One thing people don't realize is how likely it is to see breakeven or losing stretches when you have a really big sample. If you only have a 5% chance of a losing 100k sample, but you play 2M hands, you are likely to have at least one stretch of 100k worth of losing hands.
I think we should have a poll to see what kind of haircut he gets next. I am in the Lloyd Christmas camp, but others may come up with something better.
While variance is a BEAST I truly think you’re underestimating how much your content can boost someone’s red line. Especially in a pool that overfolds so consistently and under-protects their checking range so frequently. I believe it’s not coincidence my redline evened out after digesting hours of carrot corner and taking notes
One of the best feelings of anyone’s poker career is to see that red line go from a couple of Ks in bbs south to slowly evening out, and then finally make a complete U-turn to +ks in bbs north! Gl and keep studying!
Great video. Hilarious censorship moment and outro. Enjoyed the guest and his approach to analysis. Great from both guys as usual. Was a brisk, dense conversation. I had to rewind at times. One of the best hand analysis I've seen in a while, imo.
Man I think those top pair call downs for the full stack in those stakes are veeeeryyyy villain dependant. I've been playing that and a loot of villains just have it everyyy freaking time so I actually think some of those calls are possibly not great
For the first hand I think that low stakes players way overfold to flop check raises so on the river the villian has on average a too strong hand range and is thus under folding and this is another reason why over bluffing is a bad move here. Would this be a good or bad reasoning to check back 69hh?
we actually kinda what them to have an average to strong hand (which they always will do given action), but if we expect to see some more aggression from the average 50nl reg on flop or turn, then we naturally will see more folds otr i think!
Yes, definitely true and that’s a great reasoning to have more give ups than GTO. Based on my own database, they certainly under fold OTR once they call flop and turn. They basically fold everything OTT, so by the river they will land with hands that they already decided will call down.
So, a question about variance. If even 100-200k hands is nothing in poker then is it possible some famous live player, say Daniel Negreanu for example, just ran really well for a decade and actually suck? You know what I mean?
Oh absolutely. Negreanu was a known fish for the majority of his career until Doug Polk beat him HU. That’s when he actually took it seriously and started studying solvers, and now he’s an actual decent poker player.
I can only say that AQh hand vs micro pool on Stars you losing on river like 90 % of time or even more . And you will be lucky to chop it sometimes . But that is only my feelings. My estimations might be wrong
I imagine that to be true at micros. People just don't like to fire rivers, especially regs. I have more respect for a lot of the fish at micros, because even though they might be picking the wrong spots to do it, at least they are trying. Most of the nit regs are not even interested in putting money in with less than TPTK, much less TPGK.
I totally agree. River bluff shoves are at the micro's pretty rare already. with this action sequence and board texture i would even say that against non-maniac players you see hands 99% of the time that are better than top pair top kicker. btw i wouldn't fold either
@@vincevegas222 I guess I am in the maniac camp according to you. The way I figure is if it is hard for me to have bluffs on a board, I should probably bluff it.
could definitely be true! but also i think our time as poker players can be better/more efficiently directed to hands that yield greater and more frequent EV
it probably is at this channel somewhere, but can you maybe sometimes make a video about this variance meta delusions please? because thats exactly what happend to me on reg tables nl25. 20k hands and i felt like a god. one thing is facts from pros, other is the feeling of some actual money being won in a country where its much more than for some english or swedish grinder. if that makes sense. on live nl200 thats even bigger perception.
Is it a coincidence that the equity villain needs to have to call a bet is the same as the fold equity you need to make a bluff? I think the internet is full of people who can't answer this question and I'm spending a lot of time trying to figure it out for myself.
There's no direct connection. The rate of folds required to make a bluff profitable is driven by our equity when called. For example, both players with a pot-sized bet left on the turn, we only need 20%+ folds to make a shove with 25% equity profitable, but with no equity we need 50%+ folds.
@@Mathemagical55 thanks I realized after my comment that they aren't even the same number. My question really was: when we say villain needs 25% equity to call a half pot bet and therefore our betting range should contain 25% bluffs, we are implying that villain should call 25% of the time. But villain doesn't necessarily have 25% equity at 25% frequency. I've been confused for some time about why poker players talk about "equity" and "how often we win" any given spot as interchangeable. And so it isn't clear to me why the bluff to value ratio on a half pot bet should be 1:3.
