I like it. too bad he sucks and somehow has J9

I think we need to size up on all streets.

Also, J9s is a perfectly reasonable hand for him to show up with here. Although he should probably be shoving river because he only loses to TT/AA (wouldn't expect you to have much if any A9 and there is only one combo left of T9s)

I defend this hand more than i 3bet it here

I agree with Trax. Maybe I've just gotten too nitty when playing against strong-tight players (the type I assume most people online are), but KJ seems like a hand that is very rarely going to get called by a hand that it dominates, and if you do get 4-bet it sucks so much, since it's the sexy suited variety. Haven't people's cutoff opening ranges gotten pretty tight?

Yea cutoff has gotten almost half of bu opening range

I am 3betting 10% in these positions and that range includes KJs. Is this to wide? If we eliminate suited non A broadways it becomes very hard to keep 3bet above 7%

On September 14 2016 20:28 traxamillion wrote: Yea cutoff has gotten almost half of bu opening range

It isn't that extreme (at least according to snowie). BU opens about 12% wider than CO (~39%, ~27%)

Thats actually about what i meant, slight exagerration there

Had 40/25 in my head

should def 3bet KJs more than you call it, pre was fine

would tend to check turn or bet on the smaller side on the 9, giving up this combo river a fair bit seems reasonable

On September 12 2016 18:42 YoMeR wrote: too bad he sucks and somehow has J9

... he s not the one that sux if you think J9s is a bad hand to defend there

Giving up on the river with this runout seems okay, we are blocking a lot of combos that we re trying to fold as well

On September 15 2016 15:13 Spitfiree wrote: Show nested quote + On September 12 2016 18:42 YoMeR wrote: too bad he sucks and somehow has J9 ... he s not the one that sux if you think J9s is a bad hand to defend there Giving up on the river with this runout seems okay, we are blocking a lot of combos that we re trying to fold as well

hey keep fighting that good fight. how's NL25 treating you? beating those games yet?

On September 14 2016 19:47 HungarianGOD wrote: I agree with Trax. Maybe I've just gotten too nitty when playing against strong-tight players (the type I assume most people online are), but KJ seems like a hand that is very rarely going to get called by a hand that it dominates, and if you do get 4-bet it sucks so much, since it's the sexy suited variety. Haven't people's cutoff opening ranges gotten pretty tight?

3b KJs for value seems pretty solid given villain is raise/calling J9s as a standard in this spot. Why not start 3 betting a wide condensed range for value and just destroy him on "cooler" spots

Its kind of hilarious when you speculate and embarrass yourself even more

J9s isnt a stnd defend but straigh out saying its bad is funny

why is J9s bad

yeah defending J9s from CO is fine, prob should fold it too some of the time but I'm guessing somewhere around the ballpark of defending it half the time

On September 16 2016 14:03 Fayth wrote: yeah defending J9s from CO is fine, prob should fold it too some of the time but I'm guessing somewhere around the ballpark of defending it half the time

this.

sure completely eliminating J9s from your defending range is bad. but making it a 100% call i think is a spew vs most opponents.

On September 15 2016 20:26 Spitfiree wrote: Its kind of hilarious when you speculate and embarrass yourself even more J9s isnt a stnd defend but straigh out saying its bad is funny

lolllllll

yo keep making my days.

I find it hilarious that you actually think you're good at poker and talk down to others.

Plz keep fighting that good fight.

Calling J9s after opening from CO 200bb deep in position is likely a 100% defend imo. I think KJs is more often a 3bet than not at 100bb deep, but not sure how being 200bb changes things. I'd feel inclined to 3bet less frequently but not sure if that's a good adjustment or not

On September 12 2016 18:42 YoMeR wrote: too bad he sucks and somehow has J9

On September 17 2016 00:44 YoMeR wrote: sure completely eliminating J9s from your defending range is bad.

So pick one.
You act like you discovered some horrendous mistake in villains play and yet it is so completely standard, even more 200bb deep. I just watched some RIO coach vid where he simulates COvBTN 3bet spot and even OOP he gives 100% defend J9s and I doubt he is a loser in todays game, so claiming this villain sucks just because he had completely legitimate hand in a 3b defend spot after calling a 1/2 pot flop bet is just ignorant.

