Polished Poker Vol. I Study Group

[Aballinamion]

Hey its been a while...

CardsChat Poker Hands Converter

Convert your hand history into forum code, plain text or relive your hand and create animated replays

www.cardschat.com

Jumped back in this week and this monster 420bb hand reared up.
Question is felt lost on the turn, didn't know best turn action?
Tight 5nl zoom pool on Stars, fortunate result.

I see the preflop action as too much polarizing ranges: villain polarized 3-bet to 3.2x the sizing of your raising and hero polarized 4-bet to 2.91x the sizing of the 3-bet.
Yes, both are deep stacked and if villain comes over the top with a polarized 5-bet, Hero would have to call it off.
The postflop game is fine, the dealer helped a lot and I don’t see many different moves. Well played.

 

[John A]

I see the preflop action as too much polarizing ranges: villain polarized 3-bet to 3.2x the sizing of your raising and hero polarized 4-bet to 2.91x the sizing of the 3-bet.
Yes, both are deep stacked and if villain comes over the top with a polarized 5-bet, Hero would have to call it off.
The postflop game is fine, the dealer helped a lot and I don’t see many different moves. Well played.

Thanks for answering.

I'm going to be more active in this thread again. I still see there's a lot of confusion in the poker community since GTO play has become popular. People don't really understand when to use it, when not to, etc... So maybe I'll start there.

 

[Aballinamion]

Thanks for answering.

I'm going to be more active in this thread again. I still see there's a lot of confusion in the poker community since GTO play has become popular. People don't really understand when to use it, when not to, etc... So maybe I'll start there.

That’s really good news! I’ve been waiting for the resurrection of this thread for a while.
I’m simple contributor of the cash threads, I will help you and the forum to maintain it!
You are welcome again professor.
By the way have you solved the problem of your free book? Is there another link to download it?
What about Polished Poker Vol II? How much is it? Would you accept a transfer money from pokerstars? Please, let me know it.

Best regards;

 

[Aballinamion]

Allow me to humbly give you a suggestion? Why wouldn’t you start a new and fresh thread? Polished Poker Vol I Version II, whatever, and then you start to debate about your plan to discuss GTO and misconceptions about it. By the way, this is a great theme.

If you are willing to return, creating a new thread or not, I will tag and call all of my mates that are heavy contributors of the cash games thread to participate here! 😀

 

[john_entony]

I know a lot of good Polish players on PokerStars. I like their style of play and making the right decisions, sometimes even with the help of intuition. And thank you for supporting Ukraine, brothers and sisters!

 

[John A]

That’s really good news! I’ve been waiting for the resurrection of this thread for a while.
I’m simple contributor of the cash threads, I will help you and the forum to maintain it!
You are welcome again professor.
By the way have you solved the problem of your free book? Is there another link to download it?
What about Polished Poker Vol II? How much is it? Would you accept a transfer money from PokerStars? Please, let me know it.

Best regards;

Ironically, we removed polished poker last year. There's a lot of people caught in GTO land, and anything that doesn't discuss GTO, they don't think has much value. So it wasn't even worth trying to explain why GTO play as a theory is nice to understand, it's not super applicable (or profitable) unless you're playing top level pros and have lots of history with them. People tend to get very binary in their thinking. Either GTO is the best way to play, or it's not.

I'm going to stay in this thread, but I'm going to explain, as best I can in detail, how to think about poker. We want to maximize our EV based on how our population plays poker, which includes important psychological factors, that solvers don't compute. I want to address that, and why it's so FUNDAMENTALLY important to understand these kinds of concepts, because you're playing a HUMAN, not a computer that will play perfect hand ranges.

