Play your HAND in Poker, not your Range
Вставка
- Опубліковано 1 гру 2024
- 💸 CASH INJECTION IS NOW LIVE: 👉 www.carrotcorn....
🎓 THE CARROT POKER SCHOOL is now LIVE 👉www.carrotcorn...
🛒 For poker courses and products 👉 www.carrotcorn...
🥇 For poker coaching 👉 www.carrotcorn...
Follow me on Twitch 👉 / carrot_corner
Follow me on Twitter 👉 / carroters1
📜 Video Description 📜
In the pre poker solver era, hand reading and finding the highest EV play with your hand vs. your opponent's range were paramount to success at the poker tables. In recent times, range-thinking has become more prevalent with the rise of solvers. In some cases, being aware of the range vs range picture can be important; but at some point your thought process must return to a hand vs range analysis. This is how we maximise our trueEV. In today's video we analyse some 200 ZOOM hands and use them to demonstrate where range thinking needs to end and hand thinking begins. In doing so, we avoid an all too common poker pitfall.
MDF only applies on rivers (and never on flops and turns) because on rivers, EV gain or loss due to position and/or equity shifts on turn and river cards (shifting range asymmetry) no longer applies.
Hi Pete, I saw you on Charlie Carroll's podcast the other day and I thought you gave a really good account of yourself in what must have been a stressful situation.
Where was this podcast? I can’t see it on Charlie’s channel!
But Charlie is a jerk and a Anti Vaxxer. He has a lot of cringe takes. Can not take Charlie seriously. Pete was cool though
@@louiquelcutti4476 was a live stream
@@louiquelcutti4476 Yes I tried to watch it back and couldn't see it too, click "live" on his channel and it's there.
If anyone finds it comment pls
That QQ hand from the turn onwards was really neat. Thank you Pete!
The thing with 25nl is, in KK situation BB will happily shove the river with 77 or KT or Q6 or plenty other
@9:55 I still to this day remember one specific gentlemen who kept calling standard value bets down to the river and when I asked what his thought process was and why he didn't fold, he said "Pot control.." lol
I often play your videos as I drift off to sleep. Somehow the discussion of surviving in the jungle and deciding which beetle to eat woke me up, lol. I think your content is great and I’m absorbing theoretical concepts that I just didn’t understand or was just ignoring as a cope thinking “oh I don’t need to understand these nuances.” If ever I somehow find myself on a televised table whether cash or tourney, I’m going to wear a carrot corner patch 🤙
Hmm I may need to get some patches made first, or maybe you could just take an actual carrot with you as a mascot? Thanks for the kind words and glad to be a sleep aid. Sleep is key.
My interpretation of MDF has always been (aside from applying to rivers like someone else mentioned) that yes you want to aim to maintain that frequency, but not arbitrarily. You choose the best times to 'defend', and if you play preflop well you should be in a position where you can pick MDF% times to defend and win sufficient amount from doing so, while maintaining deterence against excessive bluffing. Am I wrong for thinking of it this way? It makes more sense to me when all the parts fit together. If you play everything preflop then it's going to be much harder to maintain the MDF. Everything needs to be played 'well' and then everything slots in together.
I once heard the idea that we KNOW where our actual hand sits in our range so we have information villain doesn't have. And this is information (knowing what cards we have relative to our range) we can take advantage of.
While I agree with almost all of the video, I think it does matter in the KK hand that 'I can have a straight here' because it makes it less likely that your opponent is bluffing when it's possible that you could play J9 or AJ in the same way as the KK.
true but opponents aren't supposed to under bluff just because you can have the nuts. If they do then exploit fold.
@@johnphillips669 They aren't supposed to UNDERbluff, but they are meant to bluff less when you're uncapped because the hands that will auto-call a bluff become (in a hand like this) a significant part of your range.
Whoa, whoa - Brad Owen often checks back the turn to “pot control” - are you saying… he’s bad at poker?!
