Doug 'WCGRider' Polk Talks Poker With Collin Moshman

  • Recorded coachings
(9 Votes) 5033

Description

Collin Moshman met with one of the most recognized names of online poker world - Doug 'WCGRider' Polk. Enjoy the interview!

Tags

collin Doug Polk interview MTT Multi Table Tournament Multi-Table Tournament Multitable Tournament sit and goes sng stream Tournaments wcgrider webinar

Comments (13)

newest first
  • IvicaIliev77

    #1

    Doug owning the analysis as usual. Fucking legend!
    Collin thank you for making this one happen with one of my biggest idols!!!
  • IvicaIliev77

    #2

    AQ discussion was also awesome. Doug is right, I apply this in Spins a lot because by nature games are with weird pot to stack ratio in 3/4 bet nai pots.
  • IvicaIliev77

    #3

    Excellent webinar! Please get Doug back to discuss range vs range either in tournaments with whole cards or with nl500 ZOOM. His thinking process for range construction is priceless!
  • CollinMoshman

    #5

    Thanks Iliev! Really appreciate that. The AQ hand was very interesting for sure. I will definitely try to get Doug on again in the future and ask him about that :)
  • FlyingDutchm1n

    #6

    Moshman and Polk, 2 of my favorites in one interview amazing!
  • CrimsonTree

    #7

    Glad i found that video. Pure gold, enjoyed it alot!
  • CRI4BRA

    #8

    pos he blocked his twitch only to subscribers

    in other words you do a bankroll challenge but your THAT KIND OF PERSON that you know that micro bankroll challenge to be watched only by your subscribers
  • krendipont

    #9

    With AQo we have 36.6% vs a cold 4b-range of AQ+, 88+ (which I think is too loose, but prolly on point). The 3bettor needs to call 180 into a pot that will be 1020, so he needs around 17.6% EQ. Should be an easy call, even considering the additional EQ he needs in order to make the call.
    I tried to simulate how much more EQ we need by running the spot in HRC where the 3bettor would need to call an AI 4b, both for ICM and for Nash (I have ignored the bounties). I have manually changed the ranges, so the 4bettors range and the 3bettors range for 3betting are the same. The EQ difference for teh ranges, that the 3bettor can call with is pretty much exactly 10%, thus the 3bettor should call, once he has 27,6% vs the 4bet.
    We will flop 27,6% vs the range I gave him 72% of the time. So the EV of the call is: (0.72*0.366*2220000) + (0.28*600000)= 753k

    So if we fold, we actually make 30k more EV wise. I know that the calcs are kinda whatever, but they show, that if you play strictly by ICM, this here becomes a fold rather than a call.
    As Doug pointed out, ICM has its flaws and doubling up, while having position on the CL and being able to open quite a bit into the midstacks is worth quite a lot here, so it prolly is still better to call, but it is not as clear cut as he made it look like.
  • krendipont

    #10

    We are actually only flopping 27,6% only 40% of the time. So the calc should be: (0.4*0.3666*2220000)+(0.6*610000)= 692k

    So it is quite a bit worse. At this point it looks more that the call is -EV.
  • IvicaIliev77

    #11

    @krendipont
    All these calculations don't take into account how opponent will play his range on all textures post flop. He may be passive and check which makes us realize our equity more. He may need to fold his bluff catchers on certain textures, which allows us to bluff more.
    This is why these calculations are very difficult to do.
    Pre flop we have the call; post flop is the most important factor with such hands and tendency that opponent has. He may be bluffing a lot with 4 bets for all we know and then shutting down post flop, which then makes this defend even more +EV.
  • krendipont

    #12

    Yeah he will mos def be cold4bet bluffing when he is committed against the 3bettor and has to fold everything if teh OR jams...
    Obviously these calcs are susceptible to a lot of stuff, still they are a good estimate of how profitable the play is. Otherwise any PF calc that has some postflop play following would be obsolete.

    Btw with that SPR there is not much room for maneuvering postflop anyway. He might x/fold his lowest pairs on boards with 2 overcards (esp. if it is A K, A Q, K Q) which is bad for us. There are also a few boards where it is really close for us, like 89T, 89J etc
  • Jolly2702

    #13

    Isn't the thursday thrill a bounty tourney? wouldn't that drastically affect the big stack's decision making?
  • Jolly2702

    #14

    oh, you realized later.