Some of my results over the last several years:

 

[Aballinamion]

Thanks for your reply and for being active once again.
In my humble opinion GTO and Exploitative Game complete one another: we derive from Exploitative to GTO and vice-versa.
I would like to quote an organic example: a few years ago I analyzed a hand where one student of this thread was playing NLHE 100.
I will resume the hand:

$100 NL (6 max) - Holdem - 6 players

Hand converted by PokerTracker 4: http://www.pokertracker.com

SB: 208.5 BB
Hero (BB): 126 BB
UTG: 91 BB
MP: 111.4 BB
CO: 125.9 BB
BTN: 55.6 BB

SB posts SB 0.5 BB, Hero posts BB 1 BB

Pre Flop: (pot: 1.5 BB) Hero has Tc Td

fold, MP calls 1 BB, CO calls 1 BB, BTN calls 1 BB, fold, Hero raises to 11 BB, MP calls 10 BB, fold, BTN calls 10 BB

Flop : (34.5 BB, 3 players) 3c 4h 2s

Hero bets 23 BB, MP calls 23 BB, fold

Turn : (80.5 BB, 2 players) Kc

Hero bets 80.5 BB, MP calls 77.4 BB and is all-in

64 vpip whale. analysis? didn't want to play 3strts

Analysis:

I see this hand from a GTO perspective: okay, it’s fine to derive from GTO because there are several limpers behind. However, do we need to raise to 10x? In my opinion 6x or 7x at max would have the job done.
The flops comes very coordinated and we elect to bet 2/3 pot expecting to get calls of missed aces. But limpers will have better hands than us quite often (22, 33, 44, 43s, 42s, 32s, 56s, A5s), hands that we own no removal.
Okay that recreational players don’t think that much, but they know how to fold and what’s a value hand: betting that much preflop and flop we aren’t allowing villain to play close to perfection?
OTT we have no idea what villain called about and we jam.
We assume villain is a recreational but we also assume that one way or the other players have a little notion of sizing: complete losing hands would fold to a 10x raise preflop and hands with some playability will call: AJ+, K2s-AK, all pocket pairs (we don’t know if villain has a trap or not).
Hero describes villain as a 64 VPIP “whale”.
First, I think it’s unethical to call players like this or that using pejorative words. Weak player, recreational should suffice.
64 VPIP might be a tricky data. For how much hands played we had obtained this HUD stats? Why not other stats included?
Hero says he didn’t want to play 3 streets, and haven’t put showdown results.
Are we betting for value and for bluff or we are betting because we are not in the mood for playing 3 streets?
When we jam turn, do we believe we own the winning hand?

GTO Perspective: how would I have played this:

Preflop I would raise to 6x. Flop I would go for 1/2 pot or a bit less, since the pot is too way bigger than normal and there are great chances of getting called by best hands. OTT I would’ve checked because now I have no idea what villain has called OTF.
River I would’ve bet 1/2 pot if villain checks behind and it doesn’t complete a flush or another liner for a straight, and check in the case villain had bet OTT a fair price giving me odds.

What do you think of this hand? What do you think on how hero played and how I would played it.

Thanks in advance.

 

[Aballinamion]

I would kindly ask some active mates to have a nice and healthy discussion on GTO and Exploitative Game. Please, hop in and share your hands and ideas, let’s build a constructive room with the professional help of professor Anhalt.
Here it comes, you are welcome to come aboard, @gustav197poker , @Station_Master , @Poker Orifice , @fundiver199 , @Nathan Williams , @marvinsytan , @Mr_Kk13 and anyone else feel free because this is not my thread, but I will like to take a closer look into GTO and its variants.
Forgot to invite our newest and welcomed mate, @gaucan

Best regards;

 

[Station_Master]

I agree that GTO is useful to know so we have a solid baseline strategy. From there we can deviate to exploit tendencies of the player pool and the specific villains we are up against in the hand.

Of course sometimes a hand is way off anything we could run through a solver, e.g. when there are limps in front and lots cold calling, but still principles like range and nut advantage are important in determining our strategy.

