100z going fine, getting there

Keep it up!

Week 10 Update:

Very satisfied how I have played this week. Played for most part of it my A game. Had few spots which I could have played a bit less spewy, but overall a very good week poker wise.

Had a flu thru the week, so no fitness this week for me. Plan is still to go for Istanbul on 27th and if I get my visa on time few days later to Beirut for friends wedding. I hope to reach 30k hands until then. Lets see.

Graph


GL at the tables

Nice volume and great results (as usual) GL!

Ty

Thx my friend! Hope the grind starts to treat you well and you get out of the nasty downer. GL

Very nice graph man ... Crushing it!

Anybody using GTO+ as a solver for study? I am currently solving a flop subset for a BTN vs CO 3bet pot and currently studying the turn play as the 3bettor. However, I am having issues to get the same results as MMASherdog in his course (he uses Piosolver) on the turn.

The concept which MMA basically suggests for the turn as the 3bettor IP is:

- on neutral or good cards for our range bet often and use a bigger sizing (66% PSB)

- on low equity cards (scare cards) check often and use smaller sizing (33% PSB)

This makes intuitively a lot of sense imo and was something which I used even before going over the course or using a solver. But my problem right now is that I can´t reproduce this with GTO+.

Example:



In the example I am using the same ranges and bet sizings as MMA for the solver input on the same exact board. When the turn card is a Qh the solver should check often and use the smaller sizing (33% PSB) because of the above mentioned reasons. But in my sim the solver exclusively uses a check or the 66% PSB no matter if the turn card is good or bad for our range.

Am I missing something here in the settings of GTO+? I assume by using the same inputs, Pio and GTO+ should lead to the same result? Can anybody help here?

Can you show the parameters from the video and your own sim parameters? I just ran it in Pio and GTO+ and here were the results:




They are slightly different because I have different bet and raise sizes in my initial tree. Also solvers will almost always mix on turns like the ones you gave so I think you must have configured the simulation wrong.

So it has to be that your parameters are wrong. The preflop ranges shouldn't matter too much unless they are very wonky.

I have used GTO+ a lot this year and at this point I prefer it to Pio.

Thanks a lot for your response mate. Unfortunately MMA doesn´t show the initial tree in his video. But while explaining how to play this board, he goes thru the different options of the tree. I wrote the most important one down so that I could replicate them in GTO+:

Flop:

IP:
Cbet: 33% PSB (just one sizing)
3bet: 2.4x, all in

OOP:
Check raise: 3.5x

Turn:

IP:
Bet sizing after Cbet and no check raise from OOP: 33% PSB, 66% PSB
Stab after OOP check raise on the flop (and we just call the the raise on the flop): 33% PSB, 66% PSB

OOP:
He doesn´t allow OOP to donk if he does not show aggresion on the flop
After check raise on the flop: 33% PSB, 66% PSB, all in

River:

IP:
Bet sizing: 33% PSB, all in (he does not have a normal bet sizing option like 75% PSB which is a bit weird)

OOP:
He doesn´t show the sim parameters of the tree after OOP goes for check raise on the flop

I tried to replicate these parameters as best as I can in GTO+.

Eff. Stack, SPR:


Flop Settings:


Turn/River Settings:


I recently started to work more with GTO+, so it is likely that I made somehow a mistake in my sim here. However, I don´t really know what the mistake here can be. My ranges are the same as MMA has in his video. Appreciate your help.

Click on the pencil icon and edit the tree to make sure it matches. Then click "apply changes."

I did this and it matches. Will try to download the latest version of GTO+. Maybe this helps. If not, will probably start ro simplify the tree until the point it starts to use the 33% PSB OTT. Currently GTO+ isn´t using this sizing at all, no matter what the turn card is.

You don't have all-in sizing on the river on your picture (just when pot <120%). It might not reach that treshold when flop 33, turn 33? Try adding 999% sizing (always have it on rivers for both IMO)

Thx for the suggestion my friend . This was the issue. I added them to the river settings and now the solver clearly prefers the 33% PSB on low equity cards. Really appreciate your help guys. Would never cross my mind that this might be the issue

Just seeing your blog for the first time now. I remember talking to you on Skype about half a year ago. Nice progress so far! Good luck!

Yeah exactly mate. We had a short conversation back then. Nice to see that you have catched some heat finally. Hope you can establish yourself at 200z. GL and keep us updated!