Playing only 2/5 and 5/10 live cash game 200bb+ deep (occasionally higher ) I have a couple of questions about arguments you touched in the video. 1) I think when you play deep stack huge pot make the big difference in the results a lot more than in online 100bb deep games. Don't you agree? 2)!About variance in these live games, how many hands make a "big" sample? Because you don't play 300k hands in one life of live poker, but I don't know a single winning player losing after a 6 moths period (15k hands)...
1) good question. it's likely that over small samples and in splashy games, the big pots have a far greater impact on your winrate. but that's also because in live, the game will generally be a lot weaker (people won't be attacking small pots as much as online). that doesn't mean you can't also add extreme hourly by getting better at playing small pots, increasing your edge on pool 2) this is totally dependent on your win rate, and sadly we just can't ever know what your true winrate is live. there are going to be so many players that run good their entire careers and others that quit because of their distribution. i guess all i'd say is you wanna be studying as much as possible and also pray to the gods you are in the top percentile :D
thanks for having me on pete! hyped to do this again in the future, but wtf did your editor do to my teeth in the animation :D
We are glad to have a distinguished guest on Carrot Corner.
19:08 what have you heard about that site? Im playing there so Im curious :)
@@kezman82a games be good
@@kezman82a haha yep that games are good and splashy
@@kezman82a what site is it? I couldn't catch what he said
Pete, we would like an update on the NL100 challenge and current results. You didn't talk about that for a while, which is concerning.
rake ate him alive it seems, does not deserve to play the game
Need to update that link to bens channel in the description
Just look up benabadbeat. It's not that hard.
@@seslocrit9365 these days people need all the help they can get
One thing people don't realize is how likely it is to see breakeven or losing stretches when you have a really big sample. If you only have a 5% chance of a losing 100k sample, but you play 2M hands, you are likely to have at least one stretch of 100k worth of losing hands.
yep, wild
Pete we talked about including the results in these videos
Playing against most micro stakes players you should fold the river with AQ of hearts IMO
I just found Bens channel yesterday and was so impressed. This is gonna be a banger episode
GOATed collab, more please!
Pete, your intriguing haircut: a bad beat or a bad play?
PS. Fantastic content as always. Thanks!
I think we should have a poll to see what kind of haircut he gets next.
I am in the Lloyd Christmas camp, but others may come up with something better.
@@jeffshackleford3152 A Lloyd Christmas cut gets my vote, too. 🤣
While variance is a BEAST I truly think you’re underestimating how much your content can boost someone’s red line. Especially in a pool that overfolds so consistently and under-protects their checking range so frequently. I believe it’s not coincidence my redline evened out after digesting hours of carrot corner and taking notes
One of the best feelings of anyone’s poker career is to see that red line go from a couple of Ks in bbs south to slowly evening out, and then finally make a complete U-turn to +ks in bbs north!
Gl and keep studying!
Great video. Hilarious censorship moment and outro. Enjoyed the guest and his approach to analysis. Great from both guys as usual. Was a brisk, dense conversation. I had to rewind at times. One of the best hand analysis I've seen in a while, imo.
Man I think those top pair call downs for the full stack in those stakes are veeeeryyyy villain dependant. I've been playing that and a loot of villains just have it everyyy freaking time so I actually think some of those calls are possibly not great
@5:49 - did the editor spell ANGRY wrong just to make me ANGY?
or was he mocking Pete?
Such a treat to see these beasts reviewing hands together, and having fun as well.
Really great episode 👍
For the first hand I think that low stakes players way overfold to flop check raises so on the river the villian has on average a too strong hand range and is thus under folding and this is another reason why over bluffing is a bad move here.
Would this be a good or bad reasoning to check back 69hh?
we actually kinda what them to have an average to strong hand (which they always will do given action), but if we expect to see some more aggression from the average 50nl reg on flop or turn, then we naturally will see more folds otr i think!
Yes, definitely true and that’s a great reasoning to have more give ups than GTO. Based on my own database, they certainly under fold OTR once they call flop and turn. They basically fold everything OTT, so by the river they will land with hands that they already decided will call down.
