Skip to forum
Notifications
Clear all

a fold

33 Posts
9 Users
0 Reactions
4,186 Views

Originally posted by madorjan
The discussion here is really funny. I - and every other decent small+ stakes player will tell you, not capping at all in HU pots (maybe even 3way sometimes), not 3betting from the BB vs non-SB players (maybe even SB) are two generally accepted and popular strategies that don't lose any value, on the contrary. If you don't get why, go buy gold status and watch Boomer's vids, it's all in there.

Well, something that makes me happy is when I do the same thing Madorjan and Boomer do :).

Newall's book has something about that non-capping and non-3bet HU strategy, and very well explained and easy to read. That book is fucking awesome by the way, and you guys should read it! I'm enjoying it very much. Let's see if it can change your mind about the GTO v Exploitative Play fight we've been having so far.


Reply
Quote
YohanN7
Joined: 15.06.2009

Originally posted by JLeitmotiv

Originally posted by madorjan
The discussion here is really funny. I - and every other decent small+ stakes player will tell you, not capping at all in HU pots (maybe even 3way sometimes), not 3betting from the BB vs non-SB players (maybe even SB) are two generally accepted and popular strategies that don't lose any value, on the contrary. If you don't get why, go buy gold status and watch Boomer's vids, it's all in there.

Well, something that makes me happy is when I do the same thing Madorjan and Boomer do :).

Newall's book has something about that non-capping and non-3bet HU strategy, and very well explained and easy to read. That book is fucking awesome by the way, and you guys should read it! I'm enjoying it very much. Let's see if it can change your mind about the GTO v Exploitative Play fight we've been having so far.

Well guys, you have a lot of explaining to do. There is a lot of more explaining to do for laymen like me or anybody else at the bronze level. Take for instance, the definition of GTO. You can probably go on for ever about how "good" the advice of "Boomer" or "Madorjan" are. Tell me, please, what exactly are the advice mathematically, and why? Oh, that's a nasty question, admittedly, but before the relevant terms are even defined, the terms need to be spoken of. You, being a physicist, should be welll aware of this mr LeitMotif.

/Johan = :f_confused:


Reply
Quote
madorjan
Joined: 13.11.2009

Explaining can be found in Boomer's vids. Also, balance =/= GTO.


Reply
Quote
Avataren
Joined: 28.04.2010

owned by madorjan


Reply
Quote

Originally posted by YohanN7
Well guys, you have a lot of explaining to do. There is a lot of more explaining to do for laymen like me or anybody else at the bronze level. Take for instance, the definition of GTO. You can probably go on for ever about how "good" the advice of "Boomer" or "Madorjan" are. Tell me, please, what exactly are the advice mathematically, and why? Oh, that's a nasty question, admittedly, but before the relevant terms are even defined, the terms need to be spoken of. You, being a physicist, should be welll aware of this mr LeitMotif.

/Johan = :f_confused:

It's not that I think "Madorjan says so, I'll do as he says". Actually, I started thinking about doing this before I read Newall's book, and looking for that is how I found the book. I'm saying I'm happy when I draw the same conclusions they drew. Of course I won't take other people's answer for the truth without even trying them out. Deep down, even when I play poker, I am still a scientist. I don't explain it for two reasons:

1.- I think that Newall's book explain it much better, that's why I referred you to it.

2.- Even when I try my best, my explanation will be tainted by my absolute fishiness, and I'll most probably end up confusing more than clearing things up.


Reply
Quote
sim5sim5
Joined: 15.10.2011

Originally posted by JLeitmotiv

Actually, most people that do that (I do it myself) do it to balance the entire range when playing vs observant opponents. It's the same reason why I never cap pf HU

I think u need to think of this strategy of never caping pf HU

What my point is just go through those hands when villian caps pf HU against u & u give up on flop/turn/river with ur 6 outs just because of board tex + his aggresion which makes u fold

Take this example

villian with his top 10% range caps pf HU OOP against ur tight 3 bet range of same % ( excluding PP)

how difficult it will be for u to play the hand on dry board & to put some action ???

