, and once you GET them into bed, it's often 5am! In this meta, there isn't a reasonable alternative to cocaine. Perhaps I should choose a fatty earlier in the evening to widen the range of women who will hook up with me, requiring less cocaine?
I would caution against this. There is quality of life issues at play. "I spent half my money on drugs, whores, and gambling ... the other half I wasted." -WC Fields
What a content bro! Im from Brazil and you are one of the most educational guys that i've seem. Pls continue doing your quizzes and educational videos. If I may suggest, it would be nice to have a series of videos on the basics fundamentals of pre-flop and post-flop, along the lines of a basic course for beginners.
It always felt awkward to me to bet big on wet flops. When the turn would bring a flush or some straights, I always felt like "and now what?". Bet and get called? Awful. Not to mention getting raised. Check OOP and get bet into? Awful. Check back IP / check OOP and get checked? This way we always don't get enough value with our top pairs/sets, and at the same time always pay off the river bet when the opponent has it. This bugged me a lot, but I just kept doing it because everyone says so. This vid has been eye-opening! Thanks!
Hi Qing! Love these type of videos but would like to hear some thoughts regarding adjustments in these spots based on population tendencies. For example on the 754ss we see that solver leads a ton from BB which also affect our strategy IP right? If this would not happen, or not happen to that extent, how would we respond IP? Also, let's assume on some of the lower stakes people would not find folds with 2nd and 3rd pair as often a bigger sizing would make sense? But I guess that might a bit too self explanatory :D
Yes, if BB doesn’t have a leading range then that makes us want to bet less frequently, and possibly go even smaller. You also make a great point about low stakes, which is that sizing up becomes more reasonable if opponent are going to call their weak 1p anyway. Cheers!
Your videos are excellent. It would be interesting to know what stakes you play. And I would like to know your story, where do you come from, how did you get to where you are in poker as a player and as a coach and as a human. This might be a cool idea for a video if you like to share.
This analysis makes a lot of sense from the perspective of extracting thin value. But I'm also curious about how to approach wet boards with your draws- betting small gives villian great pot odds to call with marginal made hands when my intuition is you want to put lots of pressure on hands like top pair (or even 2nd / 3rd pair) on a board like 754 two tone. And betting big with draws means you probably also want to bet big for value as well. I also recognize the difficulty of balancing multiple flop sizings so what do you think a simplified but high EV approach might look like?
Draws don’t really care about betsize-it’s not a mistake to bet small, because even though we have less fold equity, we are also risking less. So they just follow whatever our value hands want to do for the most part.
I'm very happy to have found this channel. Very good content and explained. I'm a tournament player, Holdem cashgames is dead in my area along time ago due to Cashgames went over to 4 or 5card omaha. but Tournament holdem is sill alive. I guess the concepts still remains the same, even though cash and tournament has different ranges. :)
@@嫖白-p1c he's from scandinavia, probably finland due to his nickname. I saw his comment about cash games being dead in his area a few days ago, I think in a FB poker group
This is great stuff. I want to say there is an area under those curves you could calculate to show the EV of big bets vs smaller bets. So what is the approach here to incorporate these ideas into your game? You showed 3 cases - three flops - do you look at like 7 or 8 "representative" flop categories and kind of interpolate from them for all other flops? Again, amazing stuff.
Thank you! Tbh bet sizing is not that important on the flop (as long as you’re somewhere in the ballpark). The bigger lesson is to understand that it’s not just nut hands that stop us from betting big, it’s future nut hands (aka strong draws) as well.
Amazing video and great content giraffe. I have been studying with solvers for some time and I think some of the things you said are not exactly correct. For example in 742r bu vs bb srp 100bb deep, we want to bet much bigger than on 764tt, this is because IP's range has more equity than OOP range on the first board and the top of the range advantage. But the same spot, on A84 two tone you want to check more than A84 rainbow, but the times you bet you should bet bigger on two tone boards. I have found this to be true in 3 bet pots as well when spr is smaller. Generally AA with backdoor flush draw wants to bet smaller than AA without backdoor flush draw, because it doesnt need as much protection. Please correct me if I am wrong. I think it changes from board to board and depending on spr.
Unlike on 742, where BTN's range is mostly polarized to overpairs and bluffs, BTN has way more marginal hands on a board like A84. Hands like 66, 77 and 8x bet at a slightly higher frequency when the board is rainbow, simply because they have better equity. This causes more small betting on rainbow boards, because we are more interested in betting marginal hands. This video should clear things up: th-cam.com/video/yeMPl5zco4Q/w-d-xo.html
@@PokerGiraffe Thanks giraffe. I have already watched all your videos. Thanks for explaining that. And why does solver go bigger in A84tt than rainbow?
