Are you splitting sizes ott or have a depolarized strategy? Most regs including myself are still playing only b75/x on this texture and its hard to merge AT into a polarized range here but if you have a small block sizing then it makes alot of sense.

I would just pick one size OTT so either B33 or B50.

Only time I like splitting sizes is OTF when you need to jam some turns because of how many bad rivers there will be for your range.

A common example is like 3BP OOP PFR and flop is KT7tt. You split small and large because you need to jam a bunch of turns like any 2 FD or some 3 straight turns.

I can re-adjust too. I’m just saying as a static strategy it will be better than the default GTO strategy.

You know 200blitz better than me so maybe I get owned. Time will tell.

It’s okay if we disagree

Sure, but note that my AA only jam logic is the exact same as your QQ+ jam logic (we are causing "standard calls" to be large ev mistakes against our jams). So if you think my AA only jam logic is poor, you should probably have another think yourself.

I think your jam only AA is better than GTO as a default. But I think we can capture more EV by expanding the value threshold.

The idea is to turn 0EV hands into losing calls and is a driving principle behind a lot of MDA theory.

JJ is 0EV but it’s a good call vs population. We are using this knowledge against our opponent.

Versus very good players you reverse MDA lines postflop as a default until they adjust. Even average regs for the stake understand preflop MDA and jam tendencies so now we can be more aggressive with our preflop adjustments.

Okay, interesting. I thought this was pretty much an obviously bad idea, so I really wasn't expecting this reply. But if you think AA only outperforms default gto, and you think QQ+ is basically an upgraded version of AA only, I can at least respect the consistency of your thoughts here. Off-hand I am not convinced, but it is definitely logical.

I have never taken this as a driving principle in my play (though I only have some basic mda knowledge myself)...I guess the idea is constructing in a way where opponents will make large ev blunders while 1) they have a default strategy that plays into these blunders and 2) they are unlikely to quickly adjust or play a counterstrategy to what we're doing?

Is this more or less right?


By "very good players" do you mean something narrow like "reg players who are highly aware of MDA tendencies for their games," or something else?

Yeah that is exactly what it is. You are using their knowledge against them.

In order to counter this you would need to understand what I am doing and then figure out the counter exploits. It’s not enough to just know you might be getting exploited.

I think when I say “very good players” it could be players that go by that definition or just someone who has good instincts. They might not have even studied MDA.

So for example, you might figure out rather intuitively that a board like KQJr is overbluffed in a triple barrel line in a BTNvsBB SRP because BTN has so much Ax in his range. And this would align with MDA.

One note on the QQ+ jam strat, you disregard the opportunity cost of not making a std 4b size and getting calls from hands like suited broadways,smaller pps , SCs + jams from villain

But they ovefold to 4bets and under 3bet preflop.

But he wins more when you 4bet smaller because you are super capped in that line.

You’re right that I am capped but I think the benefits of getting my opponent to make huge EV mistakes with standard calls outweighs this.

I am fully exploiting his calling range.

In order for him to fully exploit me he would have to.

1. Somehow know I don’t have AA/KK/QQ when I 4bet smaller.

2. Know that my value range is AK/JJ heavy.

3. Starting raising air OTF at 100% frequency on non Ace or King boards.

I don’t think any of the above statements are true.

This strategy will work better vs the tighter 3bet player profile. The lower the 3bet % from your opponent the more this strategy will print.

If JJ are mix call in theory and he is calling them always, then jamming range that makes JJ -EV is correct adjustment. Idk if pool is calling that always.

But even in that case lot of ev he lost by calling, he gets back when you 4bet smaller or call 3bet just becaus JJ have much more equity in those lines, so exploit is not that big IMHO.

If this exploit is against guys with 4-6% 3b stats, those guys are not gonna be exploiting you postflop. You probably just shouldn't 4bet "bluff" or call much in general except for jamming your nutted hands. So you are really just increasing the EV of your nutted hands by jamming imo.

When I saw you suggest to 4b jam AA I thought that's losing tons of value

But then did a nodelock of your hand CO vs HJ and set CO to call TT+,AK pure against a 4bet jam and then AA is indifferent between smaller 4b and all-in

At higher stakes (I play 500) am confident that's not how people play, they know KK-QQ 4bet jams often and I'd estimate regs overfold JJ-TT and AKo. But you know your pool better so looks like a good exploit if the assumptions are right

I think I messed this hand up although I did learn a few things.

