Play Loose, Win Big - Loose UTG Ranges in Practice

  • NL BSS
  • NL BSS
  • Shorthanded
(12 Votes) 3866

JOIN NOW TO VIEW THE FULL VIDEO

Free membership

Join now
 

Description

In the second instalment of the series, asimos presents real examples showing how you can play loose from UTG. If you haven't seen the first video of the series, we strongly recommend watching it before this one, click here.

Tags

2016 gameplan become a winner examples hand history review lag loose play poker is fun practice Ranges series under the gun utg winning

Comments (42)

newest first
  • KuroiYami

    #1

    You are not ahead vs AK in the 4:26 ...
    vs AKo,AKs you have ~~ 49.5 %
  • asimos

    #2

    #1 Hey,

    That' s true, but he can't have the AcKc.. I have 51% vs his particular holding, and I don't do super well only vs AcKs (~45%), which is not that bad. Also when he raises with AK and facing a shove by me... he doesn't do well vs my shoving range.. mostly flip or behind..

    Board: Kc2c4s
    Equity Win Tie
    MP2 49.90% 49.90% 0.00% { AsKs }
    MP3 50.10% 50.10% 0.00% { 6c4c }

    http://www.pokerstrategy.com
    Board: Kc2c4s
    Equity Win Tie
    MP2 48.99% 48.99% 0.00% { AsKh }
    MP3 51.01% 51.01% 0.00% { 6c4c }

    http://www.pokerstrategy.com
    Board: Kc2c4s
    Equity Win Tie
    MP2 48.99% 48.99% 0.00% { AsKh }
    MP3 51.01% 51.01% 0.00% { 6c4c }
  • asimos

    #3

    *AK vs some shoving range

    http://www.pokerstrategy.com
    Board: Kc2c4s
    Equity Win Tie
    MP2 25.45% 25.31% 0.13% { AKs, AKo }
    MP3 74.55% 74.42% 0.13% { 44, 22, AcQc, AcJc, Ac4c, 5c4c, Ac3c }
  • KuroiYami

    #4

    #3 you open from UTG - 22 and 44 ?
    As i remember now in 2016 they are EV- in 2016
    source:
    http://pl.pokerstrategy.com/video/39053/
    3:28 NL SH BSS 50-200$

    in regard to that your range - {22,44}:
    http://i.imgur.com/wNlpBav.png
  • AApoKKer

    #5

    Interesting of loose play hands, petty only 4 minutes of video.
  • asimos

    #6

    #4 I don't open them in all tables... but if it is to open 64s probably I open them too. Actually I don't open a standard range anyway :)

    And the are not EV- in all the situations and conditions as well imo :)
  • ibo79

    #9

    ok
  • imgoingtomirage

    #11

    KuroiYami, there is no one and only winning strategy at hold'em :) Our members have the huge opportunity to get to know different strategies from different coaches and to choose between and apply what they think is best for them. Isn't that just great? I think it is. You can have three different people with three different opinions on how to play a particular situation, and all of them will be right. That's the beauty of poker :)
  • cucubaul

    #13

    Nice!
  • oblioo

    #15

    hi asimos,

    Have you checked your database to see if you are actually winning money the times you choose to open these weak suited hands (53s, 64s, 83s, K7s, Q8s, 52s, etc.) UTG? I have a tough time believing they're profitable long-term outside of extremely rare situations which effectively never come up. If you do check I'd be interested to know the results :)
  • asimos

    #16

    Hey oblioo. Yes the are winners :)

    Hole card filter:
    http://postimg.org/image/sdgz8n3ih/

    bb/100:
    http://postimg.org/image/wfn0kvdon/

    overall win rate from EP:
    http://postimg.org/image/o5vdrdguh/
  • graywolf0502