In! Really like your blog, results look good too gl, will follow!

Nice point. I've had problems with this before and fixed it by upping the threshold rerunning the sim. Should really include it in every sim as standard!

Good discussion.

Keep crushing OP

Week 11 Update:

What a week. People go crazy everywhere due to the corona virus. Ofc everyone should take care of yourself/family/friends, but some people go absolutely nuts currently. When you look at the videos people fighting for toilet paper and this kinda of stuff, I think for myself I am more scared of the people than from corona.

My trip to Istanbul/Beirut is most likely cancelled due the 2 countries not allowing entrance for people coming from the country where I live currently. Friends wedding is also most likely therefore postponed.

But enough of corona, lets get back to poker. Volume was good. Put some significant time into study. Thx again to djz and RyanWCollins for helping me out with GTO+.

I think I need to start to make some adjustments vs the player pool. Some aggresive lines like triple barrels or turn raises/check raises are basically never bluffs from my experience. I am too often sitting there and telling myself that I have top of my range in these kinda of spots, just to see few seconds later 95% of time the nuts. Pool is weird respective this. People rarely bluff, but are very stationy which makes no sense to me.

Graph


Some hands:

H1: vs russian streamer reg. He folded JJ wo a spade (which I think is a good play).

PokerStars - $1 NL FAST (6 max) - Holdem - 6 players
Hand converted by PokerTracker 4

BTN: 117.13 BB
SB: 113.87 BB
BB: 115.21 BB
UTG: 349.29 BB
Hero (MP): 101.5 BB
CO: 234.52 BB

SB posts SB 0.5 BB, BB posts BB 1 BB

Pre Flop: (pot: 1.5 BB) Hero has K A

UTG raises to 2.5 BB, Hero raises to 8 BB, fold, fold, fold, fold, UTG calls 5.5 BB

Flop: (17.5 BB, 2 players) 9 3 2
UTG checks, Hero bets 9 BB, UTG calls 9 BB

Turn: (35.5 BB, 2 players) 6
UTG checks, Hero bets 21 BB, UTG calls 21 BB

River: (77.5 BB, 2 players) T
UTG checks, Hero bets 63.5 BB and is all-in, fold

Hero wins 75 BB
Rake paid 2.5 BB

H2: vs reg. I think tbh he should not have a raising range OTT, which makes his range extremely value heavy. I mean this spot is whatever.

PokerStars - $1 NL FAST (6 max) - Holdem - 6 players
Hand converted by PokerTracker 4

BTN: 114.48 BB
SB: 100.5 BB
Hero (BB): 108.56 BB
UTG: 161.82 BB
MP: 260.74 BB
CO: 100.46 BB

SB posts SB 0.5 BB, Hero posts BB 1 BB

Pre Flop: (pot: 1.5 BB) Hero has Q A

fold, fold, CO raises to 2.4 BB, fold, fold, Hero raises to 11.5 BB, CO calls 9.1 BB

Flop: (23.5 BB, 2 players) 7 Q J
Hero bets 7.37 BB, CO calls 7.37 BB

Turn: (38.24 BB, 2 players) 2
Hero bets 23.61 BB, CO raises to 81.59 BB and is all-in, Hero calls 57.98 BB

River: (201.42 BB, 2 players) 3
Players agreed to run it twice.

River #2: (201.42 BB, 2 players) 2



H3: vs good reg.

PokerStars - $1 NL FAST (6 max) - Holdem - 6 players
Hand converted by PokerTracker 4

BTN: 324.23 BB
SB: 100 BB
BB: 100 BB
UTG: 104.79 BB
MP: 56.77 BB
Hero (CO): 131.38 BB

SB posts SB 0.5 BB, BB posts BB 1 BB

Pre Flop: (pot: 1.5 BB) Hero has Q K

fold, fold, Hero raises to 2.3 BB, fold, fold, BB raises to 11.2 BB, Hero raises to 24.5 BB, BB calls 13.3 BB

Flop: (49.5 BB, 2 players) K Q A
BB checks, Hero bets 12 BB, BB calls 12 BB

Turn: (73.5 BB, 2 players) A
BB checks, Hero checks

River: (73.5 BB, 2 players) 3
BB bets 19.9 BB, Hero raises to 94.88 BB and is all-in, fold

Hero wins 110.8 BB
Rake paid 2.5 BB

H4: vs fish. Flop was a missclick. Wanted to raise. River looks nitty. However I think we are beat most of time vs a fish who donk overjams on a flush. He still has plenty of flushes which beats us.