1. Flop is a low frequency XR, I thought it would be much higher.

2. If turn pairs you are basically range checking, if you bet you jam at 100bbs (not at 150bbs).

I also don't like my line because I think 99/TT/JJ are going to fold too often.

Hand History driven straight to this forum with DriveHUD 2 Poker HUD and Database Software

NL Holdem 0.25(BB)
BTN ($59.90) [VPIP: 46.7% | PFR: 26.7% | AGG: 22.2% | Flop Agg: 33.3% | Turn Agg: 16.7% | River Agg: 16.7% | 3Bet: 25% | Fold to 3Bet: 0% | 4Bet: 100% | Hands: 15]
SB ($25.48) [VPIP: 21.6% | PFR: 17.4% | AGG: 33.6% | Hands: 1170]
BB ($47.43) [VPIP: 16.4% | PFR: 12.3% | AGG: 33.7% | Hands: 503]
HERO ($37.69) [VPIP: 27.9% | PFR: 23.4% | AGG: 38.8% | Flop Agg: 42.5% | Turn Agg: 35.1% | River Agg: 41.3% | 3Bet: 10.1% | 4Bet: 11.4% | Hands: 93830]
HJ ($27.14) [VPIP: 21.6% | PFR: 17.7% | AGG: 24% | Hands: 982]
CO ($11.19) [VPIP: 22.9% | PFR: 17.1% | AGG: 17.9% | Hands: 70]

Dealt to Hero: Q Q

HERO Raises To $0.50, HJ Folds, CO Folds, BTN Raises To $1.51, SB Folds, BB Folds, HERO Calls $1.01

Hero SPR on Flop: [10.74 effective]
Flop ($3.37): 4 3 8
HERO Checks, BTN Bets $1.68 (Rem. Stack: $56.71), HERO Raises To $6.34 (Rem. Stack: $29.84), BTN Calls $4.66 (Rem. Stack: $52.05)

Turn ($16.05): 4 3 8 3
HERO Bets $8.02 (Rem. Stack: $21.82), BTN Calls $8.02 (Rem. Stack: $44.03)

River ($32.09): 4 3 8 3 K
HERO Bets $21.82 (allin), BTN Calls $21.82 (Rem. Stack: $22.21)

Thanks for running the nodelocked preflop sim.

But the solver is assuming GTO play postflop and in MDA population is overfolding OTT/OTR vs double barrels and triple barrels so you lose value with AA when you 4bet smaller.

If you look at C-F and C-C-F frequencies there are overfolds by at least 5% compared to GTO frequencies.

They are also under stabbing by a lot. In my data I have them understabbing turns after calling flop by 10%-20% depending on flop sizing. This will hurt your value hands as well if you decide to slow play turns.

My thinking is that even if it's mixed preflop in a solver it's going to under perform postflop for all these reasons so I'd rather just jam pre.

DDP assumes they over fold to 4bet so he probably is 4bet bluffing. He dose not need to exploit you if you dont 4bet smaller anything that beats JJ, JJ will have higher ev then in theory(in that line) even if he plays normal, that was my point.

Going to post some HH's that illustrate important concepts.

1. Don't ever bet river here as a default. Solver always bets but we need to take advantage of population tendencies.

Hand History driven straight to this forum with DriveHUD 2 Poker Tracking Software

NL Holdem 0.25(BB)
BTN ($48.31) [VPIP: 20.6% | PFR: 18.2% | AGG: 37.2% | Hands: 1043]
SB ($25) [VPIP: 20.3% | PFR: 15.2% | AGG: 28.8% | Hands: 3800]
HERO ($30) [VPIP: 27.9% | PFR: 23.4% | AGG: 38.8% | Flop Agg: 42.5% | Turn Agg: 35.1% | River Agg: 41.2% | 3Bet: 10.1% | 4Bet: 11.4% | Cold Call: 9.9% | Hands: 94287]
UTG ($26.98) [VPIP: 16.9% | PFR: 15.7% | AGG: 46.2% | Hands: 85]
HJ ($34.24) [VPIP: 21.1% | PFR: 16.5% | AGG: 45.8% | Flop Agg: 38.5% | Turn Agg: 57.1% | River Agg: 50% | 3Bet: 4.9% | 4Bet: 20% | Hands: 111]
CO ($100.04) [VPIP: 20.8% | PFR: 16.1% | AGG: 27.5% | Hands: 174]

