improving

TT:

What I did when I was starting out several years ago, when I was playing 50-100NL I would constantly harass and speak to the 600NL-2000NL players untill they responded. I ended up adding them to my MSN and talking poker with them. If you want to learn either get into contact with the best players in your stakes, or players who play higher then you

What do checking back ranges look like in position?

Answer: I tend to heavily emphasize checking back hands that keep my opponents dominated hands in. For example, I probably won't bet with AQ on a Ts 4c 2d board if my opponent is going to check-fold AJ or QJ, because I can dominate those hands on the turn. When he has a hand like AJ or QJ, rather than having 6 ours (like 2 overcards usually have) he instead only has 3 outs, and additionally he'll have 2 "tained outs" where he improves to top pair but I have him outkicked.

I'd almost always bet with hands which have little showdown value and retain their equity well. So, it's rare for me to check back a gutshot or something, as those hands usually make the perfect bluffs.

Lastly, I want to bet with hands that are vulnerable to being outdrawn by hands in the opponent's check-folding range. So if I have 88 on a 9c 7c 4h board, even though I can't bet all three streets for value, I'm unlikely to check because then I give free cards to hands like QJ or AJ. So on a 9c 7c 4h board, I may want to check back AcQd, since this way if my opponent has something like KcQh he can turn a dominated pair or once in a while runner runner the 2nd nut flush vs my nut flush. But I'd bet 88 because I want his KQ to go away.

calling a turn barrel

anytime ur gona fold the best hand or call w/ worse on the river (while having <50% equity), ur losing money on your turn call.

The more optimal bluffing freq hes gonna have otr, the more money ur gonna lose

constructing Stealing & Defending ranges

A good way to think about these steal and resteal numbers is to figure out what % of the pot you have to claim postflop to make your semibluff steals greater than or neutral EV.

For example, if you have a 61% sb steal success rate and open to 3bb bvb, then you risk 2.5 to win 1.5, needing to be successful 62.5% for 0ev given 0 postflop equity. With your 61% steal success, you only have to claim 1.5% of the postflop pot on average to be breakeven on that steal. A decent way to model postflop equity share as a very rough guess might be (raw equity vs range (.8)) + (3betfreq(0)), which will give us 80% of our equity when we see a flop to account for our positional disadvantage and gives us 0% of our equity when 3bet, assuming we always fold our steal. So, if we think he folds 61%, calls 25% and 3bets 14% and we hold J7hh we get something like .61 success (1.5 pot) + (.41 equity * .25 call freq * .8) (6bb pot) + (.14) (-2.5) = .915 + .492 - .35 for a total of +1.057 bb on the steal. 

Use a similar model to get an idea for other hands/other positions.

(note : its not just about raw equity, but also equity distribution (polarized range nuts x air plays better oop) and playability / realizing the equity)

BvB optimal strat

SB:

Alice opens in SB 35%

Alice 4-bets {88+,AJs,AQo} for value
Alice 4-bets {AJo-A7o,ATs-A7s} as bluffs

(! different strat than 35% open from outside the blinds, cos both players already put money in the pot)

BB:

• 3-bet value range (including 5-bet bluffs): {JJ+,AK,A5s-A2s} =56 combos
• 3-bet bluff range: {A6o-A2o,K8o,Q8o} =84 combos
• Flatting range: {TT-22,ATs-A6s,AJo-A7o,K8s+,K9o+,Q8s+,Q9o+,J7s+,J9o+,T7s+,T8o+96s+,86s+,75s+,65s} =362 combos

I dont care how you play

a near-optimal strategy in poker wins against just about any strategy an opponent is likely to play. This means we can ignore our opponent’s strategy most of the time and still expect to have a healthy winrate. If you’re an online player who multi-tables, ignoring your opponent’s strategy frees up a massive amount of attention.

loving my game right now. playing prolly my best 6max game ever