More tier lists, please! They provide a great overview and are helpful for orientation. What comes to mind: Opponent Leaks: How easy they are to identify, how exploitable they are, and the associated risks.
Equity denial is a great concept because in theory there’s no difference between a semi-bluff and a protection bet. Both hands have good equity but also gain significant EV from folds, it’s just that protection hands are more likely to be ‘ahead’ of hands they fold out while semi-bluffs happen to be behind (though not always). Whether we happen to pass the 50% equity mark or already have a ‘made hand’ isn’t a meaningful difference.
Derived from it loosely, yes but there are plenty of spots where range advantage is NOT a sufficient reason for betting but in RBT it is. RBT is like a formula: range advantage combined with lack of SDV and last chance to bluff = mandatory bet.
excellent video imo though title would be better if was "Ranking the Poker concepts for the poker beginner", as so much more about the pitfalls of misuse example MDF which is fine in isolation and not mishandled and used as law, I know you know this but there you go. overall super useful
I think pot control got done a little dirty here, While I agree that the term on it's own can be used very poorly. I think if you keep the specifics of why you're checking for pot control in mind it's a good concept I.E My opponent is a good player, they have a range advantage and are aware of it (a good player), I have a made hand that doesn't want to play for stacks, with all that said it's a concept that shouldn't be taught to newer players similar to range advantage as it convolutes the thought process with random noise that isn't being applied properly.
i think pot control exists legitimately but pot control isnt actually why. keeping SPR high can make exploiting mistakes more profitable - but really this isnt pot control, this is just taking a line that leads to more mistakes. there could also be pot control in like PLO so that you retain the ability to repot all in on the river and have actual fold equity - but im not sure on that one. either way, if pot control is actually useful - its because theres a different mechanic at play, and pot control is not actually the reason.
@gesus.christ99 I love how you "experts" are always so condescending with your "wtf" and your emojis. but all right, I'll indulge your childishness this time. ever heard of ICM? elimination risk? future game? CashEV? in a MTT I might prefer an opponent to fold hands that still have some equity against mine, even if I lose some Chip EV, in order not to risk my tournament life. in a Cash Game I would always want to keep those hands in for maximum profit. hope this clarifies it for you.
@@thedspenguin of course nobody plays "picture perfect chipEV" because a marginal spot when you risk your entire stack to win 0,01bb on average doesn't seems very smart to take. But other than that "protection" is an essential topic in cash games too.
Love this this one. Everyone buy this the courses so I dont take all the money! Pete can also use the cash since he could not pull-out intime and now has reproduced! #typicalytcomment #luvthemfish #daddypete #carrotfam
Regarding your comment pertaining to protection, It's called a Combo Bet - When betting to make better hands fold and draws call. Bart Hanson invention if I recall
alternatively 1 pot control is something we do OOP as need higher equity threshold due to lower equity realization 2 protection is something we do when we check with weak top pairs on static boards etc to protect our checking range, and when we bet lower overpairs to board compared to higher overpairs as higher ones need less protection better wording as stephan sontheimer says a better term is equity denial designed to get folds from overcards to our lower overpairs to board, and used when we have equity advantage we bet to charge them with their draws 3 river blunder theorem is made up by some one who is desperate as someone who wants to be considered a top poker theoretician, using theorem to make it sound like science when its just a missed bluff, but as Uri Peleg says you don't understand deep theory so you aren't kidding everyone ,4 representation is when we use a single card in our range when we bluff it as a pair of that card or as made flush etc, stephan calls this the lookalike principle when blockers matter most on river and helps put hands to structure ranges to bet for value, check and bluffing, 5 board coverage agree opponents aren't clairvoyant like solver 6 targeting an important concept when it comes to indifference region when betting, so we chose good bet sizing 6 MDF only useful on river, as before river we always overfold to MDF and by how much this concept don't help, as bluffs have equity before the river and impossible to gauge how much 7 greed theorem omg another theorem!! yeah get value with value hands that is the central concept of EV, more you bet greater the EV compared to smaller bets with their concomitant frequencies 8 range advantage is simple concept all coaches talk about and use without which you can't play poker, So my problem with this channel is you treat all your viewers like they have learnt nothing and they have remained as beginners and their game hasn't progressed, we ain't stupid
There are lots of times we meet MDF facing bets pre-river and in position we actually overdefend relative to MDF in a lot of spots. The point of denoting things as theorems in CPS is to signpost to the viewer that these are really important things to memorise and pay attention to, not to mislead or try to come across as more advanced than they are. I think this is a pretty weird interpretation of you ask me. These videos are pitched at a lot of different levels from beginners to more advanced. Total beginners watch this channel as do some professionals. Try not to see things aimed at beginners as directed at you personally. That said I will consider this criticism seriously because I don’t want to be under pitching the content on a regular basis. Finally Uri’s review of the session he analysed of mine was overwhelmingly positive. I’d just like to point that out for anyone who hasn’t watched that video.
