Fast games are hard to beat but your crushing the 6 max games 
Notifications
Clear all
Originally posted by RedsYNWA
Fast games are hard to beat but your crushing the 6 max games
It's still a very small sample size, though. Despite all the errors and punts I still do, I feel quite confident overall. Let's see what the next weeks bring.
Thanks for your support!
Hi,
I recorded a 30 min NL10 Zoom video last night.
Here is a quick assessment (thanks to LahtiPelican who reviewed the session already):
- I play 3bet/fold strategy, but there are some spots where I could have flatted preflop, especially in spots with Recs in the blinds.
- I wish I could have been more aggressive postflop, but I think there weren't many really good spots.
- There were also not many spots for thin value bets.
- 4bet sizing too large (16:38).
I couldn't see much to find fault with i thought it was well played overall but there were some spots you could play differently not that you played them badly.
7.20
KQs
we open utg and get 3bet and call pre flop 65Tr we check to the 3bettor (all ok).
we have some back door draws so we can float but the 3bettor checks.We turn a flush draw and i think we can now take the initiative and bet the turn.
15.12
JJ
bb 3bets us and we call in mp flop 76Ar i kind of feel were obliged to at least peel one off
with second pair even vs a slightly larger sizing.
16.38
AA
I dont see an issue with the 4bet sizing vs a 9x 3bet it's on the larger side but anything in the region of 22-25bb is fine imo.
27.53
AQo
you open cut off for 2.5bb villain 3bets to 6bb from the big blind and you 4bet, were getting such a good price to see the flop id likely just flat here.
Originally posted by RedsYNWA
I couldn't see much to find fault with i thought it was well played overall but there were some spots you could play differently not that you played them badly.7.20
KQs
we open utg and get 3bet and call pre flop 65Tr we check to the 3bettor (all ok).
we have some back door draws so we can float but the 3bettor checks.We turn a flush draw and i think we can now take the initiative and bet the turn.15.12
JJ
bb 3bets us and we call in mp flop 76Ar i kind of feel were obliged to at least peel one off
with second pair even vs a slightly larger sizing.16.38
AA
I dont see an issue with the 4bet sizing vs a 9x 3bet it's on the larger side but anything in the region of 22-25bb is fine imo.27.53
AQo
you open cut off for 2.5bb villain 3bets to 6bb from the big blind and you 4bet, were getting such a good price to see the flop id likely just flat here.
Thanks for the review. I had also looked at these spots and I totally agree. AQo probably not good to raise/fold as a 4bet semi-bluff vs a fishy preflop min-raise.
My 4bet size with the AA hand was ~2.8x, I think. Not a huge mistake, but a bit large, especially if I want to establish a wider 4bet range in general.
Very stable and correct play! Well done! I hope I do not run to you at the tables ♦
I share my honest and humble opinion if you please.
7:20 KQs
You may consider even 4bet this hand at some frequency. Can be very profitable versus majority of opponents on this limit. Postflop is fine I guess. What was your plan at the turn? I like the Idea of check/raise, but bet is also fine.
27:50 AQo
In general you can use this hand in this spot as 4b bluff but against this fishy 3bet I prefer call and play IP versus the fish. Will be more profitable against him.
Originally posted by ddoichev
Very stable and correct play! Well done! I hope I do not run to you at the tables ♦
I share my honest and humble opinion if you please.7:20 KQs
You may consider even 4bet this hand at some frequency. Can be very profitable versus majority of opponents on this limit. Postflop is fine I guess. What was your plan at the turn? I like the Idea of check/raise, but bet is also fine.27:50 AQo
In general you can use this hand in this spot as 4b bluff but against this fishy 3bet I prefer call and play IP versus the fish. Will be more profitable against him.
Thanks for your review. I agree with you. Building a x/r range OTT in 3bet pots is tough. Haven't really worked on that. But this combo seems suitable, yes.
I wish you good luck for your challenge, mate!
Originally posted by Talisker74
It would be nice to hear your comments so we know why you played as you playedβ¦
Yes, that would be cool. But I guess, I do not feel confident to do live commentary. Maybe some day?
I recorded another video. I really like the focus I have when I record myself. Also, the feedback is awesome. This might become a habit. π
Here it is and...
...You won't believe this hand at 19:00 min
I think there are some more interesting spots in this video, compared to the last one.
There is a cut somewhere in the first half, because I tried to open a new table to not play so deep. But that didn't work how I wanted it, so I had to stop the video and start a new one. Afterwards I concatenated them.
Start to enjoy your recordings and may start doing my own. I definitely agree with you that during the recording man is more focused and does not spew much. Also receiving another opinion is also very useful. Pleasure for me to watch it.
What kind of software do you use for recording your sessions?
Originally posted by ddoichev
Start to enjoy your recordings and may start doing my own. I definitely agree with you that during the recording man is more focused and does not spew much. Also receiving another opinion is also very useful. Pleasure for me to watch it.What kind of software do you use for recording your sessions?
