How To Dominate On The Turn Like A Pro (PIO Deep Dive)

[@natekeol]

best instructional vid i’ve seen. the pace and flow of explanation!

[@alexl2512]

Thanks! Excellent presentation.

[@colinmurphy3478]

Some of the best content I can find for free. Thanks Simon.

[@BluffTheSpot]

We like to think so

[@KimiiiRaikkonen]

Super good content! Really great coaching video. Thank you Simon

[@apucterio]

This is great material, would you do one but on the river? Thanks for this video!

[@zyzzmirincomeatme]

This guy is a beast. Simon, can you please make more play and explains?

[@BluffTheSpot]

Of course. Many more on the way

[@bertjames9661]

Question for Simon regarding variance at 1knl. What's the longest break even stretch/losing stretch you have hand wrt to hand amount?

[@jackbrady9738]

comment for algorithm

[@RAWoLEVANDE]

Amazing work Simon! I would love to see what changes deep stacked like 200xbb with flop bet and turn strategy. Its very limited imformation out there on deep stack play. Thx Simon!

[@BluffTheSpot]

That's very true

[@reverplusgrand]

Simon , your content is top notch!

[@BluffTheSpot]

Thank you

[@easstttt]

Great vid, learned a lot

[@pieterbekkers]

Thanks Simon!

[@Michaelperry1985]

Excellent work Simon!

[@BluffTheSpot]

Thanks

[@antonsergheiciuc4666]

16:30 -- I understand your logic re why 2pairs start to check more, but how come AA is a pure bet? I feel like facing a x-r when holding AA is just as shitty a spot as facing a x-r when holding 2pair. Is AA meant to be an easy bet fold (esp without the flush card)? As far as other video ideas, all the ones you mentioned I'd love to see -- probe turn, defending BB, etc. Thanks for the great content Simon :)

[@ivanwong8281]

Great great educational content and i like your delivey

[@BluffTheSpot]

Thanks for the comment

[@deristokes]

I understand that this is our entire range but how do we decide what size to take is it for our exact holding or do we just choose anyone because it’s in our range? Hope this makes sense I’m kinda confused 😐

[@modeob88]

+1

[@hschuler7892]

Figure out what size you want to play in any given spot and then decide which category your hand falls into. Don't have multiple sizes in any given spot (except for SOME rivers). This will help you create a balanced strategy. When determining size, if you are unsure what size you want to play, think about a similar situation you do know and try to extrapolate.

[@sc0tt0777]

cool vid.. i vote u do it from BB perspective for next video!

[@BluffTheSpot]

That's a good idea

[@oneone_isme]

I like this kind of videos!😊

[@BluffTheSpot]

Thanks. A lot more on the way

[@vincentlai5056]

On the Q972 four ♠️ board, is Q9s Q7s a bet according to the solver, anyone know why? Thx 🙏🏻

[@vincentlai5056]

There are 3 sizing used and check in some frequencies, should we just simplify that to a check?

[@germanmoneymaker7925]

Its a very nice GTO explain video. In my opinion you missed to explain that all sizings are just "optimal" vs a perfect GTO playing opponent. For Exemple on the KJ72 board you said that you are losing 1 chip if you just use 75% on the turn and not the overbet. In theory thats 100% right but most of your viewers are no highstakes players who never played against someone who plays on that GTO level. Thats why i dont think following your strategys without thinking makes lots of sence because adjusting to opponents is key in poker. On lower stakes using an overbet (especially on zoom) is never max EV because population is not reacting like pio and that will have massive impacts on your expected EV.

[@BluffTheSpot]

Yeah that's a fair comment. I think you definitely have to play exploitive as well against a lot of the population at lower stakes

[@germanmoneymaker7925]

@@BluffTheSpot for exemple - just tell pio that your opponent is just check raising 2pair+ and good draws vs your small range cbet on the Flop- i dont think that pio would continue to overbet K8 on the turn. I am a highstakes liveplayer and i am on vacation for study and i love your content. Please dont get me wrong 😄... played just live this year and i try to get back into online Poker to improve my game and i am watching all your Videos to learn.

[@whitepanda34]

@@BluffTheSpot GTO Wizard videos explain that well ; When getting into weird lines, you force opponent into weird situations where he'll do way more mistakes, EV wise = more money for you

[@whitepanda34]

(For ex, if u have sims with 2x probe overbet, u'ld see weird lines possibilities)

[@germanmoneymaker7925]

@@whitepanda34 yeah very nice. On highstakes my experience with overbetting turns is mainly negative because people overfold a lot, so i mainly use is for bluffing and not that often for value

[@alphageneral6921]

Awesome

[@Shipdacheese]

Orange means bet, green means check...what does grey mean? Noticed a lot of Axs of hearts were grayed out...