Dealt to Hero: 6 A

UTG Folds, HJ Raises To $0.50, CO Folds, BTN Folds, SB Folds, HERO Calls $0.25

Hero SPR on Flop: [26.82 effective]
Flop ($1.10): 6 J A
HERO Checks, HJ Bets $0.82 (Rem. Stack: $32.92), HERO Calls $0.82 (Rem. Stack: $28.68)

Turn ($2.74): 6 J A 2
HERO Checks, HJ Checks

River ($2.74): 6 J A 2 4
HERO Checks, HJ Bets $0.68 (Rem. Stack: $32.24), HERO Raises To $6.98 (Rem. Stack: $21.70), HJ Calls $6.30 (Rem. Stack: $25.94)



2. I would base whether or not to bluff river on his WWSF

Hand History driven straight to this forum with DriveHUD 2 Poker HUD and Database Software

NL Holdem 0.25(BB)
BTN ($38.24) [VPIP: 19.2% | PFR: 15.4% | AGG: 28.6% | Hands: 54]
SB ($25.10) [VPIP: 20% | PFR: 16.5% | AGG: 34.6% | Flop Agg: 38.4% | Turn Agg: 34.8% | River Agg: 33.3% | 3Bet: 8.6% | Fold to 3Bet: 50% | 4Bet: 20% | Hands: 668]
BB ($30) [VPIP: 28.4% | PFR: 22.3% | AGG: 44.3% | Hands: 1017]
UTG ($30.75) [VPIP: 19.6% | PFR: 9.3% | AGG: 31.1% | Hands: 210]
HJ ($25.83) [VPIP: 20.6% | PFR: 18.2% | AGG: 37.2% | Hands: 1043]
HERO ($30) [VPIP: 27.9% | PFR: 23.4% | AGG: 38.8% | Flop Agg: 42.5% | Turn Agg: 35.1% | River Agg: 41.2% | 3Bet: 10.1% | 4Bet: 11.4% | Hands: 94287]

Dealt to Hero: 8 8

UTG Folds, HJ Folds, HERO Raises To $0.50, BTN Folds, SB Raises To $2.50, BB Folds, HERO Calls $2

Hero SPR on Flop: [4.3 effective]
Flop ($5.25): 9 A Q
SB Checks, HERO Bets $2.62 (Rem. Stack: $24.88), SB Calls $2.62 (Rem. Stack: $19.98)

Turn ($10.49): 9 A Q 9
SB Checks, HERO Checks

River ($10.49): 9 A Q 9 K
SB Bets $3.46 (Rem. Stack: $16.52), HERO Raises To $24.88 (allin), SB Folds



3. We make QQ a losing call here vs the nit with our strategy. Don't jam AK/JJ vs this player type.

Hand History driven straight to this forum with DriveHUD 2 Poker HUD and Database Software

NL Holdem 0.25(BB)
BTN ($31.12) [VPIP: 13% | PFR: 9.6% | AGG: 33.3% | Hands: 118]
SB ($62.74) [VPIP: 31.1% | PFR: 14.4% | AGG: 30.4% | Hands: 94]
BB ($34.22) [VPIP: 16.9% | PFR: 15.7% | AGG: 46.2% | Hands: 85]
UTG ($39.58) [VPIP: 28.4% | PFR: 22.3% | AGG: 44.3% | Hands: 1017]
HJ ($55.77) [VPIP: 21.6% | PFR: 17.3% | AGG: 29.1% | Hands: 1121]
HERO ($33.01) [VPIP: 27.9% | PFR: 23.4% | AGG: 38.8% | Hands: 94287]

Dealt to Hero: K K

UTG Folds, HJ Folds, HERO Raises To $0.60, BTN Raises To $2.15, SB Folds, BB Folds, HERO Raises To $33.01 (allin), BTN Calls $28.97 (allin)

Flop ($64.48): 7 3 T

Turn ($64.48): 7 3 T 5

River ($64.48): 7 3 T 5 7

Thanks for this exploit, it indeed seems to work well vs the nits

A good heuristic for this spot is SB builds its strategy around AQ.

That means Ace high boards and Q high boards will be better for the SB when the other 2 cards are not BW.