On September 17 2016 00:44 YoMeR wrote: Show nested quote + On September 15 2016 20:26 Spitfiree wrote: Its kind of hilarious when you speculate and embarrass yourself even more J9s isnt a stnd defend but straigh out saying its bad is funny lolllllll yo keep making my days. I find it hilarious that you actually think you're good at poker and talk down to others. Plz keep fighting that good fight.

I mean, you said villain sucks for having J9 here, then walked it back and agreed with Fayth after he said it was fine, which is exactly what Spitfiree said in the first place. I understand it's annoying that his posts are condescending (and without any accomplishments or aptitude to justify condescension), but it's obvious to everyone reading this that he was right in this instance.

I rarely bother to comment anymore, as I'm only playing 40-50hrs a month for cash on the side so my skill has definitely gone worse. FWIW Yomer I wasnt playing 25nl but 200, which probably equals to 20k nl at Bovada and you ll laugh at that too, but np Bovada will close soon and you ll actually have to deal with that if you want to stay a winner. Reality checks usually suck.
Down to 50/100 to chill atm as I find no pleasure in this game anymore and really cba improving. 400nl+ at decent sites would practically take all of a person's time to be able to beat and improve further, which I have no desire to do as I've found that money are shit If you're unhappy with what you're doing( I know right ? The cliches, people usually go for the probe-error method to realize such stuff though )

What you've done here is insult villain, then defended him, when a green star defended him. I believe you re intelligent enough to realize how that looks and I'm not talking about the poker aspect of the "discussion"

Preflop is the least important. I dont know why people always make such a big deal about preflop ranges. Turn and river is what separates big winners from b/e imo. Turn is always a check. Rule of thumb is to play passively whenever a card only improves your opponents range. And at this point 200bb deep we arent very psyched to bet call a board pair turn with a gutter to the nuts and a bunch of reverse implied flushes. As played your combo is just awful to bet or c/c so c/f is only option.

J9ss should be calling if he knows your 3betting as wide as KJss.

Bet Bet x/f this board, why try to rep a AK/AQss random AK bluffs when all the draws brick.

x/f riv.

On September 19 2016 19:35 handbanana21 wrote: Preflop is the least important. I dont know why people always make such a big deal about preflop ranges. Turn and river is what separates big winners from b/e imo. Turn is always a check. Rule of thumb is to play passively whenever a card only improves your opponents range. And at this point 200bb deep we arent very psyched to bet call a board pair turn with a gutter to the nuts and a bunch of reverse implied flushes. As played your combo is just awful to bet or c/c so c/f is only option.

splitting ranges on the turn is going to yield higher ev than if you check whole range, always checking is definitely easier to play without making a costly mistake but it's also suboptimal, top players nowadays are merging quite a bit with the flop c-bets and assuming we would do that too then turn 9 isn't that much better for villain's range than for ours

On September 20 2016 05:42 Fayth wrote: Show nested quote + On September 19 2016 19:35 handbanana21 wrote: Preflop is the least important. I dont know why people always make such a big deal about preflop ranges. Turn and river is what separates big winners from b/e imo. Turn is always a check. Rule of thumb is to play passively whenever a card only improves your opponents range. And at this point 200bb deep we arent very psyched to bet call a board pair turn with a gutter to the nuts and a bunch of reverse implied flushes. As played your combo is just awful to bet or c/c so c/f is only option. splitting ranges on the turn is going to yield higher ev than if you check whole range, always checking is definitely easier to play without making a costly mistake but it's also suboptimal, top players nowadays are merging quite a bit with the flop c-bets and assuming we would do that too then turn 9 isn't that much better for villain's range than for ours

Yea man i completely agree. If this was a post from you i would give different advice (given you were asking for opinions) I think limiting costly mistakes as you said is by far the most important skill to develop at the lower stakes.