Really appreciate the KK analysis, great example of looking at a river decision via the solver without trying to implement it
I'm by no means an expert at this stuff. That being said, I tend to think in terms of my range earlier in hands, and on later streets I tend to shift toward my exact hand vs their range. So preflop/flop its more Range vs Range, and Turn it often tends to be my hand class vs range, and river, its usually exact hand.
Thanks for this, i had serious problems digesting this problem, with your video finally my logic can take a breath, because i dont think that im an idiot anymore.
Allright so i have a question. Well, 2 actually
1: i currently play without an rng. Do you think this is mandatory? As you said. Being balanced doesnt really matter. So should i even be using one at 10-25nl?
2: ggpoker actually prohibits the use of tracking software. Since they have a hud build in ive just been using that. But of course, it only really shows the % of the current session, and not the entire history with the villan. And i also have no graphs nothing. Should i get tracking software, and if so, does ggpoker not notice it?
I know these are noob questions, but we all start somewhere right😅
Thank you
I think 25% bet on the turn is too small, he is basically priced in to continue with any ace or draw. And then on the river he has 50bb left and the pot is 100bb so even it the river is brick he can call your shove with ace or even king.
Been watching all of your content recently as I’m really studying the game now and find your methodology aligns closest to the way I think - this might be my Eureka video. Thank you for explaining this as succinctly as you did!
From a (hopefully for not too long) break even 25NL player
Does range matter a little bit in the KK hand? If I have all the straights in my range, I can infer that villain is less likely to check jam river as a bluff. I don't think that information is as important as everything else you covered, but it seems like it matters a bit when figuring out if the spot is over or under bluffed. Am I wrong?
This is refreshing
Pete: Can you expand a bit on what you mean by polarization error?
I really agree with you with this but I find it funny how much you still use randomizers when you know that checking and betting are both fine or b75 and b125 are both fine instead of trying to find the highest EV line for every spesific situation more often. Because again, in theory the lines might be almost identical EV / indifferent, but in reality almost always one option is greater in EV than others. Obviously can be tough to find it. Or is it more about being balanced on flops and preflop for example? Interested to hear your thoughts on this.
9:03 why would offsuit straight hands be in their range but not suited straight hands? is it bc it’s a SRP?
i just love you for this bit Pete, really, i have been approaching spots like this with the same mindset as you display here, because its the ONLY TRUE way to do so.. we are not robots.. and sometimes our opponents also will be more on the "human" side...thats the beauty of poker, keep seeking TRUE EV, not equilibrium perfect lazy solutions that are not accurate... anyways, thanks for this great videos you are putting out... just awsome ))
the last hand with QQ ; this is a cold 4bet bot and i thinking, he having not AT,AQ,KJ in the range (ok AQs) : i think the turn bet is not so gut, TT folds and AK, JJ, AA calls or shufft. i Playing Micro. or see i it false?
Takeaways :1, Range bet can turns into checks vs different player types. 2 Check back because we can sometimes delay value not because we want to pot control, pot control is not a good term if theres no good logic behind it. 3,River calling or folding ALL our bluffcatchers depend on whether the certain opponent is possibly overbluffing or under bluffing this particular node , throw away the x% of range do this x% of range do that bs.
Your dog is having the most glorious nap back there! Also, love the content!
9:58 Brad Owen feels so called-out right now.
You forgot to show the result of last hand.
I like the way you think, But the truth is the opponent also think I can think exactly how you think ehehhe but for is good.
So its complicated :D
The best hand win OR the best approach win
KK is actually not a bluff catcher here because it beats some of villain’s value range. And to know why that’s the case, we need to look at where KK is in our overall range with respect to the MDF defined by villain’s bet size.
