Quote:
Originally Posted by .isolated
I'm genuinely asking because I think PIO is very meh considering we're facing very suboptimal playing people. For instance, not many people are betting this flop for 40% and that's the entire basis of the conclusion
What conclusion? I think we are just exploring and discussing how to play our range on this board, and working to come up with a general approach based on the equity distributions observed on this board texture.
Re: 40%, not sure exactly what the pool is doing on this board, some people are stabbing bigger like up to 65%, others are splitting exploitatively and betting 30-40% with middle pairs/pps below the T, but personally I simplify to just bet my entire betting range for the same size, and I think 40% is good for that spot and kind of standard among many (better) regs (lol complimenting myself), bc the board is quite good for us and OOP has to xf a lot, so even 40% puts OOP's OCs w/o bdfd in a difficult spot already, KQ stuff has to xf, AJ has an annoying meh xc or whatever. Basically just going for efficiency as far as (folds we get/dollar invested) and from that standpoint I think 40% is optimal 60% given the ranges.
Quote:
Originally Posted by .isolated
What did you learn from that that you can actually implement into your game?
I also don't know wth I'm doing w/Pio sometimes but in general I think in poker we are playing 1) a certain baseline strategy and adjusting that strategy based on observations of 2) the opponent 2a) the player pool and Pio helps you with 1) to not have a ****ty baseline strategy.
Many regs are just cbetting like 75% on this board which probably isn't terrible given the pool doesn't raise enough IP but it's pretty far from correct and thus can't be too good.
In conditions of uncertainty about 2) and 2a), having a good baseline strategy kind of has amplified relevance in your overall profitability bc your approach is mainly relying on the baseline strategy lacking other reads.
More simply stated, I get that we don't know the ranges, and we don't know opponent's approach, but Pio is teaching us which strategies are likely to NOT BE GOOD in information vacuums, so we can NOT DO THOSE. lol
You can also use Nodelocking feature to drill down on specific tendencies of 2) and 2a) that you have directly observed or have commonly observed in the field.
There are some things Pio suggests doing that NOBODY is doing, like e.g. on high card monotone textures like KJ8hhh Pio is triple barreling a few combos like 54dd 64cc, and you can node lock to remove those and then see what you actually need to call down with given they never have those hands. So you can certainly tweak your solutions in the most obvious of spots to AVOID
results that deviate so largely from how things should actually get played IRL that they make Pio seem useless.
You also should be using Pio to drill yourself on common flop spots, e.g. BB-BTN flop defends, are we xc'ing Ah6 on 772hxx, or T8dd on J63dxx, etc., bc on flops, when ranges are still wide open, you can't be doing too much explo stuff (whereas on rivers you can do a wide array of explo folds and stuff vs. most populations), so you can instantly and confidently improve your approach just by knowing more spots on flops/turns. Again it's all about knowing the baseline strategy, so when you have an opponent opening 40% OTB, you can xf some of the most borderline defends, when they're opening 50% you play GTO, and 60% you maybe call a little wider and/or xr more or something like that. But if you don't know what the baseline is then where are you? What is the alternative to knowing baseline strategies, to guess and assume?
maybe this helps?