 

[Poker Orifice]

I would kindly ask some active mates to have a nice and healthy discussion on GTO and Exploitative Game. Please, hop in and share your hands and ideas, let’s build a constructive room with the professional help of professor Anhalt.
Here it comes, you are welcome to come aboard, @gustav197poker , @Station_Master , @Poker Orifice , @fundiver199 , @Nathan Williams , @marvinsytan , @Mr_Kk13 and anyone else feel free because this is not my thread, but I will like to take a closer look into GTO and its variants.
Forgot to invite our newest and welcomed mate, @gaucan

Best regards;

No

 

[Aballinamion]

No

You’re not much of talker, are you? 😆
But seriously, could you please say anything that will add one more point to the construction of this GTO discussion?
Do it for the members of the forum. If not, do it for me, I’m begging you with love to patiently spend some attention on writing.

Thank you

 

[John A]

Thanks for your reply and for being active once again.
In my humble opinion GTO and Exploitative Game complete one another: we derive from Exploitative to GTO and vice-versa.
I would like to quote an organic example: a few years ago I analyzed a hand where one student of this thread was playing NLHE 100.
I will resume the hand:

What do you think of this hand? What do you think on how hero played and how I would played it.

Thanks in advance.

So first, I'm not a fan of derogatory language about players, but whale is a term used in a lot of fields, and it roughly describes the same kind of person. It's someone who has expendable money. They generally aren't necessarily good at what they do, but they have the means to do so. So I don't think it's a horrible term. If you say whale in poker or stock trading, people know what you're talking about.

I'd prefer to start the thread more theory based instead of going into specific hands and getting opinions. However, as far as the hand, based on the opponent description, this is the kind of exploitative change you want to make. If people will call limp/call 10bbs when you have a good hand, you want to take advantage of that. I have no issue w/ that at all, it's ideal. Flop sizing is large, not what GTO play would recommend in a range spot, because it's playing against someone who has a balanced calling range - which a whale will not. I'm also fine w/ the turn shove for all the same reasons. There's no way you should play a GTO line against an opponent like this. You will just be losing tons of money if you do.

 

[Aballinamion]

I'd prefer to start the thread more theory based instead of going into specific hands and getting opinions.

Please, feel free to start. I don’t have too much GTO theory learned of books or media content. I also don’t use any solvers to analyze my hands or somebody else’s hands.
My GTO comes from practice and methodical observation. An old YouTube channel helped me a lot through this, it was named “Finding Equilibrium”. I think this channel still exists but they are not the same as in the past.

Why I use GTO playing against recreational ones? Because I know I will lose from time to time. I also like to use pot control for most of the situations.

 

[John A]

I agree that GTO is useful to know so we have a solid baseline strategy. From there we can deviate to exploit tendencies of the player pool and the specific villains we are up against in the hand.

Of course sometimes a hand is way off anything we could run through a solver, e.g. when there are limps in front and lots cold calling, but still principles like range and nut advantage are important in determining our strategy.

Ok, so ty for that post. This is something I hear all the time, and it's probably a good place to start because the root of any theory is important to understand. If that root has flaws, the branches of the following logic from it will exponentially be flawed.

I'm going to say something unpopular. If you're learning poker, GTO play should not be your baseline. Why?

I'll try and explain via an analogy. If I'm trying to be a car mechanic, for example, and I want to learn the absolute best way to fix the absolute best top end engines that exist on the market today, and I go to school, and I study hard and learn how the in's and outs of how to fix the absolute best engines that exist. And then I go and open a shop, and I'm ready and prepared to fix the absolute best, top end engines, and all of my customers roll in with hyundai's and old Pontiac engines (no offense to any of those owners ), I'm going to be lost.

Now, I'll know how to use my tools, I'll know how to fix some of the things, but my skill set won't be appropriate for the customer base I have. You studied the wrong thing, but it won't be immediately apparent that you did until you slowly start losing customers. And in the case of poker, it's so much more abstract it's difficult to understand how much EV you're actually leaving on the table when you take inappropriate balanced lines or bet sizes w/ your ranges, when you shouldn't be doing so.