Now u do the same thing by reducing ur 3bet range making it more tight ( excluding PP) on same board against villian same as above 10% range
u will be surprise to see the result where many will not be able to go for a SD & give up the pot just because of villian's action

I know when u will slow play ur AA & c/r flop/turn for value & knock villian down with deception it looks good but as i said taking lead with initiative will bring u more benefit than playing tricky if u take things in totallality & playing aggresive pf with hands which has good equity overall & easier to play future streets

Also important thing when u play tricky it will not long last as good player will adjust to it & will use their position as an advantage against u


Reply
Quote
sim5sim5
Joined: 15.10.2011

I would like to see boomer vid but i guess its only for gold members :(


Reply
Quote

Originally posted by sim5sim5

Originally posted by JLeitmotiv

Actually, most people that do that (I do it myself) do it to balance the entire range when playing vs observant opponents. It's the same reason why I never cap pf HU

I think u need to think of this strategy of never caping pf HU

What my point is just go through those hands when villian caps pf HU against u & u give up on flop/turn/river with ur 6 outs just because of board tex + his aggresion which makes u fold

Take this example

villian with his top 10% range caps pf HU OOP against ur tight 3 bet range of same % ( excluding PP)

how difficult it will be for u to play the hand on dry board & to put some action ???

...
...
...

Also important thing when u play tricky it will not long last as good player will adjust to it & will use their position as an advantage against u

I don't understand those ranges. I know we both have the same range and I am in position? I'd love to play that hand if so. Let all of the hands be that hand!

On the other hand, in my opinion this is not playing tricky. Capping light things like A6s would be playing tricky (and extremely helpful vs some players) because of the FE you mentioned.

Question for those that know about it: Is that admissible as another way to balance your capping range? It would be very hard to implement though (for me, at least).
If you have a tight cap range, like TT+, AQs+, AKo, I'd know how to play that hand, and I would know if I am ahead or behind, how many combos you have, etc.

If you have a wide cap range, say 40% of your opening range goes to your cap range afterwards, you'd be putting money in being an underdog. I don't know if it's much to worry about (see the question before please!) if you do it to disguise your value hands in the cap range but, as I said before, hard to do in practice anyway (again, for me!).


Reply
Quote
YohanN7
Joined: 15.06.2009

Originally posted by Avataren
owned by madorjan

I think you may just have broken your own world record in arse licking.

/Johan = :f_confused:


Reply
Quote
madorjan
Joined: 13.11.2009

Hey guys,

ok, I already agreed to myself I won't do this, but here we go...

Let's assume we want to have a balanced standard strategy (if not, you do whatever you want, I don't care). You can go two ways: capping and calling with a balanced range, or calling our entire range. Both can and will be fine, once we can execute them perfectly - but that's not as easy as it sounds. So let's examine, why do we cap?

We cap, because the top of our range wants to get value (not to make 6 outers fold, like sim5... mentioned). Against like a BU vs CO 3betting range you want to cap 77+, AT+ for value. As you can see, this range is heavily imbalanced, cause we hit an A a lot, broadways some, anything else very rarely. We'd definitely want to add some hands in there, that will make our range weaker on A hi boards, and stronger on most other boards. Now you could start to figure out, what hands should we add, but it would be too many, we'd cap way too often if we want to keep our range balanced. Therefore we'd probably need a strategy where we cap premiums just a certain percentage of the time randomly (that a human mind cannot execute).

The second problem is that your calling range gets weak, and very very capped on most boards, meaning you cannot turn enough hands to value and bluffraises, and will need to call down with shitty hands (at least shittier than if you don't cap). Also you'll less often hit the most frequent A hi boards, that we have to look out for.