You can see this in solvers because the SB start's having Donking Ranges on these boards.

HH that inspired this:

Hand History driven straight to this forum with DriveHUD 2 Poker Tracking Software

NL Holdem 0.25(BB)
HERO ($30) [VPIP: 27.8% | PFR: 23.3% | AGG: 38.7% | Flop Agg: 42.3% | Turn Agg: 35.1% | 3Bet: 10.1% | 4Bet: 11.4% | Fold to 4Bet: 56.2% | Hands: 96329]
SB ($44.82) [VPIP: 18.3% | PFR: 16.8% | AGG: 48.8% | Flop Agg: 52.5% | Turn Agg: 43.3% | 3Bet: 12% | Fold to 3Bet: 43.8% | 4Bet: 6.7% | Hands: 522]
BB ($30.80) [VPIP: 26.1% | PFR: 4.3% | AGG: 6.7% | Hands: 23]
UTG ($15.92) [VPIP: 21.3% | PFR: 17% | AGG: 0% | Hands: 47]
HJ ($32.27) [VPIP: 21.5% | PFR: 20.5% | AGG: 30.6% | Hands: 223]
CO ($27.21) [VPIP: 17.7% | PFR: 11.4% | AGG: 26.9% | Hands: 522]

Dealt to Hero: K 7

UTG Folds, HJ Folds, CO Folds, HERO Raises To $0.60, SB Raises To $2.75, BB Folds, HERO Raises To $5.90, SB Calls $3.15

Hero SPR on Flop: [2 effective]
Flop ($12.05): 8 Q 6
SB Checks, HERO Checks

Turn ($12.05): 8 Q 6 7
SB Bets $5.01 (Rem. Stack: $33.91), HERO Folds



SB Flop for this spot in a solver.



Change the Queen to an Ace.

MDA nuance here that matters.

Villain should call this

Hand History driven straight to this forum with DriveHUD 2 Poker Tracking Software

NL Holdem 0.25(BB)
BTN ($28.44) [VPIP: 21.8% | PFR: 18.2% | AGG: 32.1% | Flop Agg: 39.6% | Turn Agg: 33.3% | River Agg: 28.6% | 3Bet: 12.3% | 4Bet: 8.3% | Hands: 405]
HERO ($28.80) [VPIP: 27.8% | PFR: 23.3% | AGG: 38.7% | Flop Agg: 42.2% | Turn Agg: 35.2% | River Agg: 41.3% | 3Bet: 10.1% | Fold to 3Bet: 57.4% | 4Bet: 11.4% | Hands: 97723]
BB ($41.67) [VPIP: 26.1% | PFR: 20.6% | AGG: 39.5% | Hands: 408]
UTG ($30.72) [VPIP: 0% | PFR: 0% | AGG: 0% | Hands: 13]
HJ ($30.54) [VPIP: 21.5% | PFR: 17.3% | AGG: 35% | Hands: 537]
CO ($25) [VPIP: 18.4% | PFR: 14.3% | AGG: 32.5% | Hands: 979]

Dealt to Hero: J Q

UTG Folds, HJ Folds, CO Folds, BTN Raises To $0.57, HERO Raises To $2.86, BB Folds, BTN Calls $2.29

Hero SPR on Flop: [4.28 effective]
Flop ($5.97): K 9 7
HERO Bets $2.98 (Rem. Stack: $22.96), BTN Calls $2.98 (Rem. Stack: $22.60)

Turn ($11.93): K 9 7 T
HERO Bets $3.78 (Rem. Stack: $19.18), BTN Calls $3.78 (Rem. Stack: $18.82)

River ($19.49): K 9 7 T 2
HERO Bets $19.18 (allin), BTN Calls $18.82 (allin)



Villain should fold this

Hand History driven straight to this forum with DriveHUD 2 Poker Tracking Software

NL Holdem 0.25(BB)
BTN ($28.44) [VPIP: 21.8% | PFR: 18.2% | AGG: 32.1% | Flop Agg: 39.6% | Turn Agg: 33.3% | River Agg: 28.6% | 3Bet: 12.3% | 4Bet: 8.3% | Hands: 405]
HERO ($28.80) [VPIP: 27.8% | PFR: 23.3% | AGG: 38.7% | Flop Agg: 42.2% | Turn Agg: 35.2% | River Agg: 41.3% | 3Bet: 10.1% | Fold to 3Bet: 57.4% | 4Bet: 11.4% | Hands: 97723]
BB ($41.67) [VPIP: 26.1% | PFR: 20.6% | AGG: 39.5% | Hands: 408]
UTG ($30.72) [VPIP: 0% | PFR: 0% | AGG: 0% | Hands: 13]
HJ ($30.54) [VPIP: 21.5% | PFR: 17.3% | AGG: 35% | Hands: 537]
CO ($25) [VPIP: 18.4% | PFR: 14.3% | AGG: 32.5% | Hands: 979]

