Originally posted by 0815pokerpr0
Hi w34z3l,is there a seperate thread for your Poker in practice series?
No, I am taking questions here. Too confusing for me to have a whole bunch of different threads =D
Notifications
Clear all
Hey guys,
So firstly. let me apologize for the substandard streaming quality over the last couple of sessions. It was mostly matters beyond my control, but I am going to make every effort to get everything up and running perfectly for the session this Thursday.
The topic of the session will be DB Analysis
I would like a willing volunteer to provide a DB for me to analyse on stream. 50k hands minimum ideally.
I'll also be happy to answer any questions you have about running DB analysis with tracking software.
Feel free to post questions here in the thread in advance. I will award points as usual.
Just gonna bump this. Would like a volunteer to give me a DB. If no-one volunteers by today I will just take one from my students. Should be a good opportunity to get some free professional DB analysis.
Hey guys,
Session is today at 6.30pm UK time. A lot of us probably want to watch the football so we are starting ON TIME.
See you there,
w34z3l
Hello, quick question 
I'm currently using your ranges for microstakes (the antirake strategy) ant it says that as BTN vs CO we 3bet AQs for value.
Does this mean that after we 3bet for value, we are stacking off if CO 4bets in this particular spot?
I'm not mr.Weasel, but can tell you that you definitely should NOT stack off as a default in this situation. 3bet for value means we're ahead of vilian's calling range. Standart play vs 4bet here would be to call, unless you have specific reads on opponent, or he uses ridiculous sizing.
Strictly speaking, pure division on value and bluffs can be done only in river spots; the earlier the street, the less these terms are applicable, since there are more and more factors that influence EV. We may speak about value/bluffs preflop merely as a simplification, to make it easier to understand for players who just started to learn holdem.
Originally posted by Zolotarsp
I'm not mr.Weasel, but can tell you that you definitely should NOT stack off as a default in this situation. 3bet for value means we're ahead of vilian's calling range. Standart play vs 4bet here would be to call, unless you have specific reads on opponent, or he uses ridiculous sizing.Strictly speaking, pure division on value and bluffs can be done only in river spots; the earlier the street, the less these terms are applicable, since there are more and more factors that influence EV. We may speak about value/bluffs preflop merely as a simplification, to make it easier to understand for players who just started to learn holdem.
Is it really bad if I just shove in those positions? Or if I am BB vs SB with AQ? When we shove, we can take money instantly when he folds. And AQ does not have good playability after flop I think, unless it is suited. If we do not hit, he cbets, what we do when we have missed?
If he does not fold to our shove, we still have equity. Vs QQ+,AKs,AKo its 24%
Also what if we are SB vs BTN, or BB vs BTN? Then we are OOP so its even worse postflop if we call.
Shoving AQs in these positions is likely +EV, it's just I think calling is significantly more profitable.
If he does not fold to our shove, we still have equity. Vs QQ+,AKs,AKo its 24%
But against 4betting range with at least some bluffs we're gonna have 42-47% equity. So why do you want to make him fold his bluffs so bad you're willing to risk entire stack? Doesn't make very much sense to me to bluff jam one of our best hands, when call is clearly profitable.
Originally posted by Zolotarsp
Shoving AQs in these positions is likely +EV, it's just I think calling is significantly more profitable.If he does not fold to our shove, we still have equity. Vs QQ+,AKs,AKo its 24%
But against 4betting range with at least some bluffs we're gonna have 42-47% equity. So why do you want to make him fold his bluffs so bad you're willing to risk entire stack?
I have used to jam. Ok then what hands are good for jamming as semibluffs? AK is enough? Or maybe with AK I should also call 4bet, for the same reasons as AQ?
I am talking about late posittions BB-CO.
And also if we call 4bet, we have to be prepared to defend against bluff cbets I guess. I really have no experience. But I could try.
SPeedFANat1c, I'm not insisting, it's your money I just don't understand logic behind your position. Strategy without calling 4bets at all is obviously flawed, suboptimal and easily exploitable to say the least; best hands for calling 4bets are high suited Ax; but you want to jam them all the time 
I don't get it.
BTW, BUvsCO, BBvsSB are very different scenarios. BUvsSB and BUvsBB also not similar at all.
Originally posted by Zolotarsp
SPeedFANat1c, I'm not insisting, it's your moneyBTW, BUvsCO, BBvsSB are very different scenarios. BUvsSB and BUvsBB also not similar at all.
ok, maybe you have more detailed info how to play in those spots vs 4bets? What are hight suited Ax? Is ATs high for example?
Actually I need then ranges by position.
Created a new thread so that others could find more easily:
https://forums.pokerstrategy.com/forum/thread.php?postid=2449275#post2449275
What are hight suited Ax? Is ATs high for example?
It's poker, one definite solution doesn't exist. All depends on situation and opponent. Trying to oversimplify things automatically means you're loosing EV.
At micros (and at low stakes as well actually) most people simply have no clue what they're doing whatsoever. For instance, some of them will by default 4bet OOP 2x-2.2x with strongly polarized range containing 50-60% bluffs. Which is a ridiculously bad strategy in vacuum. Against those we should be calling almost all our hands, including most Axs - simply because we get awesome direct odds, we have a ton of equity, and have position. Other guys will 4bet 2.2x with bluffs, and 3.5x with KK+. Zoom25nl and below is filled with those players. And some of them are winning, because field doesn't adjust at all, they keep playing some random ranges they found on forums, and don't care about sizings or situation or reads on opponent. That's what we should avoid doing - don't blindly copy someone else's strategy without understanding why it is how it is.
Originally posted by Zolotarsp
What are hight suited Ax? Is ATs high for example?
