wow amazing coaching and serie!
I love this man:roto2:
Spoiler
for the next coaching i vote "exploitive play vs various player types"♦
Notifications
Clear all
No Limit
47
Posts
17
Users
7
Reactions
12 K
Views
Great Topics PokHero!
Actually a Series about Semi-Bluff barreling and when to stop/go can be very interesting... Would think about it
Originally posted by TetraQuark
Originally posted by Foxhound2
will the video of lesson 4 be out soon?+1
will come out next Monday!
Originally posted by StAllin
It was a very great coaching serie!!
For the next serie i prefer a "how do you play vs some playertypes postflop"Thank u Stasia it was so a great time, I thing everybody has saw what much of work u got in!!
Greats, Martin
Originally posted by StAllin
It was a very great coaching serie!!
For the next serie i prefer a "how do you play vs some playertypes postflop"Thank u Stasia it was so a great time, I thing everybody has saw what much of work u got in!!
Greats, Martin
Thanks Stallin for being with us for the entire series, loved having you in the Chat! :}
playing VS various player types Post-Flop is sick exploitive poker, can be a good continuation after talking about exploitive defence pre-flop vs various player types...
Hi,
I just wanted to let you know that I watched your "Defence IP - Vacuum play", and I really enjoyed it, looking forward to the rest of the series! I think you do a great job as a coach, congrats!
Edit:
Wow I just watched the vacuum defense OOP. Do you really defend 25% of hands on the BB readless vs a bouton that opens 62%? I'm such a happy button if I get calls+3bets 25% of the time from BB. I checked my DB of 2014 and I have a 26.5% VPIP with the bottom 75% (meaning I defend 25+0.75*0.265=about 45%. My winrate with the filter "BT opens sizing smaller than 3x and I'm BB with bottom 75%" is -83bb/100. If I add VPIP=true I'm at -38bb/100. If anything I should defend more based on this numbers. I play NL100 so rake has somewhat an impact, meaning that at equal skill levels I should fold more than if I were to grind higher, sure you could say the villains at Zoom500 are better but (a) I would be better too if I were to grind Zoom500 and (b) one could assume I'm much better than the villains at my current stakes, but I doubt it would mean I would have to defend twice less vs a tough opponent in a game where rake matters less.
The sweet spot is defending so that the bottom of your defending range makes -100bb/100. I would be very surprised if you were at -100bb/100 with the 25th percentile of hands.
By the way the hand where you have AK call an open from a tight range CO that does 15$, SB calls, BB squeezes 70$, CO calls, you 4bet to 197.5 and only CO calls and it comes Q549. You say villain has QQ/AQ/JJ/TT in his range and would call only QQ/AQ. You have less than a PSB left, and you estimate having 50% of FE, so it's a massively +EV shove! You even have 5% equity when called and probably more than 0% FE on AQ, why did you opt for the check?
Originally posted by sato79
wow amazing coaching and serie!I love this man:roto2:
Spoiler
for the next coaching i vote "exploitive play vs various player types"♦
Hihi funny pic,
Prob should grow an Afro :}
Originally posted by Swish29
Hi,I just wanted to let you know that I watched your "Defence IP - Vacuum play", and I really enjoyed it, looking forward to the rest of the series! I think you do a great job as a coach, congrats!
Edit:
Wow I just watched the vacuum defense OOP. Do you really defend 25% of hands on the BB readless vs a bouton that opens 62%? I'm such a happy button if I get calls+3bets 25% of the time from BB. I checked my DB of 2014 and I have a 26.5% VPIP with the bottom 75% (meaning I defend 25+0.75*0.265=about 45%. My winrate with the filter "BT opens sizing smaller than 3x and I'm BB with bottom 75%" is -83bb/100. If I add VPIP=true I'm at -38bb/100. If anything I should defend more based on this numbers. I play NL100 so rake has somewhat an impact, meaning that at equal skill levels I should fold more than if I were to grind higher, sure you could say the villains at Zoom500 are better but (a) I would be better too if I were to grind Zoom500 and (b) one could assume I'm much better than the villains at my current stakes, but I doubt it would mean I would have to defend twice less vs a tough opponent in a game where rake matters less.
The sweet spot is defending so that the bottom of your defending range makes -100bb/100. I would be very surprised if you were at -100bb/100 with the 25th percentile of hands.
By the way the hand where you have AK call an open from a tight range CO that does 15$, SB calls, BB squeezes 70$, CO calls, you 4bet to 197.5 and only CO calls and it comes Q549. You say villain has QQ/AQ/JJ/TT in his range and would call only QQ/AQ. You have less than a PSB left, and you estimate having 50% of FE, so it's a massively +EV shove! You even have 5% equity when called and probably more than 0% FE on AQ, why did you opt for the check?
Regarding BB defence VS BU open:
The Vid discussed PF defence in Vacuum, meaning we don't have any Info on the Dealer..
I discussed the Vacuum Open-Raise ranges in Lesson #1 and said that IMO 62% rfi from the Dealer is not the average of the population, and is more a "reg" number...
IMO vacuum open from the D is more or less 35% of hands..
VS this range I think that defending wider than the open-raise range + OOP + lack of initiative + capped range
==
Very though spots for most of the players.
If I gather 20 hands and above on the Dealer, then I can adjust my strategy to a more profitable one,
But without any info on the opponent I rather try to minimize my losses through Folding :}
--------
Regarding AK hand,
In the vid I "missclicked" and said that the opponent fold TT/JJ while in reality the Villain prob calls them down because my line looks a bit FOS..