I disagree fayth. Turn favors the villain by a lot. No one with a refined strategy is c-betting this flop at a high frequency, let alone a bare 9. As for the turn, I agree with Kevin that we should always check but I'd be surprised to see x/f being better than x/c with how most reg play their range on the turn.

regarding preflop even 79s is a snapcall for me but could be convinced otherwise.

I just ran a sim using these ranges and here is what I learned:
EV of betting and checking flop is close with pretty much every combo (KJss included). PIO chose a high cbet strategy, choosing to bet 80% of our range OTF for the size HERO chose.
OTT, PIO is betting far less frequently (but well above never) and KJs is being bet and checked at about the same frequency for 2/3 pot. If we do decide to check, PIO actually prefers k/shove over k/c, but it is never k/folding.
On the Ah river we should be giving up most of the time. however bluffing KJss at a small frequency is fine.

I wonder what other hands PIO likes to c/shove turn with?

Nice to see some actual hand discussion on LP for once

the fact that 9x impacts more villians range doesnt mean we can or cannot bet if our range still dominates villians even with that consideration fwiw.



BTW if im seeing correctly those are some default ranges for the preflop actions? they are far off from a good strat fwiw.

That 3betting range is pretty ridiculous. All suited aces 100% of the time? 100% of TT and 0% of 99? No lower suited connectors? 100% KQo, 0% AQo? Doesn't make much sense. There's going to be a wider range of hands that are mixed a lot in the 3betting range. Apart from the pure value hands, none of the rest of it is gonna be 100% 3bet.

As much as I love the idea of piosolver, simplepostflop, the problem with them is a) What you get out of it depends entirely on what ranges/sizing options you use which can vary dramatically from reality and b) What you get out is extremely difficult to emulate in actual gameplay.

You can get some interesting stuff out it, but if you put shit in you get shit out. I don't think these ranges are accurate for either player's range. There was a SimplePostflop pack released with preflop "Solutions" in the last year, which basically had a set opening ranges for UTG through SB using typical mid stakes player's opening ranges and allowed BB to fold/call/3bet. I'd start with using those if you were gonna try running any solutions for lines like this if you can't get a more accurate range from the actual player. Still, those solutions were made at 100bb and not 200bb like this spot and no humans play like that so it's always gonna be tough to get good solutions using those programs.

nm, completely reworking 3bet ranges

Something like this seem more reasonable as a 3Bet range for BBvCO?

Much better but no

turn is better for the villain but we should still have a betting range, size should def be smaller if u decide to bet

This is from the Simple Postflop preflop solution pack. Vs a 2.5bb CO open range of 28.42%. Obv preflop solutions aren't gonna be super accurate, but the general shape is gonna be fairly accurate

what's with Q2s and J4s over there that's just random variance in the solution?

Solutions aren't 100% accurate but I guess even if it was there'd be some hands that would be played some of the time and not all of the time as they're so borderline they can't be played all the time. To be fair I think these solutions are a lot tighter than most high stakes players play, I've seen Sauce defend like A5o against a 2.5x CO raise for instance and he's not exactly bad. I use the SP preflop ranges as a guideline and adjust based on how wide/bad players are, but I don't play much/high nowadays anyway so probably doesn't make much difference if I try to play a little wider/tighter against nl50 or nl100 competition

On September 26 2016 00:30 ToT)MidiaN( wrote: This is from the Simple Postflop preflop solution pack. Vs a 2.5bb CO open range of 28.42%. Obv preflop solutions aren't gonna be super accurate, but the general shape is gonna be fairly accurate

That's 2.75x no?

These programs seem like so much fun to play with. Tried to download but it doesn't work very well on Parallels for mac.

On September 27 2016 20:10 Daut wrote: Show nested quote + On September 26 2016 00:30 ToT)MidiaN( wrote: This is from the Simple Postflop preflop solution pack. Vs a 2.5bb CO open range of 28.42%. Obv preflop solutions aren't gonna be super accurate, but the general shape is gonna be fairly accurate That's 2.75x no? These programs seem like so much fun to play with. Tried to download but it doesn't work very well on Parallels for mac.

They had both players add 0.25 antes to make up for the small blind loss, effectively makes 2.75 into 2.50