Xx Xx by Stroggoz

man this llinus is RUNHOT MASTER

nah man he run many buy ins under ev for 25/50 for the year

I'll bet you one thing, gto never check's flop with JT here.

Clearly this isnt GTO. this is playing "exploitive" or "bad" hoping someone to make a bigger more "exploitive" or "bad" play. AKA everyday on HS Poker

This hand make no sense to me, I don't like flop check-back very much because the 3better is supposed to c/r flops a lot. I would think you lose more ev from value hands that go for c/r, than ev gained from missed hands that pick up equity later on.

solver says JT checkback should virtually never happen. There are other bluff hands that can check/jam turn, like A6-2dd, 46dd, 45dd, which solver does do, but it c/c with 47dd. Cindy plays a bit strange in general, I think they might be the weaker reg out of these monsters.

yeah linuslove certainly plays far from gto in some spots, for the most part though they don't deviate.

could be mis click check back.

i remember a hand when i was taking shots at 5/10 and poor user cold called a 3bet with T5 and proceeded to stack my AA coz i couldnt put him on TTX

I am pretty sure that they are not using pio as you guys think
they are not solving from 0 and copying all the ranges and strategies pio gives to them, they are mostly locking nodes with how people play and find out how pio adjusts and exploits their strategies

for example: if someone doesnt have a 3bet range vs a xr, oop player can increase his xr range by a lot, the only way to punish the xraiser is by 3betting him
if he thinks ohheycindy strategy is going bit too wild with his xraises vs delay cbets ( exploiting the field ) then linus can adjust by streghtening his delaycbet range

its actually a delay bet vs missed cbet, but i guess you got what i meant

On October 03 2017 13:43 Stroggoz wrote: This hand make no sense to me, I don't like flop check-back very much because the 3better is supposed to c/r flops a lot. I would think you lose more ev from value hands that go for c/r, than ev gained from missed hands that pick up equity later on. solver says JT checkback should virtually never happen. There are other bluff hands that can check/jam turn, like A6-2dd, 46dd, 45dd, which solver does do, but it c/c with 47dd. Cindy plays a bit strange in general, I think they might be the weaker reg out of these monsters. yeah linuslove certainly plays far from gto in some spots, for the most part though they don't deviate.

the deviation is an obvious one when solvers rarely check these kind of nuts however the TRUE deviation is minimal when it comes to strategy, for example not splitting ranges when you should, or not using the correct sizing is much more significant than this, but obviously less evident.

So I think its premature to say the least to reach conclusions like he is exploiting some tendency to overplay in 3B pots to delayed Cbet that requires an absurd sample

On October 04 2017 02:12 Baalim wrote: Show nested quote + On October 03 2017 13:43 Stroggoz wrote: This hand make no sense to me, I don't like flop check-back very much because the 3better is supposed to c/r flops a lot. I would think you lose more ev from value hands that go for c/r, than ev gained from missed hands that pick up equity later on. solver says JT checkback should virtually never happen. There are other bluff hands that can check/jam turn, like A6-2dd, 46dd, 45dd, which solver does do, but it c/c with 47dd. Cindy plays a bit strange in general, I think they might be the weaker reg out of these monsters. yeah linuslove certainly plays far from gto in some spots, for the most part though they don't deviate. the deviation is an obvious one when solvers rarely check these kind of nuts however the TRUE deviation is minimal when it comes to strategy, for example not splitting ranges when you should, or not using the correct sizing is much more significant than this, but obviously less evident. So I think its premature to say the least to reach conclusions like he is exploiting some tendency to overplay in 3B pots to delayed Cbet that requires an absurd sample

I don't quite understand what your saying, but i shouldn't have said he doesn't deviate much, that is kind'a hard to interpret, he probably deviates a lot more than the other 25/50 regs, but in small ways. like the small betting instead of range splitting is not gto, but the ev difference from gto is probably so small that one might not call it much of a deviation. If that's what you mean then i agree.

I also agree that these people don't play enough hands to nodelock around 3betting ranges on the flop, or c/r vs delayed cbets. They only play a couple thousand hands a month at 25/50, how could one nodelock around it unless you guessed what their ranges are after seeing a few hands that definitely should be in those ranges but arn't.

so you guys think that everyone runs range vs range on pio and copy pio strategy, and basically everybody at highstakes play the same way ? lol
right, and the games are running 3 handed with 3 bosses because of what ?

my point is that they are not blindly following pio solutions as you guys think

No i never said that lol, i'm just looking at how the sim's compare to these players. if you look through my past comments and in this comment with JTo hand, i say his play is not gto. Actually there is one person who it seems to be true, oborra.

I'm curious as to how nodelocking works at high stakes in the spots you mention when there are so few hand histories on your opponent.

On October 04 2017 03:29 drone666 wrote: so you guys think that everyone runs range vs range on pio and copy pio strategy, and basically everybody at highstakes play the same way ? lol right, and the games are running 3 handed with 3 bosses because of what ? my point is that they are not blindly following pio solutions as you guys think

You are spot on.