Dealt to Hero: J Q

UTG Folds, HJ Folds, CO Folds, BTN Raises To $0.57, HERO Raises To $2.86, BB Folds, BTN Calls $2.29

Hero SPR on Flop: [4.28 effective]
Flop ($5.97): K 9 7
HERO Bets $2.98 (Rem. Stack: $22.96), BTN Calls $2.98 (Rem. Stack: $22.60)

Turn ($11.93): K 9 7 T
HERO Bets $3.78 (Rem. Stack: $19.18), BTN Calls $3.78 (Rem. Stack: $18.82)

River ($19.49): K 9 7 T 2
HERO Bets $19.18 (allin), BTN Calls $18.82 (allin)



Big discrepancies over significant samples in the triple barrel line:

Hey, new on 2p2 and found this challenge, thinking it's relevant to me. Thanks for posting.

Would you explain why villain should fold on the runner runner board but call the other? I thought it would be the other way around. Is this a complex blocker analysis or more based on population tendency?

Holding the club blocker on the runner runner club board = more likely that hero is value betting a straight/set and less likely hero is bluffing a club runout?

I'm lost on that the front door river flush runout thought process would be.

Thanks.

This is population data so it doesn't have anything to do with blocker analysis.

I'll preface this by saying I am not 100% sure that this is true but it is a hypothesis I think is more likely to be true than not and a common trend I have found in my studies.

The important point is that this is more of an OOP tendency than an IP tendency. And a 3BP tendency not a SRP tendency

It still happens IP but it's not as significant.

You can see this here:

BlindsvsBTN as 3BP OOP PFR Triple Barrel --->6% difference



Now go to SBvsBB3BET as 3BP IP PFR --->Only 3% difference besides being a wider formation



Now go to COvsBTN3BET as 3BP IP PFR --->Only 1% difference



The way I interpret what this means is that population is more likely to continue barreling when they pick up a FD OTT as opposed to flopping a FD, especially when OOP and Xing back to realize is not an option.

Tangentially related on population tendencies, you see this in turn probe lines for SRP's a lot as well. It's much more likely OOP opponents will probe turn as opposed to xc turn with a FD. I basically think this is a manifestation of the same tendency.

This tendency is not relevant in SRP's for triple barrel lines.

Here is BTNvsBB SRP Triple Barrel vs SBvsBB Triple Barrel. Almost no difference.

Yeah, I've seen this spot mentioned in a couple of videos. AQo is good enough to just call a 3bet on the button vs SB most of the time rather than 4bet. And it is good enough to defend a 4bet in the SB vs button. So SB is doing really well on q high flops. And on A high flops, SB not only has all the AQ, they have some AA, and on this particular flop they have all the sets as well. Meanwhile button has loads of KK, QQ, JJ, TT that might not 4bet as much from earlier positions. BU is forced to defend flop with almost all its underpairs, and a lot on the turn as well. vs tripple barrels jams BU is mainly forced to defend QQ all the way. SB is supposed to tripple off a lot of underpairs, bricked draws, and air, and then tons of Ax also.

The question in practice is, how wide is BU actually defending on each street? I would not be surprised if they are defending the flop a ton with underpairs, but I think on the turn it becomes interesting. Are they defending turn too tight, and does that mean we should underbluff river? Or is river still going to be a very profitable tripple barrel bluff spot? Not sure.

On another note, if you look 25nl SB vs bu in GTO Wizard at 125bb, SB 3 bets 12bb, BU 4 bets 30bb, and SB is playing a pure 5b or fold strategy. Vs bu vs BB BB 3bets to 14bb, BU 3bets to 35bb, and BB is pure jam or fold. A lot smaller pps as well as non-AK a highs and KQs are shoving OOP here. That's absolutely not happening at 25nl though, so obviously we need to give v some range to study postflop.