On A84tt our marginal hands have worse equity when called. This makes us less inclined to bet them, and frees up more strong hands like AK to bet their natural size :)
If your opponent is a station who will call regardless of size with hands like 2nd pair no redraw on the 7-5-4 TT would it not be better to than size up again because we are still getting thick value from those hands?
Is isolating yourself really a good term to use here, or giving yourself reverse implied odds / value owning yourself? Curious on the semantics, to me isolation is the attempt of making a pot heads up with a single player, usually based on positions and preflop action. Thanks in advance if you respond
Value owning is not as clear as isolating. Isolate the limper -> limper calls, everyone else folds Isolate yourself against stronger hands -> stronger hands call, everything else folds
Hey Giraffe , I have another question. What if our opponent doesnt know they should fold pairs to a pot sized bet. Should we use the pot size bet with out overpairs now?
@pokerigiraffe Every gto article ever says that you do not play a hand less than optimal way for the sake of balance or to bring the ev of your other hands up. Thats exactly what you said on a72 that our AK bets small for the sake of our 7x that want to bet small. That definitely cant be true or then gtowizard articles is lying.
You’re right, this is just a simple (and not so precise) way to understand why AK sizes down. Here’s the more technical explanation: because we are betting so many marginal hands like 7x, BB starts raising thinner for value with hands like Ax. And this offsets the value that we lose when we size down with AK.
Does betting big really solve the problem? How big do you have to bet before villain folds a flush draw or open ender? Chances are a big bet just ends up losing more in the scenario you described.
What are you going to do when the draws all get their but your opponent doesn’t have the draws ands bluffs you on the river? You have to fold because your opponent has many draws in their range, and you lose holding the best hand. If you call, you are giving your opponent excellent odds when he actually had those draws. That’s why you need to bet big enough to make it not worth his while to call with draws.
When draws hit and a player is incentivized to bet, the solver will construct the correct calling range that will theoretically be unexploitable. if you watch someone play and you know that they are overbluffing or underbluffing on the river when draws connect, then you can make an easy counter adjustment. If you don't know whether someone is leaning more in one direction, then betting large on the turn doesn't really solve the problem because you can't prove that they would have folded those draws, or only continue with nutted hands that beat yours, or always bluff, unless you know your opponents strategy in a spot. Now if your opponent responds very linearly to a larger sizing then maybe the ev of betting large on more connected boards will be better for you, but that is dependent on your opponent. Knowing how to correctly play a spot helps with exploiting people who play incorrectly.
Compared with btn vs bb 732r, the lj vs bb 732r is almost 33% range flop cbet. Is it because the bb has much more trash when vs lj and thus must overfold vs small bet? (I notice the trend for 732r is: the earlier position the raiser raise, the more the strategy towards 33% range cbet)
You’re half correct-BB range is actually tighter vs LJ than vs BTN, but because LJ range is so strong, BB folds way more bluffcatchers if LJ were to bet big. The ratio of nuts to bluffcatchers becomes uncomfortably high, so LJ sizes down to encourage BB to call with more bluffcatchers.
On a board like A54 rainbow, the draws in BB range don’t actually have that much equity. So I’d say it’s actually the fact that we want to bet hands like 5x and 66 that makes us size down. Similar to the A72 board in the video :)
@@PokerGiraffe Your videos are so informative and give good example how to look at a spot. I was thinking that when in SRP BUvBB spot, ALL type of boards are really good for BB range due to the amount of 2p and sets in their range compared to AKx type of boards, thats why solver has so big check back % on ALL type of boards and its bet size is mostly 1/3 because BB has many nutted combos compared to AKx board. When lock solver to check range on ALL boards I see almost 0 EV loss , where on ABL boards I loose some amount,which gave me the idea that ALL boards in general are played in a deffensive way. Is my logic correct?