Glad you find value in it. I use OBS. It's free and works well so far. But, what I do is pretty basic, e.g. editing is not necessary ATM.
Very well played imo!
13:30 JJ BTNvsUTG
I use high frequency flat call on the BTN. I do not dislike 3betting but JJ is too good to fold to 4b. Be aware that your opponent does not have only QQ+, AK here but hands like AQo, ATs, AJs, A5s, A4s KTs+ played as bluff. Play IP postflop will be +EV for sure.
MP2 49.50% 49.26% 0.24% JJ
MP3 50.50% 50.26% 0.24% QQ+, AKs, AJs-ATs, A5s-A4s, KTs+, AQo+
21:30 AKo UTG
You can consider cbet on this dry flop. It is really hard for me to put the opponent on a range cause I do not have calling range MPvsUTG but probably will include small to middle pocket pairs + suited broadways depends on the opponent's stats can include and suited connectors. I believe if you do not cbet better to call one street but after pot size bet the safe option is to fold.
26:40 AQo
I prefer bigger bets on this wet drawy board - 2/3 Flop and Turn. The way you played it on the River is this value bet or bluff? What are the worse hands which will call or better to fold?
Keep up the good work. You will be fearful player on the limit 
:nh:
Originally posted by ddoichev
26:40 AQo
I prefer bigger bets on this wet drawy board - 2/3 Flop and Turn. The way you played it on the River is this value bet or bluff? What are the worse hands which will call or better to fold?Keep up the good work. You will be fearful player on the limit
Thanks again for the review!
Regarding the AQo hand. The board is not that drawy IMO. Quite disconnected and only a FD possible, which is an insignificant part of Villain's range. So I am ok with having Villain continue with a wider range here.
As played, the call OTT is marginal, I think. Not sure what your question about the river is? I didn't bet, but checked it back. I think betting IP on the river is very bad, because then Villain will call only with better hands, raise with better hands or bluffs which we cannot call and fold anything that we beat. We want to see SD.
Regarding JJ BU vs UTG, I play 3bet/fold also because the rake in Germany is higher than in other countries. But I agree that this could be a spot to have a small calling range including JJ. ππ»
I meant totally different hand when I made that comment sorry about that. This one was played well:f_drink:
Originally posted by ddoichev
I meant totally different hand when I made that comment sorry about that. This one was played well:f_drink:
I think you mean this hand.
Yeah, betting bigger on flop and turn makes sense. If I bet >20bb OTF I could even jam turn, I guess.
River is very tough. I don't have many 9x in my range. But BTN has T9s, 98s, A9s, J9s + many 2pairs and sets.
There was only 52bb effectively left. I think if I check and Villain jams, I have to call anyway with 26% pot odds. Or would you x/f here and hope Villain checks back?
Let's assume we don't fold. There are the following possibilities:
1) x/c: Villain bluffs, and we win
2) x/c Villain value bets, and we lose
3) b/c Villain has a better hand, and we lose
4) b/c Villain has a worse hand, and we win
5) b/f: we win
4) is very unlikely, I don't think he calls with KQ. Now the question is how likely is it that Villain bluffs if I check. I would say not very.
This makes all likely scenarios where we bet or call pretty bad, except when we bet and Villain folds, but in this case Villain would check behind if we check, and we would also win.
So consequently, I should x/f. And, in theory, probably bluff catch with a certain frequency.
I think I overvalued my hand, and I was lucky that I did win it.
PokerStars - $0.10 NL FAST (6 max) - Holdem - 6 players
Hand converted by PokerTracker 4
BTN: 96 BB
SB: 97.2 BB
Hero (BB): 185.3 BB
UTG: 100.4 BB
MP: 152.8 BB
CO: 101 BB
SB posts SB 0.5 BB, Hero posts BB 1 BB
Pre Flop: (pot: 1.5 BB) Hero has Q♥ A♦
UTG raises to 2.2 BB, fold, fold, BTN calls 2.2 BB, fold, Hero raises to 14 BB, fold, BTN calls 11.8 BB
Flop: (30.7 BB, 2 players) Q♣ 8♦ J♣
Hero bets 10 BB, BTN calls 10 BB
Turn: (50.7 BB, 2 players) 7♥
Hero bets 20 BB, BTN calls 20 BB
River: (90.7 BB, 2 players) T♥
Hero bets 141.3 BB and is all-in, fold,
Originally posted by monteCarlol
Originally posted by ddoichev
I meant totally different hand when I made that comment sorry about that. This one was played well:f_drink:I think you mean this hand.
Yeah, betting bigger on flop and turn makes sense. If I bet >20bb OTF I could even jam turn, I guess.
River is very tough. I don't have many 9x in my range. But BTN has T9s, 98s, A9s, J9s + many 2pairs and sets.