In retrospective I think best line for this specific flop, which is one of the worst for my hand/range here,
Is to just give-up (check-behind flop).
OBV we can go for bet flop+shove turn because villain is capped etc but it seems to me that the spot itself is Super profitable so I don't have to defend one of the worst flops.
Yeah I agree that 62% is more of a reg number. Say there is a dude 4 tabling Zoom 200 or 500, he comes from a country where it's very likely he's a pro, he opens BT, you're on the BB, how much and how do you defend? We're assuming it's a reg, thus that his opening range is 62% on average until we know more. Or let's just admit that we're in a spot where BT open, we somehow know it's a reg and we somehow know he opens 62%, SB folds, you're on the BB, what do you do?
I don't think your line looks FOS btw, not playing this high and much softer games though, I guess I'm even playing people that would fold AQ sometimes here 
Originally posted by Swish29
Yeah I agree that 62% is more of a reg number. Say there is a dude 4 tabling Zoom 200 or 500, he comes from a country where it's very likely he's a pro, he opens BT, you're on the BB, how much and how do you defend? We're assuming it's a reg, thus that his opening range is 62% on average until we know more. Or let's just admit that we're in a spot where BT open, we somehow know it's a reg and we somehow know he opens 62%, SB folds, you're on the BB, what do you do?I don't think your line looks FOS btw, not playing this high and much softer games though, I guess I'm even playing people that would fold AQ sometimes here
Regarding how do I defend my BB VS a 62% rfi from the BU,
You can check out lesson #4 (Exploitive Defence OOP)
Generally speaking if the BU folds to 3bet I would use a Standard Polarized 3bet range, e.g a lot of SC, 1-gapers, 2-gapers etc.
And if he doesn't fold to 3Bet I would use a Standard Linear 3bet range, e.g All broadwayz, 88+ etc.
hey stasia first of all you are a great coach I have already learned alot.
I have a question regarding the exploitive defence ip video, maybe I post this at false place but so be it :).
I created my 3b-range against "standard" player according to the ps advises, so i have for example bu vs mp 3b range of : AA (5combos), KK (3combos), ako (12 combos) (they are the value combos (I shove if 4b), and you have ajo,kjo, ats, j9s, t8s, 97s, (40 combos (bluff combos or fold to 4b combos). 20/40
So I don't understand you 2:1 value to thumb rule 
if the opponent folds 66 % for example. Why should we have so much valuecombos in our range if we 3b polarized.
That leads me to the second question regarding the gameplan against the nit. In contrast to the ps example where they 3b AA,KK,ako,aqo,kqo, 87s,76s,65s (maybe I modified it a little but this is the range more or less) from bb vs utg (which I think comes close to the nit range) I think ako blocks his 4b hands kk,aa good and so this is the explanation for that, you call this hand in the bu vs utg (vs a standard) ? and against a nit bu vs co ?. So you dominate his range and you can play better especially in position where you can extract the most.
you say that you 3b a linear range against the co including qq+, ako but not always you call it sometimes (in the example you just called (also because the aggressive bb)). In my theoretical understanding you just need bluff 3b hands if you have such a strong nut 3b range and a strong calling range.
So my question is do you just switch to a polarized range where you have for example a5-a2 as bluff3b-hands, if you see a high fold to 3b - number?
And a little remark in the end I think you counted twice the ako combination of villian as 9 combos I think there are just 7 left if you have ako on your own.
Hey Studdy,
Better off if you posted the questions in the related video, but here is good as well I guess :}
Regarding to Defence Ranges VS Opens, in Lesson no.1 (Vacuum Defence) I showed PS ranges and talked about how I would Adjust them in complete Vacuum (generally speaking Tightening them up..)
In Lesson no.2 I discussed what general adjustments I would do vs Specific player types...
So regarding the NIT, I wrote that without Info on how he Reacts to 3bet, I would use a very TIGHT, linear range.
OBV if the NIT folds a lot to 3bets (for example more than 67%) I would generally speaking only 3bet semi-bluffs and hands that want to go all-in VS the NIT's 4betting range (AA, KK as Coolers).
If the NIT doesn't fold to 3bet, I would use a semi-Tight linear 3bet range, and never bluff him etc.
Hope this answers your question.
Hey Itaba!
Sry my HUDS are MINE muahh hahahahahah
If you want, I can make a HUD building series though...:}
===========
OK so regarding next coaching series, we have:
Exploitive Lines VS Player Types = 3 Votes
2-Barreling for Value | Thin-Value | Semi-Bluff | Bluff = 1 Vote
Various Lines in 3Bet-Pots = 1 Vote
Hurry-Up and make your Voice heard,
Every Vote Counts!!
hihi.
Originally posted by Stasia4242
Hey Itaba!Sry my HUDS are MINE muahh hahahahahah
If you want, I can make a HUD building series though...:}
haha, it would be great a video of building an exploitive HUD!! 
I vote for various lines in 3bet pots too
Originally posted by itaba
Originally posted by Stasia4242
Hey Itaba!Sry my HUDS are MINE muahh hahahahahah
If you want, I can make a HUD building series though...:}
haha, it would be great a video of building an exploitive HUD!!
I vote for various lines in 3bet pots too
+1
Cheers!