I'm already calling more ott/otr, loving it. Also it's way more enjoyable to play, folding everything is way less fun than snapping people off like a boss haha
In that 44 hand the thing is that all his 2p are suited preflop, so it reduces those combos by a lot. He has only 6 2p combinations and 9 set combinations + 1 AQs. So if he always call us down with 2p+, we will have a bad valuebet, if he starts folding those it's a disaster. I would only valuebet that vs someone who is quite loose pre and can have all offsuit combos or if they're stations who love calling with AA/KQ(which will most likely have both leaks in their games + potentially jamming turn with their sets/AQss).
Gotta keep in mind also that since all J, K and T have different suits villain will have one less 2p combo too.
I think you're making too many assumptions about what he opens. why can't he open offsuit broadways pre? you're over analyzing this spot to death when it's really as simple as you have a set, close to the top of your value range, and he has a ton of hands in his range you beat and very few that beat you. checking back a set there means you can't really bluff that spot either
If pio is calling a hand on some turn, is that hand garbage?
What do you mean when you say garbage?
By garbage I mean hands we humans (or at least a nit like me) perceive as not good calls. As an example, AQss is a call OTT on K672ccdd 3bp SB vs btn in pio, did you know that? It's a call OTR on a lot of bricks too.
I think you're making too many assumptions about what he opens. why can't he open offsuit broadways pre? you're over analyzing this spot to death when it's really as simple as you have a set, close to the top of your value range, and he has a ton of hands in his range you beat and very few that beat you. checking back a set there means you can't really bluff that spot either
You need to make assumptions about villains in poker, I'm making the assumption that they won't have offsuited broadways but KQ in their range, you are making the assumption that they have all combos, which is closer from the truth?
And it's fine to not have many valuebets/bluffs in certain spots, sometimes villain is just too strong on some runnouts.
Also a lot of my bluffing range OTT is AQ, a lot of people will fold 2p in there
You need to make assumptions about villains in poker, I'm making the assumption that they won't have offsuited broadways but KQ in their range, you are making the assumption that they have all combos, which is closer from the truth?
And it's fine to not have many valuebets/bluffs in certain spots, sometimes villain is just too strong on some runnouts.
Also a lot of my bluffing range OTT is AQ, a lot of people will fold 2p in there
depends on pool, in my pool my assumption is closer to correct but idk about yours. I don't see how V can get away with folding 2p here (you shouldn't even have AQ that often). if you don't bet you don't give your opponents the opportunity to make calling mistakes. you aren't playing vs pio
Rapid you have hands other than AJ+spade to bluff with and im not talking about AQ
I won't defend many pps with bdfd on that texture vs 50%, specially when villains love to barrel the turn on that texture. I think it's a more viable strat to underdefend the flop and overdefend the turn/river, forcing villains to play the turn more passively
Spoiler:
Which they won't
Vs very good regs I will defend the bigger pps with a bdfd though so they can't counter my flop strat by cbetting flop and giving up OTT a lot. But even good regs will barrel a lot ott (more than they should) because it's a strong exploit vs population and it would take them a lot of hands to realize my strat (unless they already play like that vs any reg).
I won't defend many pps with bdfd on that texture vs 50%, specially when villains love to barrel the turn on that texture. I think it's a more viable strat to underdefend the flop and overdefend the turn/river, forcing villains to play the turn more passively
Spoiler:
Which they won't
Vs very good regs I will defend the bigger pps with a bdfd though so they can't counter my flop strat by cbetting flop and giving up OTT a lot. But even good regs will barrel a lot ott (more than they should) because it's a strong exploit vs population and it would take them a lot of hands to realize my strat (unless they already play like that vs any reg).
but you aren't over defending turn/river (imo). I have close to a 1k sample on you and my notes on you are: overbluff, check strong
I agree with others, H3 is a terrible check back on river. It's a mandatory bet. You can fold to a check raise because you're always beat if that happens.
but you aren't over defending turn/river (imo). I have close to a 1k sample on you and my notes on you are: overbluff, check strong
I was talking about that specific spot, in your sample I probably didn't start calling a lot yet, so it makes sense. But even when I was overfolding I was defending turns and rivers in 3bp by 60%+ each. If you add that I overfolded vs nits that number would go way higher vs aggro regs.