    #17

    Nice!
  • munjadin

    #18

    sometimes you win sometimes you loose
  • GingerKid

    #19

    first hand imo big mistake not to bluff. Your main reason why you dont want to bluff, is because you dont want to get raised, but in fact A is not improving villains raise range (not really raising ATs there). They are going to fold Tx and hands like 99 and similar, draws are still calling, but you can fold them on river if blanks, so you are in a really good spot to bluff imo. If the board would bring a card which improves ranges to more sets, straights, then I would consider checking, but still, it can hardly be mistake to bluff with 12 outs.
  • GingerKid

    #20

    E.g. hand 5d3d i agree with check back turn, since villain range improves ours not, and we dont have enough fe to make bet higher EV than check. On higher limits probably still ok to bet turn since villains are likely to donk turn big part of strong hands.
  • GingerKid

    #21

    Please dont take it personally, but I find the whole idea about opening so weak hands very wrong. Ok, maybe you have very good skills postflop, and bluff in good spots to make hands +ev (and most importantly play vs very very bad population). I am not sure if you open like 30-40% from UTG, or still around 13-18%, but you dont open hands as e.g. 78s (you fold them) but you open raise 52s and similar hands that should have lower EV than standard top range combos? If it is the case that you simply open top % range but very loose like 30%, then the problem is that regs behind especially IP are going to 3bet you like 10% (as in BTN vs CO spot), and blinds like 7%, so that all means that you are going to face so often 3bet (in this example around 37% of time) which means that you are going to fold hands like 52s, too often, and will get much less folds comparing to standard open raise range, meaning that you will often play OOP with weak hand (not good unless villains have huge leaks like e.g. overfolding a lot vs cbets and not 3betting you much, or cold calling). If your strategy is to open raise UTG e.g. 15%, but instead of opening e.g. 78s you open 52s, the only benefit would be that villains put you on a wrong range (not so important on NL50, they dont care much what you rep when they hold a bluff catcher, and on higher limits you would be so much interesting to regs that they would analyse your range). So in any case, I dont see how you can increase your UTG winrate by opening such loose range? If you really have a way to do it, then I think that the 90% of the video should be explaining why your assumption that loose UTG range is increasing EV should be working (and not only for you but for players playing also NL50 where rake is higher than on your limit). Your example hands dont prove me anything, there are some interesting spots and spots where people can learn cool things, but still the main idea of the video is missed to be explained and talked about.
  • asimos

    #22

    #19 Hey!! Thanks for replies and comments. I ll try to clarify my thoughts.

    Main reason I don't barrel is not that I am afraid to get raised (although flop sets do not necessarily raise).

    The thing is that A is not a card which I expect to have a lot of fold equity. It is not a hu pot.. but a multi way vs tight defending ranges. Draws are not going to fold the turn and are ahead mostly vs my 8 high, and both ranges in combination have a lot of Ax...

    Also there is the possibility of higher flushes... so my 12 outs are not clear.

    There are not a lot of blank rivers. Any club, A, J, K, Q, are not good.. and the Ax do not fold to sth like 2h...

    If both villains call the turn I pretty much can't bluff the river imo.
    And I can see only a small part of flop calling range to fold this turn.

    Maybe bet bet is not bad, after all we barrel with equity... but I don't think check is a mistake (especially a big one :) )
  • asimos

    #23

    #21 This is the second part with some hand histories. In the first theory part I explained in which conditions I like to expand my range..

    Briefly, I examine 1) if I can be the CO in the position of the CO.. i.e. MP + CO do not defend enough.. and WHEN and IF this is the case I see no reason to not open sth close to CO's opening range... And defend it exactly as I would if I would be in the CO.. 2) If I have fish in the blinds... I want to play as many hands vs them as possible.

    I am tired to hear that people are going to adapt...
    And I had a lot of coaches in the past who suggested to not do that or the other bc people will adapt and exploit me...
    I play 100nl zoom and shooting 200nl zoom at the moment... I fail to see people adapting, and this is a strong opinion I have for the population, so this is not an argument imo.

    My frequency is not 30% from ep at 100nl zoom. I can fold in one table AQo and open 52s to the other table (extremes, but not far from how I play in reality, I massively adapt to the table.. I don't play a chart). Each time I open, I open the wider top % range I can for the particular table. Sth around 18-25% in zoom as an average, you can open wider in normal tables.