What value hand do we beat ? Ils vilain shoving 2 par for value, I dont think so. And I dont see any trips : they would have 3b preflop or raised flop/turn. 66 is not there any more
Villain doesn’t end up with any combos of slow-played set of 77 or top two in this solver output, but it happens often enough to be relevant. I’d take a set over top two in this spot even though the solver says both are roughly same EV.
im pretty indifferent to this video
i would fold the kings hand at nl25 without much thought. i have all combos of j9 and aj, im fine getting exploited here by folding top of my non nutted range - nobody will actually exploit this in practice because im not playing solvers or best players in the world
Nice interesting detective skills. I found myself trying to work it out with you. I was leaning towards a fold on the KK hand because if I'm right in saying you were getting less than 2:1 EV, and the odds of you having the best hand were about 50%, maybe slightly less (you beat his bluffs 100% of the time, lose to his value bets 100%). Please correct me if I'm wrong. :D For the QQ hand, I'm not really sure what your thought process is - mainly because I've not come across a player folding two pair on that board lol - then again I am a noob. Keep up the good work.
If you're getting 2:1 you'd only need to have the best hand more than 33% of the time to make the call +EV. ;)
Hey Peter love your content . I tend to think in these spots like this : Is my opponent calling here with their KK when we are at the opposite spots . If the answer is yes , then I am calling too , which means I don't really lose more then them at this particular spot . What you think ? KK vs AJ hand
i think thats idiotic
"stop rolling, start thinking"👌
Excellent insight and analysis Pete!
main takeaway also from this video that we play ranges vs thinking players and our exact hand vs the so called "lads".
I mean all poker is - figure out what level your opponent is thinking on, and just go 1 level above. important not to go 2 levels above haha
what's your take on checking for tilt control?
pot control is totally fine would save you a lot of money is spiderman tinkle senses
Well said. The potential downside to this would be - Example - Opponent see's you calling down at a higher frequency than you 'should' be, and he exploits that.
Maximizing expected value of a play is always the goal, however, the expected value of a play will constantly be in fluctuation depending on a world of factors - Just because calling down a guy with ace high was the best play in the past, or present, doesn't mean it will be in the future.
Doyle Brunson had this saying, which had a lot of wisdom in it -
"Give the dog a bone."
How this ties into what we're talking about is as follows -
If our opponent has a sizeable leak, and we exploit him, there's a good chance our opponent will 'fill' his leak, and take away that potential exploit we have. Therefore, we give our opponent a 'bone', and 'letting' them have it' every now and again.
So someone might say to that, "But how are you taking the highest ev play if you give them a bone?"
And the answer simplified is as follows -
"You can take a +1 exploit play now, but your opponent will fill his leak, and this exploit won't be possible in the future."
or
"You can take a +0.2 exploit, and your opponent will never recognize he has a leak that needs to be filled. You can use this exploit forever."
Which then is the highest ev play?
Well, for our hand in this very moment, the +1 route is correct. However, given that we play our opponent every day, we do not want him to ever fill his leak. And so it's a simple conclusion that an infinite amount of +0.2's beats a low number of +1's.
And to that someone might say, "Just re-adjust to his re-adjustment."
Well, that eventually leads to both players approximating gto, you don't want that. It would be better to exploit someone without them ever being aware of it, and to do so you have to forgo present EV, to gain future EV.
Some people may dismiss this, because it takes a bit of thinking to get your head around it, but here's another example -
Joe shows up at your house every day and gives you $5. You smile at Joe and say, "Thanks Joe, see you tomorrow."
Joe returns the next day and gives you $5. You again smile at Joe and say, Thanks Joe, see you tomorrow."
This can happen every day for the rest of your life.
However, if one day Joe show up at your house, and you push him against a wall, and rob him for everything that is in his pockets(say $20). Joe will stop coming around to your house and giving you $5.
That's the concept of future EV. It's a real thing that gets dismissed by some people, and it's very foolish to dismiss it.
So in short -
Play your hand, take the highest expected value play with your hand, and if your opponent is the type to never adjust, then there's nothing else to consider. However, if your opponent adjusts to your plays, and you play them regularly, you should consider 'giving him a bone', and not make it obvious to him that you're exploiting him. This will maximize your 'life ev' vs this opponent, even though in the vacuum of a hand you're not maximally taking all that you can from them.
Sometimes to maximize your all time ev, you need to take a current hand ev hit, you need to accept the $5 from Joe, and not shake him down for the $20.