HSNL is not GTO it’s not even close. The best regs do not play or even aim to play GTO even though they push for it on social media.

You cannot know obarra is GTO from limited sample. Plus you have no information on non showdowns and his strategy could be to play more non showdown.

On October 04 2017 06:11 Baalim wrote: You have no clue about HSNL players, you havent played poker in 7 years

You’ve never even played hsnl, so yea I don’t know what gives you the confidence to think you know more about hsnl than me.

On October 04 2017 06:12 wobbly_au wrote: Show nested quote + On October 04 2017 06:11 Baalim wrote: You have no clue about HSNL players, you havent played poker in 7 years You’ve never even played hsnl, so yea I don’t know what gives you the confidence to think you know more about hsnl than me.

You havent played poker in many years, how that goes through your head is amazing, Dunning Kruger I guess.

You are acting exactl like a Phil Hellmuth, thinking that the poker skill is the same as 20 years ago

On October 04 2017 07:10 Baalim wrote: Show nested quote + On October 04 2017 06:12 wobbly_au wrote:   On October 04 2017 06:11 Baalim wrote: You have no clue about HSNL players, you havent played poker in 7 years You’ve never even played hsnl, so yea I don’t know what gives you the confidence to think you know more about hsnl than me. You havent played poker in many years, how that goes through your head is amazing, Dunning Kruger I guess. You are acting exactl like a Phil Hellmuth, thinking that the poker skill is the same as 20 years ago

Me: hasn't played & won 25/50+ in 7 years
Baal: has NEVER played 25/50+

hmmmm lets see whos logic is correct here.

idk what stakes Baal plays these days but it should be intuitively obvious for anyone whose been around poker for a while that someone playing midstakes today is more likely to know what they're talking about than someone who played high stakes 7 years ago and hasn't played since. Tons of people have gone from beating highstakes to losing at mid or even lowstakes in far less than 7 years even without taking a long break.

On October 04 2017 08:55 bigredhoss wrote: idk what stakes Baal plays these days but it should be intuitively obvious for anyone whose been around poker for a while that someone playing midstakes today is more likely to know what they're talking about than someone who played high stakes 7 years ago and hasn't played since. Tons of people have gone from beating highstakes to losing at mid or even lowstakes in far less than 7 years even without taking a long break.

You simply cannot understand hsnl without playing it.

You or baaal or any msnl player who hasn’t done 100k hands will never understand hsnl.

GTO as a concept is very basic and every winning reg back in the days understood it, we also practiced it in certain areas and in other areas we adjusted to play exploitive.

All I’m saying is Baal seems to pretend it is some new strategy, it was widely practice before and still is today. Games are much tougher maybe nl 500 is same as nl5000 I would argue it won’t be, but that doesn’t change the fact that GTO is a very basic concept.

how come image upload doesn't work on this site anymore!

I would say back in the days. When LPers said “in vacuum” or “abc” is similar concept to GTO. After factoring reads, histories, dynamic people will end up playing exploitive.

The best msnl hsnl players of my time all understood to balance and I would say for 20-100bb poker the better players are all fairly GTO preflop, and even in narrow range situations posflop, it is what made us winners. Especially people who played tones of tables, we gave up a lot of max ev for playing GTO and getting more hands vs fish while making the regs who played less tables not be able to exploit us too much.

Whole concept of GTO is to make opponent action irrelevant also if all parties play GTO then no one but rake wins, it is a ridiculously basic concept to good poker players. People who are fawning over it just expose them self for being bad at poker.

On October 04 2017 09:20 wobbly_au wrote: Show nested quote + On October 04 2017 08:55 bigredhoss wrote: idk what stakes Baal plays these days but it should be intuitively obvious for anyone whose been around poker for a while that someone playing midstakes today is more likely to know what they're talking about than someone who played high stakes 7 years ago and hasn't played since. Tons of people have gone from beating highstakes to losing at mid or even lowstakes in far less than 7 years even without taking a long break. You simply cannot understand hsnl without playing it. You or baaal or any msnl player who hasn’t done 100k hands will never understand hsnl. GTO as a concept is very basic and every winning reg back in the days understood it, we also practiced it in certain areas and in other areas we adjusted to play exploitive. All I’m saying is Baal seems to pretend it is some new strategy, it was widely practice before and still is today. Games are much tougher maybe nl 500 is same as nl5000 I would argue it won’t be, but that doesn’t change the fact that GTO is a very basic concept.

I've been out of poker for as long as you and I never played above midstakes so it's not like I'm making an argument for my own insight into today's games. But I mean it's not like people enter a higher plane of thinking when they go from 5/10 to 10/20 or 25/50, the 5knl players are just a little better than the 1knl players, I think you are mythologizing highstakes a little bit.

I also think you have some misunderstandings about what GTO is but I have to go and there's people who could explain it better than me. Like Baal said it can be very unintuitive compared to what we expect 'balanced play' to look like.