I'm a LLSNL cash player, looking to play tournaments a little more often, as next year will be the first World Series I'm eligible for, and I plan to play a couple of World Series events, along with other high value tournaments. I primarily play small stakes tournaments online for the time being, but am also going to play the $100 weekly tournaments in my area at least once a month, and since I plan to play in bigger buy in events at the Series, I'm assuming this is the right sub forum and no the small stakes mtt? I was conflicted on which was the correct. Anyways, I read the first volume and have some questions:

1. Is it true that deep stacked the lowest c bet size we should choose is 1/2 pot?

2. Is it true that our only all in bluffs should be semi bluffs? There's no need to ever be triple barreling with air?

3. Is it true that we should be flatting a lot of dry A high boards IP regardless of our cards, because these are the most common to be c bet, and thus bluffed the most often, so when they x on the turn, we can steal at a ridiculously high frequency with a bet? I've actually tried this one out in cash a few times since I've read this and it has been highly successful, but I want to make sure this isn't playing with fire too much.

4. Is it true that we shouldn't be playing draws anywhere near as aggressively as we should in cash games because of the survival aspect? If so, I'm wondering how this makes sense? The odds don't change from cash to tournament.

5. Is it true that if the board doesn't contain multiple missed draws, we should fold to river raises just about every time?

6. Do we have a flatting range at all when we're 40-60 BB deep and we open and get 3 bet?

7. Do we need to be all in squeezing super wide when we are 40-27 BB deep? He points to hands such as 65s and T8o in these spots? T8o to me sounds ridiculously wide?

8. Should we only be 3 betting opens with 40 BB or less vs extremely loose openers and premium hands because of the fact that if we get 4 bet jammed on, we will almost always have the right odds on a call?

Thank you very much for going through this.

Wait are some of these piece of "wisdom" in this book? I've heard of him and know he's highly successful, but I mean...really?:

No

Do you mean prior to the river? Anyway the answer is No, and also no.

Maybe possibly in practice bun in theory, no.

No. Think about how silly this is, for the reason you mentioned and also whatever nebulous "survival aspect" he's talking about should also be affecting the other player which should increase fold equity which should, in theory, at least balance out whatever impact the "survival aspect" is having, no?

Only if we do a poor job constructing our betting range.

Of course why wouldn't we? This is a zero sum game, there's a non-decreasing relationship between the EV of a strategy and the # of options in the strategy profile a strategy that contains no flats cannot ever be better (at least at equilibrium) than a strategy that does contain flats.

Depends entirely on who opened and who flatted, but 65s is a good squeezing hand at ~25bb and fewer.

You should not have a 3b jamming range prior to, IDK I wanna say 30bb or so.

3betting all in 25bb eff w/ T8o sounds pretty atrocious no matter who the opener is.

No.


This is pretty good exploitative advice for your purposes though, but these statements don't seem to have much theoretical basis.

“3betting all in 25bb eff w/ T8o sounds pretty atrocious no matter who the opener is.”

Surely we need some 3bet bluffs? Mixing our premiums with some amount of suited connectors?

My thoughts:

1. Is it true that deep stacked the lowest c bet size we should choose is 1/2 pot?

Not necessarily. Even deep stacked, bet sizes should be determined by what you're trying to achieve with the bet, not by any predetermined notion of minimum sizing. It's fairly true in practice though.

2. Is it true that our only all in bluffs should be semi bluffs? There's no need to ever be triple barreling with air?

No, it depends on fold equity / opponent type and range advantage. It's fairly true in practice but there are important exceptions against exploitable opponents.

3. Is it true that we should be flatting a lot of dry A high boards IP regardless of our cards, because these are the most common to be c bet, and thus bluffed the most often, so when they x on the turn, we can steal at a ridiculously high frequency with a bet? I've actually tried this one out in cash a few times since I've read this and it has been highly successful, but I want to make sure this isn't playing with fire too much.

Yes, and there are infinite similar variations where you can take advantage of position and exploitable opponents - not just A-high boards.

4. Is it true that we shouldn't be playing draws anywhere near as aggressively as we should in cash games because of the survival aspect? If so, I'm wondering how this makes sense? The odds don't change from cash to tournament.

No, fold equity is (usually) significantly higher in tournaments than cash games and we should be taking advantage of this if the higher fold equity + equity creates a profitable cEV opportunity. Just be sure to categorise opponents accurately first and ensure that fold equity exists. In other words, don't bluff fish regardless of whether you're playing cash or mtts.