This is like a fundamental misunderstanding of the purpose of the solver's bets. Or to be more accurate, not taking into account all of the information that drives the decision of the solver to bet certain types of hands on different boards. You found a wet board type that the solver bets small on. Do you think that is a function of wetness, or the fact that 6 and 7 high are the MOST disadvantageous for original raiser vs a BB caller? Food for thought, but methinks you need to go back to the study room. Even your explanation for why the A high board is bet is waaaay off. You aren't even taking into account villains expected calling range (within the solver) which drives much of the purpose behind frequency. It's like you found an anomaly to your original understanding, and then tried to use inductive reasoning to generalize (which is a logical fallacy - see hasty generalization). Just... No. Stop and go back and look at ALL wet boards. Are the majority of them big bets or small bets? Here endeth the freebies.
Do you think it is a coincidence that 6 and 7 high boards are necessarily more connected than most other boards? What is magical about the numbers 6 and 7?
Giraffe’s explanation was pretty good and correct. I don’t think they were saying wet always means small and dry always means big. But that it’s not as simple as “dry small, wet big”
LOL @ here endeth the freebies when you're talking to one of the best theory coaches available. And you think he didn't come to this conclusion after pouring over sims before making this video. I love the internet.
Since you seem to need some freebies, 7 and 6 high boards are not even remotely the most disadvantageous for BTN in this scenario. A board like A32 has far worse EV than many 7 high boards. Tis what happens when you spout off without being studied or check your work before said spout off.
Amazing video! I have a question, why on boards like 9s8s7c does the solver start implementing a bigger bet size again? It actually slightly favours 75% and 50% over the small size and bets overpairs using all 3 sizes.
That’s a great question. My guess is that on 987, it’s actually the 2p+ region that is driving our betsize. We have way more of these combos (98o, JTo), and they’re able to bet bigger since they have more equity.
We also have less overpairs since the board is higher, and many of them (JJ, TT) have a straight draw. So that allows them to bet a touch bigger too.
Big and small are relative-if you compare 987 with 982, we still bet bigger on the latter (dryer) board. The only difference is that our betsizing shifts upwards due to our betting range being more polarized.
@@PokerGiraffe Ahhh awesome, totally makes sense. Thankyou master
Hi. Even though I can't comment on this very specific board and not knowing the parameters of your sim, I can tell you than in general JTX, J9X, J8X, T9X, T8X, 98X, 97X, etc etc boards tend to favour bigger flop bet sizings because of the equity that broadway combos have. On most of these boards, most broadway card have a backdoor straight (Any A4o, K2s, Q4s, etc on JTX for example) and most broadway hands will have at least a gutshot. Which means that when the defender is facing a small cbet, he isn't really threatened that much as it is very easy to float KQo on J9X for example / We need to bet bigger to make J-Q-K high indifferent.
The core of ranges being high card in general, most of our opponent range high card hands will have a very decent equity with lots of two overs + BDFD + BDSD on these boards.
A very extreme case of this can be seen in SBvBU 3bet pots, where SB will want to cbet jam quite a lot of JTX boards while it never does it on J9X or T9X boards. The reason being that in this specific spot, BU has some KQo / AQo and suited broadway combos that can be put to the test directly by jamming the JTX flop while you don't need to jam the flop to pressure AQ on T9X.
It's a very general concept but yeah, in general if the bulk of the high card hands of your opponent tend to have a lot of backdoors, the solver will like to size a bit to be able to deny their 20%+ equity.
@@pierre-yvesmimpontel6984 Thank you for this comment, I feel you've added another important piece of the puzzle. I remember a video by Fedor Holz explaining his thought process when deciding the cbet size, saying that it mainly revolves around making the large portion of his opponent's range indifferent between calling and folding. Of course there are other considerations, otherwise we would be betting 10% pot on AKx to make a lot of trash indifferent, instead of overbetting to target the narrower gutshot/Kx/Ax region.
bet big on AK3 with AK, and your opponent doesnt call
Awesome video, ty! The difference you noted between A72 and AK2 was very illuminating for me. No thin value on the latter so we size up
Ah, so the fallacy is 'targeting' draws in villain's range when in reality even on the 'draw-heavy' board, a lot of his range is still marginal made hands, and versus those marginal made hands, our over pairs want to bet smaller because those hands have too much equity for us to be that far ahead when called, so we bet smaller to widen/weaken his calling range.
This is fine, but how do I not spend all of my bankroll on cocaine after I stack a guy who flatted preflop in a single raised pot with AKs and then check-piled for 200bb when he flopped the NFD and I flopped a set? On the one hand, cocaine is expensive and often contaminated. On the other hand, once you reach your late thirties, it's difficult to stay awake at party after party in downtown Los Angeles and still have enough energy to keep drinking alcohol, making absurd claims and plans about your career in the entertainment industry, and trying to talk various celebutantes into bed, and once you GET them into bed, it's often 5am! In this meta, there isn't a reasonable alternative to cocaine.
