NL100 - Tripple barrel bluff ones again

Best judge ever! Thanks :f_love:. Can't wait for your vids

Thanks for your comments.

I actually think I'm a much better coach than video maker. Its hard to know what is and isn't known when talking in a video. I find direct questions much easier to answer.

I hope the videos live up to your expectations.(Two this month in bootcamp I think) I am generally inexperienced with video making, so the first ones will in theory be the worst. I will improve with time.

Anyway as promised I finally have time to make that post. First of all Desultory makes very good points with his post except I don't agree with few parts.

First of all, I don't agree that regs will x/c flop and x/f turn TT-QQ vs someone 3betting as much as farma.

The reason I was trying to get farma to do this exercise, the whole figure out what's a good mathematical approach to this spot is in order to understand how we should be approaching this spot from a mathematical stand point, ldo obv captain obvious. Anyway going on, if we don't have a good idea of what a balanced plan is, how can we know how much we can deviate from it, ie "exploit someone". So if we don't know how our 3bet %, bet-sizing, etc etc will influence our opponent's decision theoretically, then we will likely be making mistakes.

I'm all for exploiting players, don't get me wrong, but let's look at your 3bet range for example, not going to debate whether I agree with it or not, but I'm assuming JJ+ AK+ is your 3bet/5bet range is, that's 40 combos, and you have 106 or 108 combos total in your screenshot. It's weighed way more towards bluffs, making your bluff frequency way too high, eventually everyone and their mother will notice this and at higher stakes regs will punish you for this.

Also I will be the first to admit, my understanding of game theory is very terrible and only recently I started learning more about theory and math from other regs and videos and I think it's actually improving my game quite a bit because of what I said. So something I learned recently is that if we have 38 combos on the river like we said, 28 value and 10 bluffs in GTO, then all 38 combos are considered value on the turn, so then we just need to figure out how many combos of bluffs we can have. Also since a huge majority of regs will be playing a x/c strat ie bluff catching then it makes sense to barrel hands with most equity and give up with hands with very little equity. Obv if we think someone is defending too wide pre and x/f a lot post, we deviate from our GTO strat and bet more combos and cbet smaller, if someone folding too much pre, we can 3bet slightly more combos but then postflop we have to bluff slightly less, cus we are exploiting them preflop and so on and so forth.

Simply saying I feel like betting huge here and double barreling 100% cus my range has more AA/KK here cus he didn't 4bet is also quite bad imo and that's why I wanted you to work out some good starting points for this spot and from there deviate. Also sorry but I'm not going to do it for you

Like Desultory said and I will say definitely exploit people, but imo having a good mathematical understanding of spots is also important to help you make more solid guesses in game. And honestly I think that's what separates guys that are winning more/play higher, they are just less lazy, do their hw, work on stuff like this on more complex spots, and figure out good mathematical solutions and play very tough.

Anyway hopefully this helps guys.

You best alltime post serverm? ♦

I completely agree with you and everything you say makes sense! But I still struggle with deciding which hands to drop on the turn. Are there also some hands you would not CB on this flop?

It's also true that my 3B-range is too bluffheavy and I'm working on constructing my gameplan atm, esspecially after the first bootcamp coaching which was really inspiring.

Hi. Firstly I want to say that I very much like the discussion in this thread.

I especially like your approach serverm07 and I agree full-heartedly with your last post here. But I want to point out some mistakes you made in your previous posts.

Anyway turn is the same concept, lets say we chose 7 on flop and 17 on turn. It looks like he needs 34% equity on the turn to call, 17 to win 49.5 if I didn't mess it up.

You did mess up. On the turn the pot will be 32$ before betting. And if we bet 17$, then villain should have to call 17$ in a total pot of 66$ (32$ curent pot + 17$ bet + 17$ his call). Which makes his pot odds 25.7%. And that means we have 75% value / 25% bluff ratio which makes our bet indiferent to villain calling or folding.

The problem with this, is that when you bet bigger, statistically speaking it has to work more often and your range value:bluff ratio has to be different, more value than bluffs.

This is wrong. The bigger our bet is the more bluffs we can have in our range.

If we think in terms of only the bluff, hand vs range... then yes, the bigger we bet the more often the bluff has to work to show a profit.

But if we think in terms of range vs range... then the bigger we bet the more bluffs we can have in our value/bluff ratio. For example if we bet 1/2 pot, then we should have 75%:25% (value:bluff). If we bet pot, then we can 66%:33% (value:bluff). If we bet infinity we can have 50%:50% (value:bluff). [And going on a tangent here, this means that GTO we can never have more combos of bluffs than value, when we do is exploitable and we do to probably exploit a folding leak which our opponent has]

So something I learned recently is that if we have 38 combos on the river like we said, 28 value and 10 bluffs in GTO, then all 38 combos are considered value on the turn

This is interesting to me, can you elaborate a bit or point me in the right direction to find out on my own? Why do you consider all the 38 combos as value? Shouldn't it be X combos nuts, Y combos good hands that we can bet for value on the current street, and X+Y/3 bluffs, and on the river we check behind the Y combos and only bet the X combos of nuts, and X/3 combos of bluffs (and give up with the Y/3 combos of bluffs that we bet on the turn)?

I'm going to teach you how to calculate how to achieve SPR on the river. Basically very easy, 33% of your stack has to go in before the river, preflop to turn. So if you 3bet to $9 here, you have to put in another 24 between flop and turn, you can do 7+17, 8+16 or w/e combo u wanna do really. Obv we can also bet smaller if we think he will react to it poorly and overbet the river, that's just how you figure it out.

