VIDEO: Flop CR Scenarios

This topic contains 4 replies, has 2 voices, and was last updated by Profile photo of Viktor Viktor 3 years, 4 months ago.

Profile photo of Viktor

VIDEO: Flop CR Scenarios

By Viktor

Hi guys!

Here is my second video for the PokerJuice Community. Leave comments if you have any.

I hope you enjoy! ūüôā

Viktor

  • Author
    Replies
  • Profile photo of TheDrunkLife TheDrunkLife
    Hey Viktor, I really enjoyed this video and the last one. ¬†Looking forward to the rest of the series. Quick question. ¬†You said you default strategy on this flop vs a 10% x/r was to cbet 2+, AK. ¬†Same vs a slightly higher x/r and then vs an aggressive opponent just Q+. ¬†I followed the logic well and I want to put in this work in spots to find the proper frequencies. ¬† The situation I face is that in practice, I’m always looking at my opponents fold to cbet stat, and against many opponents would be exploitably c-betting far wider than 2+ AK. ¬†Basically this work brings us to a balanced strategy for how to play vs a 25%range SB cold call with varying x/r frequencies. ¬†Are we assuming opponents overall defense (call or XR) frequency is balanced? I suppose in the next video regarding calling we might look at opponents flop range and our hands EQ vs that range and EQ vs his continuing range and turn visibility. ¬†Vs a solid player with varying XR frequency, the strategy outlined in the video seems solid, but in game you would also adjust vs players who are over-folding to cbets? ¬†Would you consider this your default strategy on this texture without stats showing a reason to deviate to an exploit? ¬†I would think against most unknowns, we could cbet wider than this and I would be reserving a balanced approach for vs a player I deemed solid. Do you think it’s better to start out being exploitative to what we believe general population tendencies to be, or to start out balanced and only go exploitative when we are sure we have cause vs our specific opponent?    
    Profile photo of Viktor Viktor
    Hey, Im very sorry for my delayed response. Ive been on vacation and unavaible. Regarding your first question that if we assume opponents overall defense frequency is balanced. I would say its more likely that regulars (various skill levels) all have some intuitive understanding on how often they will have stuff, so they usually be more balanced then not when facing another regular in alot of spots. People play 90% the same hands so the frequencies should never be too off. More specific answer to the question. I dont think people are overall balanced enough and we can have some very exploitable plays in certain spots (monotone boards is a good example, not considering hand rankings). I like how you formulate the second part. We should try have a standard strategy and when we get reads (folding too much to cbets etc), we can alter our strategy to exploit his leak maximally. But as a standard, I try to play more balanced vs. unknowns to make sure I wont get exploited first. Hope it covered some, and again, sorry for late response.
    Profile photo of TheDrunkLife TheDrunkLife
    No problem about the late reply. ¬†Appreciate the feedback. ¬†I certainly feel better about my game when I start out playing what I feel is a more solid strategy in general and deviate after I have the read. Example: In HU i changed from opening 100% as std (based on the assumption population overfolds BB) to limping hands that I feel play better in single raised pots as opposed to 3b pots. ¬†My limping range is a work in progress, trying to make it balanced and hard to read, but still I feel more comfortable to start raising these hands that play better as limps once I have the stats showing my opponents BB fold feq to be at an amount that makes it more +EV. ¬†I feel like I’m playing better, and also, I’m less likely to get into an awkward spot without much information. Especially HU vs a random,¬†it’s important to be careful where you build pots because a lot of players are looking to win one pot and quit. Monotone boards is a spot where I probably am still playing an exploitative strategy as my default (assuming others overfold.) ¬†I balance somewhat by not betting hands that have good EQ/visability vs non-flush holdings, but I’m still going to have much more air than flushes when betting. ¬†It’s a spot where I wont find out they are not overfolding until I see them fighting back a lot. ¬†The same can be true on paired, rainbow 3-straight and Axx boards. ¬†Thoughts on this?
    Profile photo of Viktor Viktor

    In my experience, unknowns fold alot on monotone boards and maybe its justified. What can he do with A985r on Q75ddd if we make a bet? Not much. That means alot of our very low equity hands goes up in value if we can make alot of pairs or any draw fold. Same goes for a board like A62r, we make a cbet and our opponent holds JTT7. If we have a hand like 9854, we gain a ton of value straight away from making better hands fold. So theres a lot of merit to be betting those kind of low equity hands because a majority of our opponents range simply cant fight back. A conclusion from that would be we really dont need to bet hands like 4-high flushes on Q75dd, AT98 on A62r because we only exclude hands we are way ahead and bloat the pot with mediocre holdings vs. a calling range when that happens. Summing it up, generally a polarized cbetting approach is standard in my game for the most part. Sometimes it leans way more to the low equity hands then the high equity ones but our opponent is usually late with catching up to that fact and its hard to do anything about. Usually the best response is preflop but thats another topic ūüôā .

Viewing 4 replies - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)