It's poker, one definite solution doesn't exist. All depends on situation and opponent. Trying to oversimplify things automatically means you're loosing EV.
At micros (and at low stakes as well actually) most people simply have no clue what they're doing whatsoever. For instance, some of them will by default 4bet OOP 2x-2.2x with strongly polarized range containing 50-60% bluffs. Which is a ridiculously bad strategy in vacuum. Against those we should be calling almost all our hands, including most Axs - simply because we get awesome direct odds, we have a ton of equity, and have position. Other guys will 4bet 2.2x with bluffs, and 3.5x with KK+. Zoom25nl and below is filled with those players. And some of them are winning, because field doesn't adjust at all, they keep playing some random ranges they found on forums, and don't care about sizings or situation or reads on opponent. That's what we should avoid doing - don't blindly copy someone else's strategy without understanding why it is how it is.
I completely understand that one definite solution does not exist in poker. I need to understand how to adjust, which I do not know now, and I am shoving AQ preflop vs 4bet.
Now about those some players who have polarized range containing 50-60 % bluffs. In zoom we often do not know enough info for this. Can we assume those stats for unknown regular? Or how do we adjust to unknown regular?
Hi w34z3l,
i just saw an older video of you playing a Live Session of NL25 Zoom. One thing that really got me confused was the bet sizing in some spots. It seemed to me, like you tend to bet drawheavy boards on the flop pretty small like half pot and on a turn blank you put out a 66%, which i actually don't understand. I personally do the exact opposite and bet the flop bigger around 66% and the turn smaller.
I'll give you an example hand https://de.pokerstrategy.com/video/39665/ (1:11:55 left table):
You and your opponent are Fullstacked 100BB.
Hero is CO with: Q:d Q:c
Hero (CO) raises to $0.70, SB Calls, BB folds
Pot: $1.58
Flop: Q:h 5:h 3:h
SB checks, Hero bets $0.80, SB calls
Pot: $3.10
Turn: T:d
SB checks, Hero bets $2, SB calls
I am really wondering what the reason for that is, because from an equity perspective, any heart draw has much more equity on the flop then on the turn against our hand, so it seems logical to me to bet bigger on the flop (with our hand and generally).
Do you think our opponents range is more sensitive to our bet size on the flop, than on the turn and therefore you bet small on the flop to get value from weak heart draws. On the turn you assume that only strong Showdownhands and strong heartdraws will call, regardsless of the size?
I'm really wondering.
Originally posted by dye
Hi w34z3l,i just saw an older video of you playing a Live Session of NL25 Zoom. One thing that really got me confused was the bet sizing in some spots. It seemed to me, like you tend to bet drawheavy boards on the flop pretty small like half pot and on a turn blank you put out a 66%, which i actually don't understand. I personally do the exact opposite and bet the flop bigger around 66% and the turn smaller.
I'll give you an example hand https://de.pokerstrategy.com/video/39665/ (1:11:55 left table):
You and your opponent are Fullstacked 100BB.
Hero is CO with: Q:d Q:c
Hero (CO) raises to $0.70, SB Calls, BB folds
Pot: $1.58
Flop: Q:h 5:h 3:hSB checks, Hero bets $0.80, SB calls
Pot: $3.10
Turn: T:dSB checks, Hero bets $2, SB calls
I am really wondering what the reason for that is, because from an equity perspective, any heart draw has much more equity on the flop then on the turn against our hand, so it seems logical to me to bet bigger on the flop (with our hand and generally).
Do you think our opponents range is more sensitive to our bet size on the flop, than on the turn and therefore you bet small on the flop to get value from weak heart draws. On the turn you assume that only strong Showdownhands and strong heartdraws will call, regardsless of the size?
I'm really wondering.
I also now bet flop small when there are draws and turn bet big. Somewhere I heard, that the reason to bet small on flop is that even if we bet big, oponent still has implied odds to call, so we are not protecting our hand anyway but creating bigger pot. But we do not want big pot with medium hand.
But when I have big hand I bet big, because I want to create big pot. If he bets with top set small, then I am also not sure why.
I am also not sure with bluffs - I bet small with bluffs too. Bluffs become cheaper, so I need less fold equity and they do not know if its medium hand or bluff. But some players might exploit me with that, so theoretically I should also have big bluff sizings. I guess it is not a problem on my main limit NL5 zoom now, but if I move up, then there might start be a problem.
Originally posted by SPeedFANat1c
I completely understand that one definite solution does not exist in poker. I need to understand how to adjust, which I do not know now, and I am shoving AQ preflop vs 4bet.Now about those some players who have polarized range containing 50-60 % bluffs. In zoom we often do not know enough info for this. Can we assume those stats for unknown regular? Or how do we adjust to unknown regular?
Well, it's not that much about adjusting, and obviously you can't adjust to an unknown player. General tendencies of your field (for instance, 4bet ranges) you can look up in your database, noone can know it better than you. But if you never call 4bets, if you play push-fold strat, you're missing out on a lot of EV in those spots. You're making opponent fold his bluffs, which you have in awful shape with a hand as strong as AQs, when you can call and make him suffer postflop and force to pay you more - whether he's gonna keep bluffing occasionally, or you both hit, but you get him dominated. And more: against his value-part you shove and risk your whole stack every time; instead of calling preflop, seeing the board, and either flop good equity (much more than 24%), or miss and get out cheaply.
Yes, you strategy is probably easier to execute; but in poker simple almost always means less profitable. Choice is yours - simplicity or higher EV 
muchas gracias por todos los videos recomendados, la verdad nos ayudan muccho para nuestro crecimiento personal y profesional como jugadores de poker, sigan asi y de verdad m