Why is it a good idea to play a more common spot worse to make less common spots easier (not necessarily better) to play? Isn't defending against c-bets one spot where all your study on things like MDF's is going to be much more applicable than the river spots you were applying it where it was leading to you making sizable mistakes.
You seem to take a lot of poker theory and try to apply it really poor ways without really thinking of the implications.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rapidesh123
I think it's a more viable strat to underdefend the flop and overdefend the turn/river, forcing villains to play the turn more passively.
With regards to this post. Especially when the general rule is that people don't bluff spots enough and tend to be value heavy. Why is overdefending spots where villain is more value heavy and the bet sizes bigger a good adjustment? Yet a spot that is very common in defending against c-bets you want to let villains print money against you by not trying to defend as well as possible.
Last edited by MMSS; 01-30-2019 at 06:07 PM.
Reason: Adding in quote
Why is it a good idea to play a more common spot worse to make less common spots easier (not necessarily better) to play? Isn't defending against c-bets one spot where all your study on things like MDF's is going to be much more applicable than the river spots you were applying it where it was leading to you making sizable mistakes.
You seem to take a lot of poker theory and try to apply it really poor ways without really thinking of the implications.
With regards to this post. Especially when the general rule is that people don't bluff spots enough and tend to be value heavy. Why is overdefending spots where villain is more value heavy and the bet sizes bigger a good adjustment? Yet a spot that is very common in defending against c-bets you want to let villains print money against you by not trying to defend as well as possible.
I prefer underdefending the flop because I know most people are too aggro ott, so even though the flop is more common, if I know the guy will barrel a lot OTT and have 0 clue on what villain does OTR, the best adjustment is to give up otf more often, specially with hands with bad removal/playability like pps.
If I defend flop with a pio strategy and adjust turn defending slightly more to counter his weaker barrels,I will still have to face the river which I will never be able to adjust well given the sample size required.
And after overfolding flop I'm not overcalling the turn because I will be calling weak hands, quite the opposite: I won't get to the turn with weak hands, so villain will be making a mistake vs that range if he is going very aggro OTT automatically. It's a simple exploit that is very easy to apply and it's effective if I'm right. Not printing like crazy, but better than to be in the dark.
I prefer underdefending the flop because I know most people are too aggro ott, so even though the flop is more common, if I know the guy will barrel a lot OTT and have 0 clue on what villain does OTR, the best adjustment is to give up otf more often, specially with hands with bad removal/playability like pps.
If I defend flop with a pio strategy and adjust turn defending slightly more to counter his weaker barrels,I will still have to face the river which I will never be able to adjust well given the sample size required.
And after overfolding flop I'm not overcalling the turn because I will be calling weak hands, quite the opposite: I won't get to the turn with weak hands, so villain will be making a mistake vs that range if he is going very aggro OTT automatically. It's a simple exploit that is very easy to apply and it's effective if I'm right. Not printing like crazy, but better than to be in the dark.
How can you possibly read his post, reply to it and COMPLETELY miss the point?
Haha i cant resist chiming in and congratualting that play vs the whale, you showed him
jkjk gl!
Was it good? Like, these guys are tilted as hell and could have any spazz with A high. And some won't valuebet Kx. TT blocks T9/AT which got there and I dont block the flush too.
I need to be right 1 out of 3, how is that guy not showing up otr with random spaz?
Was it good? Like, these guys are tilted as hell and could have any spazz with A high. And some won't valuebet Kx. TT blocks T9/AT which got there and I dont block the flush too.
I need to be right 1 out of 3, how is that guy not showing up otr with random spaz?
Idk why it's that bad, I've seen people make way lighter calls vs me (like calling 9x9c) in there and I'm not a whale.
I just call now if I think the guy is spazzing, also he snap x ott, which I think gives him close to 0 value combos when he raises turn, he would ateast consider betting imo. OTR I just went for it, thought I would see random garbage a lot and didn't expect him to valuebet Kx