Perhaps I should choose a fatty earlier in the evening to widen the range of women who will hook up with me, requiring less cocaine?
sounds feasible
I would caution against this. There is quality of life issues at play.
"I spent half my money on drugs, whores, and gambling ... the other half I wasted."
-WC Fields
I haven't laughed this hard to a comment in a long time 🤣
I often hear "when deciding how much to bet always think what your top value wants to do"
You now showed me that this is wrong! thanks! 🙏
What a content bro! Im from Brazil and you are one of the most educational guys that i've seem. Pls continue doing your quizzes and educational videos. If I may suggest, it would be nice to have a series of videos on the basics fundamentals of pre-flop and post-flop, along the lines of a basic course for beginners.
Glad i found your channel. Appreciate these presentations and the work that goes into them.
Glad you like them!
It always felt awkward to me to bet big on wet flops. When the turn would bring a flush or some straights, I always felt like "and now what?".
Bet and get called? Awful. Not to mention getting raised.
Check OOP and get bet into? Awful.
Check back IP / check OOP and get checked? This way we always don't get enough value with our top pairs/sets, and at the same time always pay off the river bet when the opponent has it.
This bugged me a lot, but I just kept doing it because everyone says so. This vid has been eye-opening! Thanks!
You’re very welcome!
Hi Qing! Love these type of videos but would like to hear some thoughts regarding adjustments in these spots based on population tendencies. For example on the 754ss we see that solver leads a ton from BB which also affect our strategy IP right? If this would not happen, or not happen to that extent, how would we respond IP? Also, let's assume on some of the lower stakes people would not find folds with 2nd and 3rd pair as often a bigger sizing would make sense? But I guess that might a bit too self explanatory :D
Yes and many stupid stations on low stakes don’t fold overcards that should fold vs small bets so our bluffs underperform?
Yes, if BB doesn’t have a leading range then that makes us want to bet less frequently, and possibly go even smaller.
You also make a great point about low stakes, which is that sizing up becomes more reasonable if opponent are going to call their weak 1p anyway. Cheers!
Your videos are excellent. It would be interesting to know what stakes you play. And I would like to know your story, where do you come from, how did you get to where you are in poker as a player and as a coach and as a human. This might be a cool idea for a video if you like to share.
簡短而深刻，而且切入點總是獨特又易懂，就是QY的特色！
Concise and profound, with explanations that are consistently unique and easy to understand - that's the hallmark of QY!
过奖了！
The best video on this subject to date.
Amazing video, amazing editing. Thanks for your videos!
Minute 8:06 I literally 🤯🤯🤯
Never heard it explained like this before amazing job!
very good content as per usual
Thank you sir!
This analysis makes a lot of sense from the perspective of extracting thin value. But I'm also curious about how to approach wet boards with your draws- betting small gives villian great pot odds to call with marginal made hands when my intuition is you want to put lots of pressure on hands like top pair (or even 2nd / 3rd pair) on a board like 754 two tone. And betting big with draws means you probably also want to bet big for value as well. I also recognize the difficulty of balancing multiple flop sizings so what do you think a simplified but high EV approach might look like?
Draws don’t really care about betsize-it’s not a mistake to bet small, because even though we have less fold equity, we are also risking less. So they just follow whatever our value hands want to do for the most part.
I'm very happy to have found this channel. Very good content and explained. I'm a tournament player, Holdem cashgames is dead in my area along time ago due to Cashgames went over to 4 or 5card omaha. but Tournament holdem is sill alive.
I guess the concepts still remains the same, even though cash and tournament has different ranges. :)
I’m wondering where you’re?
@@嫖白-p1c he's from scandinavia, probably finland due to his nickname. I saw his comment about cash games being dead in his area a few days ago, I think in a FB poker group
Highly underrated keep up the good content 🎉
This is great stuff. I want to say there is an area under those curves you could calculate to show the EV of big bets vs smaller bets. So what is the approach here to incorporate these ideas into your game? You showed 3 cases - three flops - do you look at like 7 or 8 "representative" flop categories and kind of interpolate from them for all other flops? Again, amazing stuff.