@@CarrotCornerPoker fair reply, using MDF pre river, so hard to differentiate if near MDF over defend spot or under defend spot ,so the concept isn't that useful IMO before river but I may be wrong there( maybe you can do some video on this). My criticism of your use of language is that other creators use simpler language who are great theory experts also, saulo costa, uri peleg, jayser1337, Stephan sontheimer , I am not denying you know theory just that you over egg the pudding unnecessarily and it comes across as an inferiority complex, you are better than that. But your rebuttal maybe fair as that is what your audience is used too. I appreciate that you have taken onboard the level you are pitching at, I follow you but we don't stand still in our understanding. Yes Uri was mostly complimentary and from him that is high praise, but back to my previous point, other great content creators use simpler language and I am sure you can too where possible.
@@strewensThat’s fair. I think language for me is a creative outlet and some flourish/personal flavour can be a good thing and helps to build a brand, but I do agree I can work on being more concise and accessible at times.
@@CarrotCornerPoker I personally think river blunder theorem tells you absolutely nothing about the actual spot. Maybe mandatory bluff theorem or something.
More tier lists, please! They provide a great overview and are helpful for orientation.
What comes to mind:
Opponent Leaks: How easy they are to identify, how exploitable they are, and the associated risks.
Equity denial is a great concept because in theory there’s no difference between a semi-bluff and a protection bet. Both hands have good equity but also gain significant EV from folds, it’s just that protection hands are more likely to be ‘ahead’ of hands they fold out while semi-bluffs happen to be behind (though not always). Whether we happen to pass the 50% equity mark or already have a ‘made hand’ isn’t a meaningful difference.
Whatever you came up with is s tier and whatever people you dont like came up with is d tier, got it
River blunder theorem is S but essentially is just derived from range advantage in C tier :) I see how it’s good for teaching though
Derived from it loosely, yes but there are plenty of spots where range advantage is NOT a sufficient reason for betting but in RBT it is. RBT is like a formula: range advantage combined with lack of SDV and last chance to bluff = mandatory bet.
Do you remember the "spew gauge" concept you introduced about 15 years ago on Grinderschool? I still use it today.
Can you share it roughly I’m curious lol
excellent video imo though title would be better if was "Ranking the Poker concepts for the poker beginner", as so much more about the pitfalls of misuse example MDF which is fine in isolation and not mishandled and used as law, I know you know this but there you go. overall super useful
also, I'd love another video with more poker concepts.
This video is the equivalent of saying “Banana is a dumb word because some people might use it to refer to apples”
I do pot control by making small bkuff bets to jeep them from betting higher.
amazing idea, would enjoy more in a similar format.
I think pot control got done a little dirty here, While I agree that the term on it's own can be used very poorly. I think if you keep the specifics of why you're checking for pot control in mind it's a good concept I.E My opponent is a good player, they have a range advantage and are aware of it (a good player), I have a made hand that doesn't want to play for stacks, with all that said it's a concept that shouldn't be taught to newer players similar to range advantage as it convolutes the thought process with random noise that isn't being applied properly.
Awesome video idea this is kool thanks
*koolaid
1999 watched this and typed kool beans in the AIM chat.
i think pot control exists legitimately but pot control isnt actually why.
keeping SPR high can make exploiting mistakes more profitable - but really this isnt pot control, this is just taking a line that leads to more mistakes.
there could also be pot control in like PLO so that you retain the ability to repot all in on the river and have actual fold equity - but im not sure on that one. either way, if pot control is actually useful - its because theres a different mechanic at play, and pot control is not actually the reason.
others call it denial, maybe im in denial. man on his daily duppy out of no where
this video is literally the 1% 50% 99% normal distribution meme 😃 one can view every term in a reasonable or unreasonable way. i like it.
I just watched the first 5 minutes for pot control
River blunder theorem is s tier and blockers is c tier. Pretty much sums up this channel. Poker jagron king aka verbal diarrhea
Protection never made sense for me in Cash Games, only in MTTs.
Wtf you mean😂😂😂 Tell me a difference between chipEV MTT and cash game (other than opening ranges adjustments due to rake)
@gesus.christ99 I love how you "experts" are always so condescending with your "wtf" and your emojis. but all right, I'll indulge your childishness this time. ever heard of ICM? elimination risk? future game? CashEV? in a MTT I might prefer an opponent to fold hands that still have some equity against mine, even if I lose some Chip EV, in order not to risk my tournament life. in a Cash Game I would always want to keep those hands in for maximum profit. hope this clarifies it for you.