There was only 52bb effectively left. I think if I check and Villain jams, I have to call anyway with 26% pot odds. Or would you x/f here and hope Villain checks back?Let's assume we don't fold. There are the following possibilities:
1) x/c: Villain bluffs, and we win
2) x/c Villain value bets, and we lose
3) b/c Villain has a better hand, and we lose
4) b/c Villain has a worse hand, and we win
5) b/f: we win4) is very unlikely, I don't think he calls with KQ. Now the question is how likely is it that Villain bluffs if I check. I would say not very.
This makes all likely scenarios where we bet or call pretty bad, except when we bet and Villain folds, but in this case Villain would check behind if we check, and we would also win.So consequently, I should x/f. And, in theory, probably bluff catch with a certain frequency.
I think I overvalued my hand, and I was lucky that I did win it.
PokerStars - $0.10 NL FAST (6 max) - Holdem - 6 players
Hand converted by PokerTracker 4BTN: 96 BB
SB: 97.2 BB
Hero (BB): 185.3 BB
UTG: 100.4 BB
MP: 152.8 BB
CO: 101 BBSB posts SB 0.5 BB, Hero posts BB 1 BB
Pre Flop: (pot: 1.5 BB) Hero has Q♥ A♦
UTG raises to 2.2 BB, fold, fold, BTN calls 2.2 BB, fold, Hero raises to 14 BB, fold, BTN calls 11.8 BB
Flop: (30.7 BB, 2 players) Q♣ 8♦ J♣
Hero bets 10 BB, BTN calls 10 BBTurn: (50.7 BB, 2 players) 7♥
Hero bets 20 BB, BTN calls 20 BBRiver: (90.7 BB, 2 players) T♥
Hero bets 141.3 BB and is all-in, fold,
I checked this hand in GTO Wizard. It plays preflop, flop, and turn pretty much the same. Sizing wise it prefers to bet 12bb OTF slightly over 10bb.
On the river it is a 100% pure check/call with AdQh (the AQo combos that block the ♣ flush draws and ♦ BD FD's are calling less frequently).
But I think population probably underbluffs this spot. So x/f might be an exploitative option? I am really not sure.
Yes, this was the hand I was thinking about back then.
Actually I don't see many bluffs on their spot. I also check it in GTO wizard and aware that it advises check/call in this situation, but did you notice what bluff range they give to villain? It is mainly some frequencies on 5♣:6♣: , 7♣:6♣: , 5♣:4♣: I don't think we will see such hands from villain on the River on this limit. Therefore I prefer check/fold option.
Don't get me wrong I really enjoy your playstyle but advising with GTO on NL10 is not very useful, as the solver assuming that the opponents are playing perfectly and balanced and not a single player ever plays it that on this limit.
My approach is always put villain on a range and decide what Equity I would have against it. if I am not sure about my opponent's range will be indifferent and take EV=0 decision.
Originally posted by ddoichev
Don't get me wrong I really enjoy your playstyle but advising with GTO on NL10 is not very useful, as the solver assuming that the opponents are playing perfectly and balanced and not a single player ever plays it that on this limit.
I hear you, and I mostly agree. However, I would respectfully disagree with the statement that it is not useful to learn and study with GTO solutions on the micros at all. (You didn't actually put it that way.)
The main reason is that it gives you a baseline to deviate from. And this is much better than playing an exploitative style but not knowing what the equilibrium is. It makes you a better poker player, in my opinion, if you are able to reason about the optimal play (vs an optimal opponent) and how you deviate from it based on what you know about your opponent. This is also what I did in my review of the AQo hand.
It's worth mentioning that if you hypothetical play perfect GTO (I acknowledge that this is not possible), you are guaranteed to have a positive win rate (unless your opponents play optimal as well). The maximally exploitative strategy (MES) vs an optimal strategy is the optimal strategy. So if your opponents do not play optimal, your EV increases. This is called a passive exploit. Therefore, GTO on the micros is not -EV. It's just not max EV. I claim that the most EV losses that we make do not come from playing GTO, they come from mistakes that are mistakes in both GTO and MES. A good example of this is the AQo hand again, where I jammed on the river which is neither solver approved nor is it a good exploitative play.
Finally, I want to stress, I do not see a contradiction here, and I am not arguing about whether GTO or exploitative is better. It's the same. And therefore, a dispute actually doesn't make any sense to me. E.g. I admire and am very curious about the approach of Nick Howard from Poker Detox. They base their strategy on mass data analysis. In my opinion, this is the ideal (and maybe the only) way of developing a sound MES. Unfortunately, I do not have any access to their resources. When we make exploits based on assumptions, the question always is, what is the basis of these assumptions, and do we have the data that backs up those assumptions with certainty? There are other people that say, we do not have any reliable information on our opponents most of the time, and therefor the MES is GTO. And here we are in the camp of Doug Polk or Zenith Poker, e.g.
I have a pretty strong opinion about this, but no worries, I hold it lightly. It's a valuable discussion, and I would be interested how you and others think about this?