Thank you! Tbh bet sizing is not that important on the flop (as long as you’re somewhere in the ballpark). The bigger lesson is to understand that it’s not just nut hands that stop us from betting big, it’s future nut hands (aka strong draws) as well.
magnificent content. ill set the line on how many times i watch this video at 4.5 lol.
don't wanna miss any video of yours!!!
Awesome content, fundamental and easy to digest knowledge! I was wondering which application generates the EQ/Top Percentage graphs (the XY axis) ?
Thank you! I used HoldEQ, you can download it for free on the Flopzilla website.
Amazing video and great content giraffe. I have been studying with solvers for some time and I think some of the things you said are not exactly correct. For example in 742r bu vs bb srp 100bb deep, we want to bet much bigger than on 764tt, this is because IP's range has more equity than OOP range on the first board and the top of the range advantage. But the same spot, on A84 two tone you want to check more than A84 rainbow, but the times you bet you should bet bigger on two tone boards. I have found this to be true in 3 bet pots as well when spr is smaller. Generally AA with backdoor flush draw wants to bet smaller than AA without backdoor flush draw, because it doesnt need as much protection. Please correct me if I am wrong. I think it changes from board to board and depending on spr.
Unlike on 742, where BTN's range is mostly polarized to overpairs and bluffs, BTN has way more marginal hands on a board like A84.
Hands like 66, 77 and 8x bet at a slightly higher frequency when the board is rainbow, simply because they have better equity. This causes more small betting on rainbow boards, because we are more interested in betting marginal hands.
This video should clear things up: th-cam.com/video/yeMPl5zco4Q/w-d-xo.html
@@PokerGiraffe Thanks giraffe. I have already watched all your videos. Thanks for explaining that. And why does solver go bigger in A84tt than rainbow?
On A84tt our marginal hands have worse equity when called. This makes us less inclined to bet them, and frees up more strong hands like AK to bet their natural size :)
@@PokerGiraffe Yes, thats what I thought. Thanks very much.
GTO bets bigger when the situation is more defined and smaller when it's uncertain
Great video!
If your opponent is a station who will call regardless of size with hands like 2nd pair no redraw on the 7-5-4 TT would it not be better to than size up again because we are still getting thick value from those hands?
Yes, we can bet a bit bigger in that case. Great point!
Is isolating yourself really a good term to use here, or giving yourself reverse implied odds / value owning yourself? Curious on the semantics, to me isolation is the attempt of making a pot heads up with a single player, usually based on positions and preflop action. Thanks in advance if you respond
Value owning would work too, but the meaning isn’t quite as clear I think
@@PokerGiraffe Which term do you mean sorry, isolating, RIO reverse implied odds or value owning? Thanks for the reply
Value owning is not as clear as isolating.
Isolate the limper -> limper calls, everyone else folds
Isolate yourself against stronger hands -> stronger hands call, everything else folds
@@PokerGiraffe Ahh I see thank you so much for the replies
can i ask if you write a script before hand when you narrate through your video? :) very organised train of thought
Yes I do :)
Hey Giraffe , I have another question. What if our opponent doesnt know they should fold pairs to a pot sized bet. Should we use the pot size bet with out overpairs now?
Sizing up would be more reasonable for sure :)
great video
@pokerigiraffe
Every gto article ever says that you do not play a hand less than optimal way for the sake of balance or to bring the ev of your other hands up. Thats exactly what you said on a72 that our AK bets small for the sake of our 7x that want to bet small. That definitely cant be true or then gtowizard articles is lying.
You’re right, this is just a simple (and not so precise) way to understand why AK sizes down.
Here’s the more technical explanation: because we are betting so many marginal hands like 7x, BB starts raising thinner for value with hands like Ax. And this offsets the value that we lose when we size down with AK.
If you study solvers you know you don't cbet big OTF when there are a lot of equity changing turns.
What if your opponent has 88 and all the draws come in and he shoves on you with KK?
Does betting big really solve the problem? How big do you have to bet before villain folds a flush draw or open ender?
Chances are a big bet just ends up losing more in the scenario you described.
Would you say that these principles still apply if you're playing heads up cash or husngs?
Of course!
Interesting. I don't really see the bet sizings being small on dry boards in my games.@@PokerGiraffe
Love from Singapore bro
Thanks for the support!
Do we size up or down on A72 two tone?
Size down, so we can bet the more vulnerable pairs like 7x and 88
What are you going to do when the draws all get their but your opponent doesn’t have the draws ands bluffs you on the river? You have to fold because your opponent has many draws in their range, and you lose holding the best hand. If you call, you are giving your opponent excellent odds when he actually had those draws. That’s why you need to bet big enough to make it not worth his while to call with draws.
