+1

LP16,

I have read elsewhere that AI naturally came to the result of overbetting the nuts often.

Can you explain why AI comes to these conclusions? Is the idea that "when you have the nuts you want to put infinity in the pot" the natural learning AI developed and therefore over ships entire river 3b range here?

you can play with some scenarios in softwares like crev to see how evs will run for diff bet sizings. if u wanna get better invest 100$ in a runitonce membership and watch sulskys toy gaming series to learn more about these concepts (its long and you will probably have to watchit a couple of times at least, 4 or 5 60+ min vids) also read chens mathematics of poker for more info

whats your reasons for why you thing betting the max amount possible with the best hand possible is bad

if we think he folds vs 3800~ with the same frequency as AI then it makes sense to shove w/ nuts and make it ~3800 w/ bluffs. (I'm not saying this is the case in this hand)

Although the frequency of his calls is probably not equal I also doubt it's "balanced".

Also in live poker you don't have 100k+ sample sizes, and the small sample sizes you do have are only recorded by memory. These spots dont happen enough to worry about balance so make the best play based on the current situation.

the first assumption is wrong and kills the whole argument. He wont and shouldnt fold as often to 3800 vs all in

I play with villains that would call an all in bet (because in their mind it looks bluffy, fos) but fold to 3800 ("it looks like he wants a call").

Once again I'm not saying this is the case here, but there's no way villains calling frequency is GTO and we should be exploiting him using exploitable sizing to maximize profit.

Do you guys use $5 chips or $10 chips?

$5

Cool. I like your line up until this point. What you do now (fold or raise mainly) depends on a) what he thinks of you, b) his tendencies to station/hero fold c) if this is his normal stakes or if he plays a lot bigger and d) game flow.

I'm actually villain in this hand. He raised to 2650 otr and I called with JsTs. I'm posting because I thought it was a really cool spot that emphasizes dynamic bet sizing to target specific hands.

Exactly my point. It ip doesn't pick this weird small sizing he ends up pwning you

would you have called if he raised you bigger otr? say $4.5k?

No, I likely would have folded all straights, called flushes.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

If you had actually rivered backdoor nut flush I'm sure your sizing would have been much closer to pot, ~500, which kind of makes a 3b here seem bluffy.

Hmmmm

Would you have called with flushes no matter what the bet was, or was there an amount you would've folded to?

How am I supposed to answer that question?

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

where do you play and how can we exploit you?

We are 900+ bb deep at 5/10. Obv we have equity on the turn (either irl or represented depending on how we decide to play out this hand). If we bet the turn, isn't a good pro (such as DGAF) going to raise big a lot of the time, putting us in a difficult situation, particularly with our actual holding? I realize the line was not the point of the post, but just wonder about the comment that the turn is a bet 100% of the time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think there's very likely a significant incongruence between what someone writes on discussion forums and how they actually play.

Even if you would always post detailed and honest thoughts about your general philosophy of poker and your own specific tactics, it still wouldn't let your opponents exploit you perfectly. Granted, it might help, but less than people think it would.

It depends on the situation. If our range is perfectly polarized then the optimal bet sizing on the river is all-in. This can happen when the nuts can't be shared and we have bluffs which block the nuts, or when the opponent's range is capped. There are plenty of situations where we shouldn't overbet the nuts.

Take the obvious one which live players seem to never get right. The board is KQJT5, no flush and one player bets 80% pot. The opponent can defend with the nuts only, so the bettor gets no value with his nuts and cannot bluff profitably because the nuts is such a big part of ranges. The correct bet sizing here is likely very small with both nuts and bluffs.

Another example: Maybe we have a range of thin value hands on the river that maximizes value by betting relatively small. If we bet with a capped range the opponent can exploit us by raising aggressively with hands he knows can't be beaten and a balanced number of bluffs. However, if he does this often enough then now we have an incentive to also bet small with the nuts.

grunch


If you think he has all combo of JTo then this becomes a raise. I only gave him 6 combos of JTo, JThh, QThh, KThh, QJhh, KJhh (He cant have x9h because river is 9h so mistake in OP). That’s 11 combos, and only 2 combos of Khigh flush if you think he raises KQhh on turn. However this deep I would expect him to call a few more K2-K5hh type hands. Anyways, discarding K2-K5hh type hands, he has 11 combos going to the river. He needs to fold 63% of the time or 7 combos for our $3250 bluff to breakeven. If he folds ALL straight (6 combos that’s already there), then if he folds all his Q high flushes he is folding 81% of the time and the bluff becomes very + EV.

Looking at our range, our reraising range on the river looks like this. AA(3 combos with hearts, AThh+. We will discount KQhh because we never reraise with this here.

So that’s 7 combos, 3 of which are bluffs. If he sees us as capable of making a move with all our Ahx then we become massively over bluffing this spot and he should find a call a big % of the time. Given that we ONLY re raise river with NUT flush and Ah blocker, I think we will have too many Ahx in this spot for this to be a interesting spot to bluff. Then again if you think you have a tight image then you should raise this spot.

Good post

excellent hand and excellent thread, thanks for posting.

lol