Been watching a load of vids this week, and I feel I've improved my thinking tons. Phil Galfond philosophy vid was good, it went through a ton of complex calculations, but the gist was that having different betsizes (splitting your range) in a lot of spots makes it extremely hard for our opponent to adjust.
As an example, when someone tailors their CC turn range, they're basically doing so on the basis of facing a standard 2/3-3/4 bet. If we incorporate underbets, or overbets, then it means changing their entire decision to check in the first place, or even makes their decisions on earlier streets questionable. Different sizes was something I used to do all the time, and so I've mixed it back in during the times when the PSR is awkward (underbet) and also when stabbing the flop IP I'll go much smaller now. Dry boards too, only really 'needs' a 1/4 cbet and it totally fucks with people's gameplans and their ranges, and their handreading.
Another vid I watched was Gogol's nose. He explained all hands in a seemingly quite basic manner, but I felt like the real key to his success was considering his entire range when deciding on a bet, raise and specifically betsize. Way too often on the river we'll just be like, ok I want a call let's go small- but the proper process is to say, ok we have a bluff, so what would my size be for value? We may have gone $72 as a bluff, but $50 for value. That doesn't then mean we just say 'ok let's go $50 then', because we want to arrive on a size that's good for both bluff and value, and so at that point I'll take the midway point. The whole point of this exercise is to make the decision put to our opponent as difficult as possible.
I really want to keep up with that thought process, so I just need to keep up my vid watching, and possible start reading Matt Janda book.
No comments:
Post a Comment