    I posted my win rate with those small suited hands in a comment upper, answering to a question of oblioo... and with my overall win rate from ep and for the 50nl-100nl zoom tables.

    So, they are +ev and this is not an assumption. And it is working. There is not why it should be working, cause poker is not a game in theory but in practice. In practice they are +ev opens bc the population is bad...and bc I know how to play them.

    If the population wasn't bad relatively to my skills I wouldn't play this game with money :) If the average 50nl player wants to be winner or sth more than 2bb/100 (you can't find many with higher win rate out there, especially in zoom) he has to learn how to think the game.
  • asimos

    #24

    #21 I don't take anything personally when it comes well-disposed.
    I m really glad you post your comments and thoughts and really enjoy the conversation and I strongly respect your opinion :)
  • GingerKid

    #25

    "The thing is that A is not a card which I expect to have a lot of fold equity. It is not a hu pot.. but a multi way vs tight defending ranges. Draws are not going to fold the turn and are ahead mostly vs my 8 high, and both ranges in combination have a lot of Ax... ". Sure, you might not have so much fold equity on turn, but since you have enough outs, you need likely > 20% FE to make it +EV bluff. And my plan is to shove bluff river if turn gets called, to fold all busted draws, one pair hands (and likely 2 pair hands vs reg). If flush comes on river, it is a bit more tricky, since we dont have a value bet, and likely have to c/f, but luckily we dont improve that often to flush.
  • GingerKid

    #26

    And as I mentioned, when we play bet F bet T and river we hit flush, the problem is that vs regs we cant value bet baby flush (hands like 52s) so we mostly have to cf (unless villain turns hands into bluff), which is one argument against oppening so loose, hands that "play well" in multiway pots.
  • GingerKid

    #27

    Also to add, even if reg is defending unexploitable, he would still fold likey most of his non flush hands on the river, since the ranges in mutliway pots when 2 players call get very tight
  • GingerKid

    #28

    "There are not a lot of blank rivers. Any club, A, J, K, Q, are not good.. and the Ax do not fold to sth like 2h... " Just shove it on river on those cards (preferably overbet) and you will have tone of FE vs reg (I expect all 2 pairs to fold considering 2 players called flop). Vs fish, it is different story.
  • GingerKid

    #29

    "If both villains call the turn I pretty much can't bluff the river imo.
    And I can see only a small part of flop calling range to fold this turn.". Probability that both regs call again is anyway low, since ranges get very tight, and if you barrel again, they cant be happy calling even with TPTK. Anyway, if they both call again on so drawy board, we can discard plenty of strong hands from their range, so we can shove river (on any except cards which bring flush, A maybe also not since some regs are not capable folding trips).
  • GingerKid

    #30

    "Maybe bet bet is not bad, after all we barrel with equity... but I don't think check is a mistake (especially a big one :) )"

    Check is likely also +EV, but if bet has significantly higher EV, then check is a big mistake :) Of course, this is all speculation, we cant say for sure, it is just my opinion. Check back in position is probably the best, but if OOP, in spot where villain will bet often, and we plan to call with dominated fd, I cant see how check is better than bet.
  • GingerKid

    #31

    "This is the second part with some hand histories. In the first theory part I explained in which conditions I like to expand my range..". Sorry, I didn't realize that there is another video, from the title I didnt conclude that the video belongs to the series of videos. I will look at it and give my opinion. Anyway, I like new approaches, it is tough to have completely a new idea in poker, which is better than the others, but still very interesting trying it.
  • GingerKid