Hell yeah, always make them fold when you are ahead so you win every hand.
How big do you have to bet to get flush/straight draws to fold ? Chances are your big bets are just giving them better pot odds
@@henrypham5423Please, can you explain it better? Does betting big give them better odds to call ?
When draws hit and a player is incentivized to bet, the solver will construct the correct calling range that will theoretically be unexploitable. if you watch someone play and you know that they are overbluffing or underbluffing on the river when draws connect, then you can make an easy counter adjustment. If you don't know whether someone is leaning more in one direction, then betting large on the turn doesn't really solve the problem because you can't prove that they would have folded those draws, or only continue with nutted hands that beat yours, or always bluff, unless you know your opponents strategy in a spot.
Now if your opponent responds very linearly to a larger sizing then maybe the ev of betting large on more connected boards will be better for you, but that is dependent on your opponent. Knowing how to correctly play a spot helps with exploiting people who play incorrectly.
If your opponent doesn't have the draws and bluffs you on the river you have to fold? What kind of reverse logic is that
wowwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww
Did you know 90% of giraffes are gay?
"They just walk around eating... and not mating. You sold me... queer giraffes. I want my money back." -Antonius Proximo, 'Gladiator'
okay I‘ve finished it after 3 times,a short one but many points to deep thinking
Compared with btn vs bb 732r, the lj vs bb 732r is almost 33% range flop cbet. Is it because the bb has much more trash when vs lj and thus must overfold vs small bet? (I notice the trend for 732r is: the earlier position the raiser raise, the more the strategy towards 33% range cbet)
You’re half correct-BB range is actually tighter vs LJ than vs BTN, but because LJ range is so strong, BB folds way more bluffcatchers if LJ were to bet big. The ratio of nuts to bluffcatchers becomes uncomfortably high, so LJ sizes down to encourage BB to call with more bluffcatchers.
Thanks, man! @@PokerGiraffe
does small bet on board like A54, A32 due to the same reason?
On a board like A54 rainbow, the draws in BB range don’t actually have that much equity. So I’d say it’s actually the fact that we want to bet hands like 5x and 66 that makes us size down. Similar to the A72 board in the video :)
@@PokerGiraffe that makes sense to me! Thanks!
@@PokerGiraffe Your videos are so informative and give good example how to look at a spot. I was thinking that when in SRP BUvBB spot, ALL type of boards are really good for BB range due to the amount of 2p and sets in their range compared to AKx type of boards, thats why solver has so big check back % on ALL type of boards and its bet size is mostly 1/3 because BB has many nutted combos compared to AKx board. When lock solver to check range on ALL boards I see almost 0 EV loss , where on ABL boards I loose some amount,which gave me the idea that ALL boards in general are played in a deffensive way. Is my logic correct?
qing is the king
great
Thanks Benoit! ;)
This is like a fundamental misunderstanding of the purpose of the solver's bets. Or to be more accurate, not taking into account all of the information that drives the decision of the solver to bet certain types of hands on different boards. You found a wet board type that the solver bets small on. Do you think that is a function of wetness, or the fact that 6 and 7 high are the MOST disadvantageous for original raiser vs a BB caller? Food for thought, but methinks you need to go back to the study room. Even your explanation for why the A high board is bet is waaaay off. You aren't even taking into account villains expected calling range (within the solver) which drives much of the purpose behind frequency.
It's like you found an anomaly to your original understanding, and then tried to use inductive reasoning to generalize (which is a logical fallacy - see hasty generalization).
Just... No. Stop and go back and look at ALL wet boards. Are the majority of them big bets or small bets? Here endeth the freebies.
Do you think it is a coincidence that 6 and 7 high boards are necessarily more connected than most other boards? What is magical about the numbers 6 and 7?
Giraffe’s explanation was pretty good and correct. I don’t think they were saying wet always means small and dry always means big. But that it’s not as simple as “dry small, wet big”
LOL @ here endeth the freebies when you're talking to one of the best theory coaches available. And you think he didn't come to this conclusion after pouring over sims before making this video.
I love the internet.
Since you seem to need some freebies, 7 and 6 high boards are not even remotely the most disadvantageous for BTN in this scenario. A board like A32 has far worse EV than many 7 high boards.
Tis what happens when you spout off without being studied or check your work before said spout off.
Me thinks u need to go back to the study room Lol