5. Is it true that if the board doesn't contain multiple missed draws, we should fold to river raises just about every time?

Yes, most tournament players have an tendency to underbluff rivers and we can exploit that by overfolding.

6. Do we have a flatting range at all when we're 40-60 BB deep and we open and get 3 bet?

Yes - the median range for me is AQo, TT- and suited connectors for starters and then tighter/narrower depending on opponent post flop ability. I can also flat KK / AA to a 3! and do all sorts of other stuff. Very opponent dependent.

7. Do we need to be all in squeezing super wide when we are 40-27 BB deep? He points to hands such as 65s and T8o in these spots? T8o to me sounds ridiculously wide?

Depends on opponents and ranges. Squeezing is profitable, but squeezing wide all-in is as old as Harrington and competent players have adjusted.

8. Should we only be 3 betting opens with 40 BB or less vs extremely loose openers and premium hands because of the fact that if we get 4 bet jammed on, we will almost always have the right odds on a call?

If opponent opens to 2BB and we 3! to 6BB and opponent 4! to any sizing at all, we most certainly are NOT pot committed nor do we have the odds to call off low equity hands.

“Depends on opponents and ranges. Squeezing is profitable, but squeezing wide all-in is as old as Harrington and competent players have adjusted.“

Surely that’s a reason to do it? Say we squeeze mostly with AA-QQ/AK, and mix that with a random amount of suited connectors, surely that’s unexploitable as the majority of the time we’re taking down the pot or getting calls by hands we dominate? And when we get called with our bluffs, at least we still have some equity most of the time? And 9Ts or seems the ideal hand to do this as it’s such a good drawing hand, and when we get called with say KQs, we’re often completely dominated by AK, AQ etc.
Surely we need bluffs in our squeezing range as otherwise we’re hardly squeezing and when we do we’re never called?

Just doing some maths - 9Ts has 41% equity against AKos and 21% vs KK. KQs has 29% equity vs AKos and 13% vs KK. Obviously there’s lots of examples I could play around with but I think this partially demonstrates why 9Ts is a good bluff squeeze against our opponents calling range when mixed with the top % of hands.

T9s has domination issues of it's own v continuance. Flatter has all the hands which block your outs, dominate your draws or are one card away from stacking you when you flop two pair.

-------

Even Little wouldn't believe alot of this stuff anymore. Books which do little more than reel off exploitative, micro do's and dont's age poorly.

What hands are best to mix into our squeezing range as bluffs?

Appreciate the feedback a lot...This book appears to have been a huge waste of money. Oh well, I can probably play 100 BB + pretty solid because of cash and will just have to learn shorter stacks with time.

Personally I very much recommend the RIO elite subscription if you have the time to make good use of it

Think MTT players are better off having a pool of eligible combos at given depths and concentrate energy on getting shrewd at picking appropriate spots based on opponent formation than saying “this hand is the highest EV candidate, I squeeze 100%” as the EV/equities will run quite close if pooling well. T9s has appropriate properties to pool at depth while shallow I’d lean towards one or two big cards inc offsuit broadways.

Being combo driven would be more incentivised in very tough, balanced fields, I believe.

Better than Upswing Poker Lab? I've heard a lot of positive things about RYE - anyone have an opinion on RYE?

oh for the love of god, please stop reading Jonathan Little immediately.
The advice he gives (which led to your questions) is almost all wrong, and badly so. I mean this advice is comically bad and reveals a complete lack of understanding of poker. sqz with 65s/T8o wtf? don't play draws aggro in MTTs bc of survival? this stuff should be fkn illegal to print, jesus

indeed. sorry :/

FFS guys, before reading any poker material, please! Search the year of publication...

These books are from 2014. A little common sense, please

On topic: Little has good books and more dated. They are good for the low limits only. It's a good starting material for begginers

Most of the others here have far more experience than me with study content - I'm still relatively new to the game - but unfortunately they don't seem to be responding. I have never used upswing lab but I have Petrangelos mtt course. It's a fantastic condensed teaching on mixed strategy, though I'm yet to fully understand it or apply it properly. But i'm working on it. Its expensive though. The RIO elite is fantastic value for money if you have the time to make the most of it, as I said. Everything is there. You have videos from Phil Galfond and Ben Sulsky which were made several years ago but still seem very relevant. Theres also loads of great content from other top players. I would also recommend ChicagoJoeys poker life podcast for a fantastic insight into the minds of top players. Some amazing people with incredibly interesting views.


Best wishes

Is he seeding disinformation or just leaving out some key "insights"?