So, a question about variance. If even 100-200k hands is nothing in poker then is it possible some famous live player, say Daniel Negreanu for example, just ran really well for a decade and actually suck? You know what I mean?
Oh absolutely. Negreanu was a known fish for the majority of his career until Doug Polk beat him HU. That’s when he actually took it seriously and started studying solvers, and now he’s an actual decent poker player.
I can only say that AQh hand vs micro pool on Stars you losing on river like 90 % of time or even more . And you will be lucky to chop it sometimes . But that is only my feelings. My estimations might be wrong
I imagine that to be true at micros.
People just don't like to fire rivers, especially regs.
I have more respect for a lot of the fish at micros, because even though they might be picking the wrong spots to do it, at least they are trying.
Most of the nit regs are not even interested in putting money in with less than TPTK, much less TPGK.
I totally agree. River bluff shoves are at the micro's pretty rare already. with this action sequence and board texture i would even say that against non-maniac players you see hands 99% of the time that are better than top pair top kicker. btw i wouldn't fold either
@@vincevegas222 I guess I am in the maniac camp according to you.
The way I figure is if it is hard for me to have bluffs on a board, I should probably bluff it.
could definitely be true! but also i think our time as poker players can be better/more efficiently directed to hands that yield greater and more frequent EV
it probably is at this channel somewhere, but can you maybe sometimes make a video about this variance meta delusions please? because thats exactly what happend to me on reg tables nl25. 20k hands and i felt like a god. one thing is facts from pros, other is the feeling of some actual money being won in a country where its much more than for some english or swedish grinder. if that makes sense. on live nl200 thats even bigger perception.
🔥🔥🔥 Amazing video!
Ben IS AMAZING!
Is it a coincidence that the equity villain needs to have to call a bet is the same as the fold equity you need to make a bluff?
I think the internet is full of people who can't answer this question and I'm spending a lot of time trying to figure it out for myself.
There's no direct connection. The rate of folds required to make a bluff profitable is driven by our equity when called. For example, both players with a pot-sized bet left on the turn, we only need 20%+ folds to make a shove with 25% equity profitable, but with no equity we need 50%+ folds.
@@Mathemagical55 thanks I realized after my comment that they aren't even the same number. My question really was: when we say villain needs 25% equity to call a half pot bet and therefore our betting range should contain 25% bluffs, we are implying that villain should call 25% of the time. But villain doesn't necessarily have 25% equity at 25% frequency. I've been confused for some time about why poker players talk about "equity" and "how often we win" any given spot as interchangeable. And so it isn't clear to me why the bluff to value ratio on a half pot bet should be 1:3.
what a bangin outro LOL
ahahaha
19:07 please can someone tell me what site are they talking about?
it's a swedish site called Svenskaspel. pretty sure only swedes can play there though!
Probably Svenska Spel Poker. Swedish state run site. I play sometimes there at 50NL where they do have 5 handed tables and you play deep.
23:50 you revealed you lost at -4bb/100 in a freudian slip
Excellent work gentlemen! Love the reviews
review ... review ... review.... oh another review ....
Playing only 2/5 and 5/10 live cash game 200bb+ deep (occasionally higher ) I have a couple of questions about arguments you touched in the video.
1) I think when you play deep stack huge pot make the big difference in the results a lot more than in online 100bb deep games. Don't you agree?
2)!About variance in these live games, how many hands make a "big" sample? Because you don't play 300k hands in one life of live poker, but I don't know a single winning player losing after a 6 moths period (15k hands)...
1) good question. it's likely that over small samples and in splashy games, the big pots have a far greater impact on your winrate. but that's also because in live, the game will generally be a lot weaker (people won't be attacking small pots as much as online). that doesn't mean you can't also add extreme hourly by getting better at playing small pots, increasing your edge on pool
2) this is totally dependent on your win rate, and sadly we just can't ever know what your true winrate is live. there are going to be so many players that run good their entire careers and others that quit because of their distribution. i guess all i'd say is you wanna be studying as much as possible and also pray to the gods you are in the top percentile :D
Q9c. Spewy. Easy fold pre