[@WuftaNick]

it means that specific combo is not part of your range

[@Shipdacheese]

@@WuftaNick Oh i see thanks. Why would Ax of hearts not be part of the range there though?

[@EffectLT]

Super!

[@user-pe1yc8fk7d]

Take a look at delayed cbetting next time plz!!!!

[@BluffTheSpot]

Sure thing 👍

[@paradoxicalinsanity7613]

hey uh....i know mma is rich now but we come for the wouter!

[@jackbrady9738]

Question for anyone please: 6:47 PIO folds 64% of hands verse a 124 bet into 83. amount that 124 bet needs to fold if holding 0% equity = risk/reward 124/124+83 124/207 =60% 60% equals the amount that bet needs to make fold in order to break even if bluffing with 0% equity. but OOP folds 64% of the time? Question1a) does anyone know why the extra 4%? is it because that extra 4% that it folds isn't getting the correct equity of 124/331 = 37% so it folds? question1b) OR is it because IP isn't bluffing with 0% equity, they're bluffing with equity, and so OOP gets to fold more. But if this is the case? Surely you'd fold FARR more than just 4%? instead of assuming 0% equity the hands youre up against have like 18% equity, so wouldn't the fold rate vs a 1.3x pot bet be more like 75%? Question 2) So does that mean that PIO prefers getting the right price to call over being exploited by overfolding? and would rather fold 4% more than 'theoretical minimum defence' because the EV lost of those 4% of hands not having 37% equity costs more than then getting exploited for 4% overfolding? Thanks very much

[@Coq7]

Solvers don't defend MDF. They only follow +EV spots. MDF is a cool concept but you should not apply it in game that much. BTW, solvers do call MDF on the river most of the time because it makes more sense on that street. Hope it will help

[@xuphan]

MDF is not that useful before river, it's super complicated to calculate on earlier streets. let's say your question1b), "because IP isn't bluffing with 0% equity, they're bluffing with equity, and so OOP gets to fold more". Not really. on the Flop or Turn, if IP is bluffing with equity combos, that doesn't mean OOP should fold more every time in any scenario, since some combos in OOP's range beat IP's bluff, or some combos of OOP has enough equity, then OOP may continue those combos sometime. in theory OOP fold more only because he is facing IP's larger beting size. overall it's too hard to calculate MDF on earlier streets, there still is one community card, it may changes a lot. Another example, SRP BB vs LJ on 234, IP call XR, Turn 6, OOP cb with a overpot size, you may see solver also "fold too often".

[@jackbrady9738]

@@xuphan thank u thank u. so it's all about equity on all streets before final river decision, then final river decision (assuming u want to play 'GTO') is MDF.

[@xuphan]

@@jackbrady9738 you're welcome, glad to be helpful, and maybe I'm wrong on some topic so please be cautious. I think it's easier for human being to think about equity and eqr (equity realization) before river, and calculating EV is another way to turn all the factors into a number. then MDF is somewhat a simplified version of all these calculation on river because there's no more street.

[@JeffHoopAdventure]

MDF?

[@keirsullivan2578]

Jexxy Wexxy

[@m.r6826]

? A brick isn't favorable for cbetter range. It's a bad card, so cbetter want to polarise his turn barrelling range, and so, use a big size or a check. When a card is a good card (like overcard) cbetter wants to bet a lot with a lower (mesium to high) sizing. Isn't ? Or there is something I missed ? And you don't talk about yours toughts against population for a low to mid stakes grinder : against high stakes players (or solver) big polarised bet have highest EV. But it's much easier (or intuituitive) to respond against a overbet than a 3/4 bet. In other word, without work out the table, a intuitive response is higher to the optimal response against an overbet than an underpot bet. And only against people who respond optimally against an underpot bet, you can use the overbet to maximise your EV. Why do you offert a content that 90% channel already did (from Alvin to FE, by Zenith) without talk about that is really helpfulll to small- medium stakes grinder ?

[@JeffHoopAdventure]

Playing against over bets isn’t easier compared to more common sizing like 3/4. Why? Because most people don’t overbet, and nearly everyone responds incorrectly vs overbets due to lack of experience playing against overbets.