Poker players are your customers. And your customers are humans... not computers. You need to understand these things first, as a baseline in order to smash the games you're playing, and then... when you understand these (or to some degree in parallel), you learn GTO as an ideal theory, NOT as a baseline.

1) Correct pre-flop ranges.
2) Proper c-betting flop texture strategies.
3) You and your opponent's approximate equity vs your opponent's range.
4) General player personalities, and how these personalities tend to adopt strategies (ie, think about the game of poker).
5) Signs of opponent losing and winning tilt (they are different).

These things need to be your baseline, and they are, I hate to say this, but even more difficult to learn than GTO play. But that's where I'd start, and then build out from there. While doing this, it's perfectly fine to look at how a solver would handle a situation, vs the line you or your opponent took. But look at that in terms of theory, and not necessarily what you should do in a game, UNLESS YOU HAVE ADEQUATE HISTORY W/ AN OPPONENT AND THEY ARE A GOOD PLAYER.

Solvers got popular because top pro's started using them and doing training videos around them vs other top pros, and then software companies promoted them as the absolute essential tool every player needs. And that's just simply not true. They are great and important tools (that's why I developed one over 10 years ago), but they aren't applicable to micro and small stakes games.

 

[Aballinamion]

1) Correct pre-flop ranges.
2) Proper c-betting flop texture strategies.
3) You and your opponent's approximate equity vs your opponent's range.
4) General player personalities, and how these personalities tend to adopt strategies (ie, think about the game of poker).
5) Signs of opponent losing and winning tilt (they are different).

Thank you for this good reply. I got it, GTO is ideal and as a program it thinks like a program versus other ideal programs. And we are facing humans and their behavior changes considerably to one person to another, as you stated in your illustration.
I need to read Polished Poker again, I have it but I need to print it again and take a deeper look once more. There I found the best description ever of player types and their tendencies.
I remember just a couple of them, such as flush chaser and players addicted to any ace.
Also there’s the algorithm process of thinking before playing a hand that goes way beyond looking to a sheet or range chart.
So let’s begin this using some basis. I’m cash player of micro-stakes. What are the correct preflop range for UTG? (6-MAX). I use 15% range from UTG, but sometimes I use just 5% (when players call too much from MP/CO/BU, for example.
I also use 2.5x or 3x for opening my entire range from UTG, whether is 5% or 15%.
I’m totally opened to criticism.

 

[Station_Master]

Ok, so ty for that post. This is something I hear all the time, and it's probably a good place to start because the root of any theory is important to understand. If that root has flaws, the branches of the following logic from it will exponentially be flawed.

I'm going to say something unpopular. If you're learning poker, GTO play should not be your baseline. Why?

I'll try and explain via an analogy. If I'm trying to be a car mechanic, for example, and I want to learn the absolute best way to fix the absolute best top end engines that exist on the market today, and I go to school, and I study hard and learn how the in's and outs of how to fix the absolute best engines that exist. And then I go and open a shop, and I'm ready and prepared to fix the absolute best, top end engines, and all of my customers roll in with hyundai's and old Pontiac engines (no offense to any of those owners ), I'm going to be lost.

Now, I'll know how to use my tools, I'll know how to fix some of the things, but my skill set won't be appropriate for the customer base I have. You studied the wrong thing, but it won't be immediately apparent that you did until you slowly start losing customers. And in the case of poker, it's so much more abstract it's difficult to understand how much EV you're actually leaving on the table when you take inappropriate balanced lines or bet sizes w/ your ranges, when you shouldn't be doing so.

Poker players are your customers. And your customers are humans... not computers. You need to understand these things first, as a baseline in order to smash the games you're playing, and then... when you understand these (or to some degree in parallel), you learn GTO as an ideal theory, NOT as a baseline.