    #32

    "Briefly, I examine 1) if I can be the CO in the position of the CO.. i.e. MP + CO do not defend enough.. and WHEN and IF this is the case I see no reason to not open sth close to CO's opening range... And defend it exactly as I would if I would be in the CO.. 2) If I have fish in the blinds... I want to play as many hands vs them as possible.". Sure, this is only for special spots, I thought that you suggest standard loose ranges. If CO defend e.g. 50% less hands, then you can open more hands +EV from MP and UTG. The problem is, that it can be that BTN and blinds defend more than they should, so still you can't open more hands +EV than standard. So it seems to me impossible to correctly estimate which hands can you open additionally, since you have to observe all villains behind. Sure, if fish is in blinds, you can open wider since you play IP vs bad player. Anyway, looks like very complex math to me, to know which hands to open raise additionally, and likely impossible when you play live.
  • GingerKid

    #33

    "I am tired to hear that people are going to adapt...
    And I had a lot of coaches in the past who suggested to not do that or the other bc people will adapt and exploit me...
    I play 100nl zoom and shooting 200nl zoom at the moment... I fail to see people adapting, and this is a strong opinion I have for the population, so this is not an argument imo." If you would play standard loose ranges from UTG, MP, surely regs would adapt and exploit you. But if you play loose ranges only in special spots (which anyway occure rare, such that you can open 52s), then it is very unlikely that regs will adapt. Depends how often are you going to "see" such spots where you are openning loose. E.g. if you think that every time when you see a player e.g. VPIP 15 at the CO, you open much looser at UTG, and if you very often have tight players at the tables, then it would lead that your average UTG open raise gets from e.g. 13% to e.g. 18% (if you really open each time so loose as 52s, lets say you open 30% UTG). Other regs would just look at your average open raise %, and see 18%, so they would all increase their 3bet ranges and likely cold call ranges. This would further lead, that when you open your standard 13% UTG range, you get more EV with your value hands when you face cold call or 3bet (since regs have looser incorrect ranges vs you), but your bottom range hands EV would drop significantly). Also when you open loose as e.g. 30% from UTG (e.g. CO is very tight), then regs would still look at your average 18% open raise from UTG and still 3bet and cold call a bit looser ranges, so your bottom hands EV would drop, and you have many such hands in a range. Still CO is not going to 3bet you much or cold call, so in average it is not a problem. Anyway interesting spot, and not easy to predict how it affects your EV in a long run.
  • GingerKid

    #34

    Regarding your winrates, 6bb/100 hands for the "bottom part" of extended utg range, looks to me as approximatively break even EV. 3500 sample size is very low, so it is really variance. It would be similar as if you would say, I have 10bb/100 hands overall winrate, on the sample size 3500 hands, so it means that my strategy is winning? So small sample size could show you maybe rough tendencies, like if you would extremely loose money, or bring you extremely a lot of money, then you could say it is very likely that you are winning/loosing there. But 6bb/100 hands is really extremely likely that such hands are around break even. So, from that sample, I am not convinced that you play those hands +EV.
    Anyway, even if it would be fact that you play them +EV, we see that it is in the best case slightly + EV, and probably you can play it +EV because you have very good postflop exploitative skills. Your video is mentioned to improve other players (micro limits), and they don't have your skills, so they would likely just burn money with such strategy. So if such strategy would be really working and requires a lot of skills, then at least this video should be diamond, so that only very skilled players see the idea.
  • GingerKid

    #35

    "There is not why it should be working, cause poker is not a game in theory but in practice. ". Actually poker is science, at least what you are trying to do, to invent new strategic approach. And science work in the way that you have assumption and prove it in a theory, then in practice (without proving in theory, nobody even tries anything, since it would be like randomly trying to achieve something). If you observe GTO (only scientific stuff in poker), it proves most of the things in theory, then applies in practice. And it works in practice. I mean, you dont have to prove your idea with theorems, but at least to have reasonable assumption why your approach should be better than the existing one.
  • asimos

    #36

    #35 Science is not an assumption proven in theory, rather a theory proven with experiment. And works both ways. Electromagnetism or thermodynamics for example were first discovered in practice... and theory came after...

    And what in theory and why should be an UTG opening range? Who says that i.e. 13% or 15% is the optimal frequency? Even if it was that would be true only on a virtual table of gto experts. A table I would never play with money :)
  • asimos

    #37

    #34 Was wondering what you consider a good win rate from EP. I see regs having sth in the range 10-15 bb/100 (the best regs in zoom do not have more than 15bb/100)... so I wouldn't consider 6bb from *extended range small (though I agree sample is small).