So in short summary: capping preflop a balanced range HAS more value, than calling, however working it out perfectly is nearly impossible, and requires you to have an RNG nearby every time you play. Also, it makes your future streets really hard to play, cause your hands a re weighted in your range, meaning the frequencies =/= combos, making the calculations close to impossible. And it won't be as profitable, cause you loose a lot of the original intention of capping (getting value with the top of our range). Not to mention that people till these days play awful against pure strategies, but that's obviously doesn't relate closely to our point.

Just as an example:

Spoiler

I never 3bet the BB HUHU, cause I find that finding a balanced 3betting/calling range there is as pointless as finding a capping range. I played a friendly HUHU match against dats, who had a quite okayish, but not really balanced 3betting range. This hand is a great example, why you shouldn't be doing that. (My plan was to raise any turn except an 8 or a 3.)

Pre Flop: (pot: 60) Hero has 3♦ 8♦

Hero raises to 80, BB calls 40

Flop: (160, 2 players) K♠ Q♦ A♠
BB checks, Hero bets 40, BB raises to 80, Hero calls 40

Turn: (320, 2 players) 8♥
BB bets 80, Hero calls 80

River: (480, 2 players) A♣
BB checks, Hero checks

BB shows 4♦ T♠ (One Pair, Aces) (Pre 61%, Flop 74%, Turn 16%)
Hero shows 3♦ 8♦ (Two Pair, Aces and Eights) (Pre 39%, Flop 26%, Turn 84%)
Hero wins 480


Reply
Quote
Boomer2k10
Joined: 22.09.2010

Originally posted by sim5sim5
I would like to see boomer vid but i guess its only for gold members :(

Sorry :(

Jist of it was pretty much what maddy said though

While finding a 100% balanced range for doing something like, for example, 3-betting out of the BB vs a Button open is certainly possible and may even be better than flatting everything (i.e. the "pure" strategy) in a vacuum, it is almost impossible to do at game speed and requires us to either

1) Add a ton of hands with no equity to our 3-betting range (essentially 3-bet bluffs in a game where you can't mathematically fold to a 3-bet preflop if you've already put 2 in)
2) Randomize your range to the extent you need a mobile phone with an RNG on it on standby because you're 3-betting a certain hand precisely 64% of the time or something

This also leads to the problem that unless we do something like weight our 3-betting range horrifically towards suited hands we will completely miss certain boards with the vast majority of our calling range thus leaving us open to being played back at on the flop

(i.e. if you have an unbalanced 3-betting range god help you on a AK5 board when you just call pre because the button's range is stronger than yours (he has all Aces, you don't) but you're totally open to his continuation bet becaseu your range is so weak that you can't call enough hands on this board to make his C-bet anything like neutral EV)

Now, if something like Polaris or Hyper-Boolean was playing (Slumbot too more recently) would it 3-bet out of the BB as part of it's GTO-style play? Probably yes, Polaris even did wierd crap like open-limping the button HUHU but Polaris was capable of addressing 10^12 different board states at once and could therefore playing optimally. No human being is capable of making those calculations and thus we are limited mainly to "bucket" style strategies (which even Polaris uses at extremes)


Reply
Quote
Boomer2k10
Joined: 22.09.2010

Originally posted by YohanN7

Originally posted by Avataren
owned by madorjan

I think you may just have broken your own world record in arse licking.

/Johan = :f_confused:

Less of this please

At the end of the day the way we (madorjan and I) approach poker is different from the way that has been taught down the years but it is by no means an exclusive strategy.

What we do doesn't mean that we throw all exploitation and other strategies out of the window, quite the opposite. (In fact if you look at madorjan's hand he posted I couldn't find a more exploitative play if I tried)

It's just that if you approach the game from a Balance viewpoint rather than what I tend to call a "Pre-Emptive Exploitation" viewpoint (i.e. "Average Player does this so I'm going to assume this guy does too") you'll actually get a better of idea of how and why exploitation play works.

I'm happy to respond to any question people have but let's keep the flaming and trolling down :f_love:


Reply
Quote
Avataren
Joined: 28.04.2010

thanks boomer. :=)

now i can just sit here and laugh what a great convo this turned out to be <3


Reply
Quote