Thanks for sharing. I have a SPR problem in 3bet pots, hopefully with what you wrote here I am able to work out a bet sizing strategy for this. I never thought about it this way.

Originally posted by Gabinr1
Hi. Firstly I want to say that I very much like the discussion in this thread.

I especially like your approach serverm07 and I agree full-heartedly with your last post here. But I want to point out some mistakes you made in your previous posts.

Thank you appreciate it

Anyway turn is the same concept, lets say we chose 7 on flop and 17 on turn. It looks like he needs 34% equity on the turn to call, 17 to win 49.5 if I didn't mess it up.

You did mess up. On the turn the pot will be 32$ before betting. And if we bet 17$, then villain should have to call 17$ in a total pot of 66$ (32$ curent pot + 17$ bet + 17$ his call). Which makes his pot odds 25.7%. And that means we have 75% value / 25% bluff ratio which makes our bet indiferent to villain calling or folding.

Yea you are right I did mess up my calculation. obv the formula is risk/(whats in the pot) and I left out the $17 it looks like.

The problem with this, is that when you bet bigger, statistically speaking it has to work more often and your range value:bluff ratio has to be different, more value than bluffs.

This is wrong. The bigger our bet is the more bluffs we can have in our range.

If we think in terms of only the bluff, hand vs range... then yes, the bigger we bet the more often the bluff has to work to show a profit.

But if we think in terms of range vs range... then the bigger we bet the more bluffs we can have in our value/bluff ratio. For example if we bet 1/2 pot, then we should have 75%:25% (value:bluff). If we bet pot, then we can 66%:33% (value:bluff). If we bet infinity we can have 50%:50% (value:bluff). [And going on a tangent here, this means that GTO we can never have more combos of bluffs than value, when we do is exploitable and we do to probably exploit a folding leak which our opponent has]

Oh here I made a big boo-boo in my wording. When I said when you bet bigger, it has to work more often...What I meant is exactly what you said, when we bet bigger our bluff has to work more often to be profitable and you are absolutely right about value:bluff ratio with the examples and stuff. But I want to point out something, when we do bet larger, now the combos of value hands that are +EV to make that bet size are going to be reduced, so in this example betting AK for infinity would be clearly -EV because his bluff catchers would be clearly stronger. So when we choose a bet sizing, we have to think about range vs range and make such a bet that our weakest hand in our value range is in-different to getting raised. Thats GTO wise, obviously I do agree we should be thinking about exploitation as much as possible.

So something I learned recently is that if we have 38 combos on the river like we said, 28 value and 10 bluffs in GTO, then all 38 combos are considered value on the turn

This is interesting to me, can you elaborate a bit or point me in the right direction to find out on my own? Why do you consider all the 38 combos as value? Shouldn't it be X combos nuts, Y combos good hands that we can bet for value on the current street, and X+Y/3 bluffs, and on the river we check behind the Y combos and only bet the X combos of nuts, and X/3 combos of bluffs (and give up with the Y/3 combos of bluffs that we bet on the turn)?

GTO focuses on B/E as you know, so if we take this example of 38 combos on the river. This means that if our opponent had a GTO river calling range we would make $0 with those 38 combos. So that means that on the turn we can considering those combos as "value" because if our opponent calls the turn we are jamming river and are always making $0. So that's why people figure out ranges backwards working from the river.

But also important thing I want to point out is that we should also keep in mind protecting our checking ranges, so here on this board for example if I thought I needed to protect my checking range by checking by K9 then I wouldn't have it in my range after I bet-bet, so I can't count that as part of my value combos if I was to chose a check back strategy on the flop.

I'm going to teach you how to calculate how to achieve SPR on the river. Basically very easy, 33% of your stack has to go in before the river, preflop to turn. So if you 3bet to $9 here, you have to put in another 24 between flop and turn, you can do 7+17, 8+16 or w/e combo u wanna do really. Obv we can also bet smaller if we think he will react to it poorly and overbet the river, that's just how you figure it out.

Thanks for sharing. I have a SPR problem in 3bet pots, hopefully with what you wrote here I am able to work out a bet sizing strategy for this. I never thought about it this way.

Yea it helped me a lot after I learned this. The more I think about getting 33% of the pot in by turn the easier are bet sizes for me. Anyway all of my answers are in bold and thanks for pointing out my mistakes.

Thanks for your thoughts.

GTO focuses on B/E as you know, so if we take this example of 38 combos on the river. This means that if our opponent had a GTO river calling range we would make $0 with those 38 combos.

I disagree with this. GTO just ensures us fixed winnings indifferent to villains actions. It does not equal "fold" which has 0 EV.

I like everything else you said. In practice things are not so simple because there are more factors that we have to account for.

Ok, I think you are likely misunderstanding me so I will try to clear it up.

So in your example we have 20 combos on the river.

And our GTO strat is to bet 10 for value and 5 as a bluff. That means our value to bluff is 2:1

If villain was playing GTO he would never call 100% or fold 100%, If both players are playing GTO they both break/even assuming there is no rake.

So in your example if 15 combos on the river are considered GTO that means they are never losing money on the river. So these 15 combos would be considered value on the turn also and not 20 that we bet the turn with because we are giving up with 5 combos.

Hope that makes sense.