    Also as you said, the wider you open the higher the EV for the top of your range becomes. That's why I put whole win rate from EP, cause you should see the range as a whole rather than extended or standard or what ever. And I wait sb to post a bigger win rate from EP in zoom (sample is an issue I agree, can't do sth for that though).

    *even stronger hands that the ones I putted there should be consider extended range for most people, i.e. K9s, Q9s etc are not standard opens
  • GingerKid

    #38

    #34 If i spot fish in blinds, I open from UTG additionally K9s, Q9s, QTs, J9s, 97s, 68s, A2s-A9s, KJo, ATo. Thats it, not more. Surely, it can be that more hands are +ev, but considering rake, I dont think that those additional hands would have big positive impact on my winrate, so I rather not open them. If I am e.g. CO, and some of players behind is tight, or average 3bet of player behind is considerably lower than standard, then I would extend CO range by about 8-12%.
  • GingerKid

    #39

    I think that in video you said, that if you spot a fish in blinds, you open much looser range, but you open raise 2BB. I think that it is better to open raise e.g. top 7% like at least 3BB and the rest of the range 2bb. If we have a strong hand we want to play vs fish a big pot. Sure it opens more space for being exploitable, but I doubt that many regs would notice anything.
  • asimos

    #40

    #39 I open 2.5 from ep to keep the sizing consistent.

    Not really fun of changing all the time my preflop sizings, though the later could be more optimal in some cases.

    I do change my preflop 3bet sizing according to the player some times though..
  • lui69

    #41

    Intresting video but the handexamples went way too good imo
  • asimos

    #42

    #41 Had really hard time to find interesting and same time losing hands with this part of my range, i.e. if I put a hand where I just x/f the flop, or where I lose from a higher set or sth viewers won't gain a lot...

    The results are not so important, rather the concepts presented here in my knowledge, regarding playing such loose for EP, for first time.

    But I accept the criticism, in the rest videos of the series I also include some losing hands :)
  • msnek

    #43

    1:49 isn't betting this flop a little bit of overkill ? You will get raised a lot and you will be forced to fold. I think this flop hits calling range of other player pretty decent, isn't it ? Also it is even more dangerous since it is a multiway pot ! On what TURN cards you would continue with betting and on which ones would you just check-fold ?

    3:32 You bet because you have a lot of equity ? How do you mean it ? Against villains flop calling range ? Like against Kx for example ? You say he doesn't rep a lot by his raise OTF. So with what range is he actually raising you ?
  • msnek

    #44

    Somebody already said it here, but also you have to include loosing hands. It has many reasons. First of all, when you are trying to teach somebody else something, you gotta show him it is really working. It would be really interested to show all these kind of hands together and see your bb/100 winrate. Second, showing loosing hands gives us complete idea how are we supposed to play them (a lot of check folding on the flop for example?).
  • asimos

    #45

    #43 1.49 I don't agree I will gait raised a lot. Sets will raise, but draws and over pairs in my experience usually call.

    Turn cards I will barrel are 9, 5 diamonds (excluding the Ad) and maybe the 6 with the plan to barrel most rivers.

    3.32 When we bet with a flush draw it isn't a value bet, that is we are not ahead from Villain's calling or raising range.

    But we want to c-betting the flop both with value hands and bluff hands... and a flush draw is a hand with a lot of equity to bet as a bluff / semi-bluff, what ever you want to call it :)

    In theory he shouldn't be raising this flop a lot, simply bc he doesn't have enough nutty hands in his range. So his raise doesn't make sense.. But if it was me to put him on a range I would say Kx, AcX, A5s, some flush draws maybe (but can't see why he wants to raise with those).
  • asimos

    #46

    #44
    I posted my win rate with those small suited hands + my whole win rate from EP, see comment #16.
  • msnek

    #47

    Thx for answers !