If my understanding of your experience level is correct, any knowledge gained from more experienced players should have value to you, even if not on the cutting edge or if you discard it. I am sure you will encounter players that play just like him and it will give you an advantage to understand how they think about the game. I hope the two online buyins for the book did not break your roll.

Hi Six,


You picked up my first tournament book, which was written about nine years ago, and was designed to exploit the generally weak, straightforward play of the day. Please be aware that the solvers did not exist and I simply wrote about the strategies I used to beat the medium and high stakes tournaments. I would make suggestions for which of my newer books for you to get, but I do not think that is allowed. I will DM you.

1. Is it true that deep stacked the lowest c bet size we should choose is 1/2 pot?

While you should generally use larger sizes when deep, betting small (25% pot or so) is certainly ideal on dry boards when you have the range and nut advantage.

2. Is it true that our only all in bluffs should be semi bluffs? There's no need to ever be triple barreling with air?

For the most part, your bluffs should contain at least some equity. On the river, depending on your range's composition, using the best blockers may or may not be relevant.

3. Is it true that we should be flatting a lot of dry A high boards IP regardless of our cards, because these are the most common to be c bet, and thus bluffed the most often, so when they x on the turn, we can steal at a ridiculously high frequency with a bet? I've actually tried this one out in cash a few times since I've read this and it has been highly successful, but I want to make sure this isn't playing with fire too much.

It depends on the opponent's tendencies, but floating with the least bit of equity in position is often ideal, especially when facing a small bet size.

4. Is it true that we shouldn't be playing draws anywhere near as aggressively as we should in cash games because of the survival aspect? If so, I'm wondering how this makes sense? The odds don't change from cash to tournament.

In general, you should shy away from playing for all your money in tournaments without a substantial edge. That said, there is certainly room to play your draws with little showdown value aggressively.

5. Is it true that if the board doesn't contain multiple missed draws, we should fold to river raises just about every time?

Most people (especially straightforward ones) simply do not raise the river as a bluff.

6. Do we have a flatting range at all when we're 40-60 BB deep and we open and get 3 bet?

Yep!

7. Do we need to be all in squeezing super wide when we are 40-27 BB deep? He points to hands such as 65s and T8o in these spots? T8o to me sounds ridiculously wide?

If the opponents open too wide and fold too often (as they did nine years ago) jamming super wide is incredibly profitable. That said, T8o is probably only fine to push when you are sure you have more fold equity than normal.

8. Should we only be 3 betting opens with 40 BB or less vs extremely loose openers and premium hands because of the fact that if we get 4 bet jammed on, we will almost always have the right odds on a call?

It depends on the opponent's strategy. If you expect to get frequently jammed on, you should be prepared to call off more often than not. If the opponent will raise with a wide range but then fold to a 3-bet, then you can 3-bet with a wide range as a bluff due to expecting to have more fold equity than normal.

Thanks for the questions. Good luck in your games!

As somebody who has read Little's first 3 books a number of times I would say that I don't remember the specifics (like the above questions) as much as some of the guiding principals that I got from reading the books (which I haven't done in some years...)

What I got from it first and foremost was not to alter my betting sizes pre-flop based on the strength of my hand. But to use effective stack sizes and position to help set up consistent pre-flop raise sizes. Similarly post flop I will try to be consistent with cbet sizing.

Also, when raising after one or more limpers pre-flop, to make the bet size consistent with the number of limpers (he recommended 3.5x + 1 for every limper and then I add a BB if I am SB or BB).

The thing about that has been so helpful for me is that I immediately notice when other players use inconsistent bet sizing. Also, when another player raises pre-flop after limpers, I use the bet sizing i just mentioned to look at whether or not I am getting a bargain to call. How many times have you seen players with hands like AA/KK rage at their raises pre-flop being called by "bad" hands after they have been cracked, and at the same time thinking "wow, they didn't raise big enough to get a bad hand to fold".

There are many other things that I have incorporated into my game as a result that I don't remember specifically anymore. But I would like to say a big thank you to FieryJustice for being willing to share his knowledge.

^ As 'oldtimers' we've watched the game evolve. I still remember laughing at Euro 2BB opens when they first arrived on Stars and FT in ~2007. Two years later it was standard.

Pre-flop is solved and all competent players will roll it out like a Guy-Lopez -> Morphy Defense within the next 2-3 years. Shallow turbo tournaments will become trivial and consigned to low stakes.

The advantage has moved post flop, and humans being imperfect will remain exploitable. Thankfully there are enough post-flop variations to defy perfect human play.