@@thedspenguin of course nobody plays "picture perfect chipEV" because a marginal spot when you risk your entire stack to win 0,01bb on average doesn't seems very smart to take.
But other than that "protection" is an essential topic in cash games too.
Nice Brad Owen!
Love this this one. Everyone buy this the courses so I dont take all the money! Pete can also use the cash since he could not pull-out intime and now has reproduced! #typicalytcomment #luvthemfish #daddypete #carrotfam
Haha I can assure you it’s been the best 3 days of my life so far ❤
@@CarrotCornerPoker Awww, congrats man. Hope the mom is doing well. Dont be to hard on yourselves and take those naps during the day like the baby 😉
Nettle Tea. Righto mate ok
Regarding your comment pertaining to protection, It's called a Combo Bet - When betting to make better hands fold and draws call.
Bart Hanson invention if I recall
Revolutionary
kewl video
pot control 🙊
Bro you just killed Brad Owen
It was just meant to be some generic vlogger impression.
@CarrotCornerPoker I feel like even if this wasn't on purpose, Brad snuck his way into your mind when you did the impression 😉
alternatively 1 pot control is something we do OOP as need higher equity threshold due to lower equity realization 2 protection is something we do when we check with weak top pairs on static boards etc to protect our checking range, and when we bet lower overpairs to board compared to higher overpairs as higher ones need less protection better wording as stephan sontheimer says a better term is equity denial designed to get folds from overcards to our lower overpairs to board, and used when we have equity advantage we bet to charge them with their draws 3 river blunder theorem is made up by some one who is desperate as someone who wants to be considered a top poker theoretician, using theorem to make it sound like science when its just a missed bluff, but as Uri Peleg says you don't understand deep theory so you aren't kidding everyone ,4 representation is when we use a single card in our range when we bluff it as a pair of that card or as made flush etc, stephan calls this the lookalike principle when blockers matter most on river and helps put hands to structure ranges to bet for value, check and bluffing, 5 board coverage agree opponents aren't clairvoyant like solver 6 targeting an important concept when it comes to indifference region when betting, so we chose good bet sizing 6 MDF only useful on river, as before river we always overfold to MDF and by how much this concept don't help, as bluffs have equity before the river and impossible to gauge how much 7 greed theorem omg another theorem!! yeah get value with value hands that is the central concept of EV, more you bet greater the EV compared to smaller bets with their concomitant frequencies 8 range advantage is simple concept all coaches talk about and use without which you can't play poker, So my problem with this channel is you treat all your viewers like they have learnt nothing and they have remained as beginners and their game hasn't progressed, we ain't stupid
There are lots of times we meet MDF facing bets pre-river and in position we actually overdefend relative to MDF in a lot of spots.
The point of denoting things as theorems in CPS is to signpost to the viewer that these are really important things to memorise and pay attention to, not to mislead or try to come across as more advanced than they are. I think this is a pretty weird interpretation of you ask me.
These videos are pitched at a lot of different levels from beginners to more advanced. Total beginners watch this channel as do some professionals. Try not to see things aimed at beginners as directed at you personally. That said I will consider this criticism seriously because I don’t want to be under pitching the content on a regular basis.
Finally Uri’s review of the session he analysed of mine was overwhelmingly positive. I’d just like to point that out for anyone who hasn’t watched that video.
@@CarrotCornerPoker fair reply, using MDF pre river, so hard to differentiate if near MDF over defend spot or under defend spot ,so the concept isn't that useful IMO before river but I may be wrong there( maybe you can do some video on this). My criticism of your use of language is that other creators use simpler language who are great theory experts also, saulo costa, uri peleg, jayser1337, Stephan sontheimer , I am not denying you know theory just that you over egg the pudding unnecessarily and it comes across as an inferiority complex, you are better than that. But your rebuttal maybe fair as that is what your audience is used too. I appreciate that you have taken onboard the level you are pitching at, I follow you but we don't stand still in our understanding. Yes Uri was mostly complimentary and from him that is high praise, but back to my previous point, other great content creators use simpler language and I am sure you can too where possible.
@@strewensThat’s fair. I think language for me is a creative outlet and some flourish/personal flavour can be a good thing and helps to build a brand, but I do agree I can work on being more concise and accessible at times.
@@CarrotCornerPoker I personally think river blunder theorem tells you absolutely nothing about the actual spot. Maybe mandatory bluff theorem or something.