PokerStars - $1 NL FAST (6 max) - Holdem - 6 players
Hand converted by PokerTracker 4

BTN: 108.94 BB
SB: 119.48 BB
BB: 100 BB
UTG: 101 BB
MP: 36.88 BB
Hero (CO): 113.25 BB

SB posts SB 0.5 BB, BB posts BB 1 BB

Pre Flop: (pot: 1.5 BB) Hero has 6 8

fold, fold, Hero raises to 2.3 BB, fold, fold, BB calls 1.3 BB

Flop: (5.1 BB, 2 players) 7 2 5
BB bets 3 BB, Hero calls 3 BB

Turn: (11.1 BB, 2 players) K
BB bets 5 BB, Hero raises to 17.5 BB, BB calls 12.5 BB

River: (46.1 BB, 2 players) A
BB bets 77.2 BB and is all-in, fold

BB wins 43.8 BB
Rake paid 2.3 BB

H5: vs reg. I am somewhat top of my range. Not sure if I can find a fold here. Maybe just calling with 55,88 and JJ is fine here vs 100z player pool. Not sure tbh.

PokerStars - $1 NL FAST (6 max) - Holdem - 6 players
Hand converted by PokerTracker 4

BTN: 179.65 BB
SB: 171.25 BB
BB: 182.61 BB
UTG: 101 BB
Hero (MP): 125.23 BB
CO: 139.94 BB

SB posts SB 0.5 BB, BB posts BB 1 BB

Pre Flop: (pot: 1.5 BB) Hero has T T

fold, Hero raises to 2.3 BB, CO raises to 8 BB, fold, fold, fold, Hero calls 5.7 BB

Flop: (17.5 BB, 2 players) 8 5 2
Hero checks, CO bets 10.97 BB, Hero calls 10.97 BB

Turn: (39.44 BB, 2 players) 5
Hero checks, CO bets 24.73 BB, Hero calls 24.73 BB

River: (88.9 BB, 2 players) 5
Hero checks, CO bets 96.24 BB and is all-in, Hero calls 81.53 BB and is all-in




Stay all healthy and GL on the corona grind my friends

hey bud, just gonna give my thoughs to these hands

H1, think i give up river the Ks is irrelecant since he should have close to no K high flushes otr. Ac is a terrible card however. Would prefer bluffing with As and hands with Q/J that blokc QQ/JJ w a spade

H2, we indeed. Agree with your reasoning. Its a spot where i go broke and dont think much about it

H3 wp

H4, excellent fold imo

H5, ive played a lot of 100z hands (1m+) and trust me you can mix fold some TT here and not think too much of it.

Is it true even at 100z that you can expect regs to be way underbluffing in these spots? Pretty much all overcards mixes in some betting OTT in equilibrium, even hands that block hero's folding range. TT is probably mixed fold already OTT especially if he made it a bit bigger, as nitty as it sounds. Even I might underbluff a ton as villain here.

TT is probably mostly 4b pf in such high rake environment so i doubt we do actuallty get to pitch it a lot ott

yes imo this spot is heavily underbluffed. Ive called there so often and have never seen a bluff I swear haha

Thanks for your feedback mate. Appreciate it.

Regarding H1: I agree with you. Would ofc prefer to have the As. But as you said having the Ac is pretty bad OTR and we would should give up this combo. I did a sim on this hand after my session and was surprised to see that on the river Ts, we basically give up OTR with all our AKo (including AsKx) combos. Was a bit suprised to see this.

My experience is similar to IMaWIZARD´s. The average 100z reg is way underbluffing in these spots. But somehow I often find myself calling here and very very rarely catch a bluff. Beeing 125bb deep makes it even worse prob.

Enjoying this thread, keep it up!
TT spot sucks for sure and can only agree with others regarding villains severely under bluffing these spots in most pools , maybe under bluffing isn't the right term, more like they just always have it.
GL!

Thx mate. Nice to hear that peope are following the thread. GL to you too!

Great thread man. I was just having the same issue with GTO+ as well and this helped clear it up. Look forward to following and GL!