In the KK hand (haven't seen the result) the reasons I would lean toward fold here.
98s got there on the river, and your flop bet was large, so I think he's going to release most of his pure floats. Due to the sizing he may flat J9o or J9s on the flop instead of X/R it, so he has actually a fairly large number of straights by the river and the question becomes 'what does he float the flop with that he subsequently turns into a bluff in this way.' We have to keep in mind that some of his flop floats are going to donk the river because you checked back the turn. So for him to be over-bluffing he has to have a lot of flop floats vs. big bets, *too many* of which he then slots into a check-turn check-river range with the intention of moving you off the portion of your range that is strong enough to make a big value bet but is not itself the nuts.
The argument for calling is that our turn check-back he may interpret as kind of merge-y. He may conclude that if you had a turned straight or anything strong enough to value bet the river, you would bet it off on the turn due to the presence of the flush draw. So he may think you are either capped to one pair and thinly value betting OR you are bluffing, and he can't beat your bluffs, so he would check-jam with hands with no showdown value, reasoning that you would fold everything.
But, again, unless this guy totally disrespects you, he should have something when he calls the flop. A lot of his something functions pretty well as a bluff catcher against your polarized river bet. It's hard for him to show up with the kind of total air that needs to get you off jack-high.
For me it comes down to the fact that he's giving you a pretty good price and in order to have too many bluffs he needs to be resisting the temptation to bet the river himself, against a weak range, electing instead to put air into his checking range intending to attack a strong range, and to the aggro player, I think that initial temptation to bet the river would be too strong. So I would fold.
This is going to sound harsh : that's a lot of mumbo jumbo for essentially a weak synopsis. Forget any of that mental game crap and focus on fundementals. Imagine this is an incognito pool so there will be villains over bluffing and some never bluffing this node.
The best way I describe this is like a bucket of water. You have 1 bucket and n your bucket your water is your value and each node/decision point for villain. As they progress down the game tree they will be filling other buckets with some of this water. Some buckets are very neglected and others they simply run out of almost all of the water. This is one of those nodes where it's very difficult to find enough water, after preflop, flop, turn nodes to have water in this last XRAI bucket.
- However ANY time villain feels like finding a bluff they can in this spot and they don't need water to do it.
- This leads to some villains having FAR too many bluffs in this node compared to their value.
IF we conclude there villains in the pool bluffing here we should find some calls when we have a bluff catcher.
- Some bluff catchers are better than others, and I'd grade them in terms of unblocking bluffs rather than blocking value.
- Specifically I'd consider KK a better call than KQ here. QQ mostly meant to check back turn as well.
Also sometimes shit happens and you get stacked and youre just gonna pay in spots. IF you spend all your time trying to fold you will block yourself from progressing as well.
If you can compare his value range to a bucket of water, you can do the same thing with his air. The problem is that a lot of the air got there. He needs to be turning busted front door flush draws and middle pairs into bluff, because there are a lot of combos of straights he needs to have like ten combos of bluffs to make us indifferent and more than that to make us pure call. Recall that pio is folding this hand 80% of the time, I'm not a nit because I think we should fold it this time. I am arguing he doesn't float vs large flop bet with enough air, and the doesn't check that air twice with the intention of moving hero off a hand like the one he has. At least not enough that we would want to call. I am saying if he had air he would bet the river with it most of the time. he doesn't really want to x/r a busted front door flush draw anyway because that makes it far less likely that hero has one, and villain wants to unblock our folding range. Where do you think these combos of creative bluffs are coming from?
@@hymnofashes villains bluffs on river here won’t be “air”. They will be pairs with showdown value that block straights that are good enough to win at showdown but not good enough to call the river bet from hero. So villains checks on river here are going to be give ups, showdown value and traps. And if villain was to bluff here he would be using the showdown value portion that doesn’t win enough to call but that blocks hero’s best calls for example QJ. So it doesn’t matter if villain has little air here because he doesn’t want to bluff air here anyway as it has poor bluffing properties on this river.
