Cold Calling In Position - The Magic Rectangle

  • NL BSS
  • NL BSS
  • $400
  • Shorthanded
(15 Votes) 10872


Free membership

Join now


Oblioo goes through a theory of his called the Magic Rectangle and relates it to how we can potentially expand our calling ranges preflop in position to exploit our opponents better


cold calling preflop. hud stats Theory Video

Comments (15)

newest first
  • Ninjai


    I like the idea of your exploits, however, calls like 56s MP/UTG and some others, too, are not only marginal, but probably even minus EV, as you not once consider their actual opening ranges. And this makes a pretty big difference in case your opponent is not using linear ranges preflop, which most midstakes regs are not.

    Still, you bring the game to your opponent, which is very nice to look at. I wonder if you could follow up with further exploit spots, of which most have gone bad and you decided to give up, mixing in some where e.g. the board made you continue bluffing although you weren't exactly sure whether it was good or bad.
  • oblioo


    #1: Thanks for your comment. I agree that there were a couple calls that were probably not good, and I also agree that I could have spoken more about opening ranges and board textures and how well they connected. Those things should always be considered but I guess I just wanted to emphasize the exploitative variables at play.

    I'm not sure what you mean about midstatkes regs not using linear ranges preflop? Pretty much everyone opens with a linear range, as they should...
  • Ninjai


    #2 Should obviously be w/o the "not". But I am glad you found the mistake and hinted at that.

    Looking forward to a further production.
  • pKay



    thx for making this video! :)
    I think this is a highly controversial and potentially dangerous topic.

    What I wondered most about is that you don't look at
    -their openraising % from each position
    -their fold to 3b
    -their 4b-range%

    since I perceive these stats as my most important factor to get a rough idea of what my in position strategy should look like and wether or not a hand is better for a 3b or can make the cut and be cold called etc.

    I mean against 10% UTG open its probably just terribad to flat K9s EVEN IF the rectangle indicates leaks.

    Or are you able to fold K72 to a cbet?!

    In genereal I think you can't just disregard the spots where you hit a piece and are bet into.
  • oblioo


    #4: I do look at their fold to 3b by position and their 4b range; I just don't mention them since they're not particularly relevant in these hands, and not the focus. We could consider hundreds of variables to influence our decision but I chose to focus on what I think are most important for when we consider cold-calling. (Considering 3betting is a different process).

    And, frankly, villains' opening range is not TOO important when they have obvious postflop leaks and we are 100bb+ deep. For example, it doesn't matter if someone's range is 10% if they are bet/folding overpairs on the flop and turn. In the hypothetical example you mentioned, maybe I would turn K9s into a bluffraise on the turn vs. a tight player I thought it was +EV to flat with pre. Also neither of us mentioned implied for us which helps calling as well.
  • oblioo


    implied odds*
  • lnternet


    You are making a bit of a generalization mistake here.

    Just because someone skxf flop (=fold to flop float in PT4) 60% on average, does not mean that he will skxf a TT5f flop heads up, against your half pot bet 60%.

    There will be flops he gives up often and flops he never gives up; there will be opponents he folds to often and opponents he folds to rarely; there will be sizes he folds to and sizes he doesn't fold to.

    Sure, the general stats are very useful. But you absolutely can not say: "This guy will fold 50% to our flop raise with 98s on KT3 because he folds to flop cbet raises 50% on average".
  • oblioo


    #7: I understand that, but the more exploitable a stat is, the less that player adjusts to various opponents.

    And regarding your specific example, I agree with what you say, but villain's cbet% is important to consider as well, and when someone is cbetting over 70%, that's usually exploitable since they are (generally) essentially auto-cbetting all rainbow flops without strong but non TP SDV (i.e. AT and JJ-QQ might check on KT2r but almost everything else bets).
  • belgianbeer


    On HEM1 the 3rd stat is :
    On the flop - check fold as PFR
    On the Turn - Fold to turn bet (dont find any other)
  • GingerKid


    I agree that open raising range is very important because villian simply hits much better from early position than CO, and if he folds e.g. 60% average vs raise he probably folds less from early.

    I think the most important factor here is our stats and what is villian thinking about us. If we start cold calling so wide, and increase our aggression, villian will not anymore fold e.g. 60% vs raise but significantly less. If he doesnt adapt at all, fine exploit maximum. But how many reggs are really so blind? So I think that if we want to exploit his stats we should just increase a bit our cold calling range (or not increase but exploit him with range we have) unless we are sure he is blind.
  • GingerKid


    Forgot to say, the big danger of this kind of exploit is that if we go to so big extreme and widen our cold calling range and villian adapts just slightly (hard to notice for us), or adapts randomly by simply improving his ranges (also realistic) we are in that cases open to exploits, and villian exploits us in that case more than we used to exploit him (especially for marginal cases like your example where villian folds vs raise 48%.)
  • oblioo


    I figured this video would be somewhat controversial, but the argument that "we shouldn't exploit villain because he can adjust" is basically a generic argument for never exploiting anyone, and imo is not valid unless you just want to always play as close to GTO as you can and never try to exploit/adjust.

    When a player's stat is unusually exploitable, it means that that player is NOT adjusting in those spots, because if he/she were adjusting then the stat in question would not be so high/low/exploitable. Therefore I am not worried, for example, about someone who is cbetting 40% and c/fing 80% adjusting or improving their ranges until I see them do it.

    That said, I agree that I may have overdone it in this video to try to get the point across, and I also agree that we shouldn't usually go crazy overboard.
  • Ninjai


    I, too, can only smile about villains adjusting etc. What we do is overthinking a spot. Until he adjusts, we should keep riding his boat 110%.

    I don't think it's too controversial but misses some details here and there. Maybe add some pre-infos and cbet IP/oop and the conclusions you can draw from that given range, board and general plan which he might think we have. Other than that this is definately far better than why-we-should-cbet-ToR.
  • EverSteel


    Hello oblioo,
    several questions if you might:

    19:40 98c, are we gonna push the river after the opponent calls the turn, or isn't our hand included into the 3-barrel bluff range in this situation? Or do we only bluff-bet the turn and give up river?
    28:40 Does our opponent really cbet turn 6%? Isnt it too low to raise it? (I believe the sample of his folds to raises is too small and rather his extremely low second barrel is representative)
    34:30 K4s, After raising and after the opponent calls (the turn), are we gonna push? What pushing range do we give ourselves for pushing the river?
    39:00 AJs, What is our plan without hitting against him? He doesnt give up often enough on the flop, while he barrels quite enough on the turn and doesnt really check/fold too much, neither does he fold to raises. Do we only make moves with a solid balanced range (therefore, not calling him too wide)?
    \Thank you for the video, good format, it would be nice to discuss more possibilities on different outcomes, your lines given different cards.
  • GingerKid


    How do we know if the player adjusted? E.g. villian folds vs raise 65% and we exploit him wider. He realizes that after some time, and vs us doesnt fold 65% but e.g. 45%. Is it possible to notice that?