@@jackbuhlmann148 Good point, not a lot of "air," but still, surely villain will want to bluff-catch with some of those pairs, and he has to have *too many* of those pairs-turned-into-bluffs to make us not indifferent. Still not hearing any cogent argument as to why that would be the case in this pool.
Dude, this comment is utter insanity because the entirety of it is founded on a falsehood. He bet 3/4 pot on the turn and villain called. PLEASE never type anything like this ever again. I legitimately lost brain cells.
The idea of rolling dice seems silly to me, unless you’re literally playing massive volume against a GTO bot with a perfect memory. Surely the more pertinent consideration, in situations when you’re indifferent to calling or folding, is what table image you want to present. Suppose you’ve folded to a river bet 3 times in the last 5 hands you’ve played (because you happened to not even have a bluff catcher in those hands). If you fold again then you’re going to start looking vulnerable and people are going to think about exploitatively over-bluffing you. Let random cards you’ve been dealt over the course of the session, and the image you’re generating for yourself by playing them, be your RNG.
You absolutely must use both your hand and your range - not just your hand. If you just looked at your hand you’d have no idea what to do. If you used your range, meaning, you saw that MDF says we must defend with 40% of our range, and clearly way less than 40% of our range is straights, so we have to dip into some of our sets to make up the rest of the 40%. That’s the thought process anyway. Also, this is a cherry picked spot whereas usually blocker and unblocker effects make it more intuitive to choose what part of our range defends, and the difference in EV of our river holdings is more dramatic.
And if you don’t know which sets to use (the rest of range is basically all sets) or the EVs are too close, just randomize till you reach the 40%. But in general Pete is right in that the player tendencies are more relevant than the theory stuff in these spots.
Jungle jokes are the best :D
at 25 zoom they dont fold shit. i tried to bluff an unknown opponent on Q 9 4 8 6 like 150bb deep.
I had Q10s he had KK. I opened 2,2bb ep and called his tiny 3b of 5,4bb (LOL) from bu. I played x c x c x shuv AI vs b33 b50 b75 from him and he like called with not even a 10 seconds tank. thats just to funny how some opponents there are not even thinking at level 2 (what my opponent could have) just level 1 (well duh i have overpair i call)
random comment to support the channel
to channel the comment random support
Finally, idk how GTO players can make an excuse here. Think about their range.
If you’re unsure on the call break their range down to combos.
How many Ax’s does he have here
A2, A3,A4,A5,A6,A8,A9,AJ,AQ all of clubs.
Other flushes 89c 96c if they’re a fish. (Not accounting for the raise pre here just general)
Maybe he does this with QT 6x of them.
KQ & KT 3 of each so 6
7s Ts and Qs 9 combinations.
AA 6 combos
By my count
38 potentially bluffs/ hands we beat that may possibly decide to jam.
Now what beats us.
J9 and 89 and AJ
16 of each which is 48.
So our hand is facing
38 potential combos we beat
Versus
48 we lose to
- without considering any preflop action or post flop and how often he takes any of those 38 combos that we beat play like this. Would drastically lower this ratio.
#FUCKGTO
Great video, and well explained on Charlie’s stream!
25:33 😂😂😂
Dude keep making videos man for the few that realize you're the best it's a golden learning opportunity, while they are learning poop from Johnathan little carrot disciples are learning the karate to chop them down based off more correct logic just like the grinders manual
That few is growing according to our metrics. Thanks for the kind words.
@ 20:30 A lot of players are either not playing anymore (long gone) or have never truly progressed because of the nonsense you talk about here.
This is the shit man
I don't like this video. There is nothing wrong with solvers. It's 0ev because it is against perfect play, a completely balanced range. The solver tells you how to play your hands, and to exploit players you must adjust from the solver only once you know what your specific opponent does wrong.
Its big Kruzer !
Always cracks me up to see kruzer in the old videos. Pete got his old opponents working for him now, kinda a flex. Plus knowing how good kruzer is always makes me a little nervous whenever he gets involved in the pot. Even though im not even the one playing 😂