1) Correct pre-flop ranges.
2) Proper c-betting flop texture strategies.
3) You and your opponent's approximate equity vs your opponent's range.
4) General player personalities, and how these personalities tend to adopt strategies (ie, think about the game of poker).
5) Signs of opponent losing and winning tilt (they are different).

These things need to be your baseline, and they are, I hate to say this, but even more difficult to learn than GTO play. But that's where I'd start, and then build out from there. While doing this, it's perfectly fine to look at how a solver would handle a situation, vs the line you or your opponent took. But look at that in terms of theory, and not necessarily what you should do in a game, UNLESS YOU HAVE ADEQUATE HISTORY W/ AN OPPONENT AND THEY ARE A GOOD PLAYER.

Solvers got popular because top pro's started using them and doing training videos around them vs other top pros, and then software companies promoted them as the absolute essential tool every player needs. And that's just simply not true. They are great and important tools (that's why I developed one over 10 years ago), but they aren't applicable to micro and small stakes games.

Thanks for the reply.

So do you think GTO is useful for preflop ranges and cbetting strategies?

My sense is for raise first in GTO charts are reasonable, depending who is still to act. Also for 3betting they seem a reasonable guide. But defending 3bets often tighter against most villains who under 3bet. And I am never 5betting A5s all in!

I thought cbetting strategies were loosely based on GTO generally. E.g. small bets on dry boards (with most or all hands), bigger on wet boards (but not whole range) and where we have a significant nut advantage. Of course if someone overfolds then I would cbet wider. Or do you advocate a different approach?

 

[John A]

Thank you for this good reply. I got it, GTO is ideal and as a program it thinks like a program versus other ideal programs. And we are facing humans and their behavior changes considerably to one person to another, as you stated in your illustration.
I need to read Polished Poker again, I have it but I need to print it again and take a deeper look once more. There I found the best description ever of player types and their tendencies.
I remember just a couple of them, such as flush chaser and players addicted to any ace.
Also there’s the algorithm process of thinking before playing a hand that goes way beyond looking to a sheet or range chart.
So let’s begin this using some basis. I’m cash player of micro-stakes. What are the correct preflop range for UTG? (6-MAX). I use 15% range from UTG, but sometimes I use just 5% (when players call too much from MP/CO/BU, for example.
I also use 2.5x or 3x for opening my entire range from UTG, whether is 5% or 15%.
I’m totally opened to criticism.

Thanks for the reply.

So do you think GTO is useful for preflop ranges and cbetting strategies?

My sense is for raise first in GTO charts are reasonable, depending who is still to act. Also for 3betting they seem a reasonable guide. But defending 3bets often tighter against most villains who under 3bet. And I am never 5betting A5s all in!

I thought cbetting strategies were loosely based on GTO generally. E.g. small bets on dry boards (with most or all hands), bigger on wet boards (but not whole range) and where we have a significant nut advantage. Of course if someone overfolds then I would cbet wider. Or do you advocate a different approach?

So both good and similar questions. I want to update my hand charts, and I'll post some here next week.

But yes, GTO hand charts aren't a bad place to start. I'd just modify a few things, especially in relation to OOP play, as I don't think EV is realized in reality as well as a solver realizes it.

C-betting... not so much, and I'll explain in more detail when we get there. I'm a stats / data nerd. I created Leak Buster years ago, because I was getting tired of all the opinions on 2+2 hand discussions on what lines you should take and what range you should have in X spot. So I got tens of millions of hands together from top sites, and I created algorithms to figure these stats and ranges out, and look at what the biggest winners were doing, and what yielded the highest EV in reality. I'm more interested in what actually works vs. ideal theory (although idealism is always useful as a guide when you're unsure).

I'll post up some stuff next week. I have a lot of graduations and other things going on over the next few days, and father's day this weekend. But we'll get to it and contrast w/ GTO says vs population data.

 

[John A]

I'm dealing w/ some major unexpected family issues right now, so not sure I'll be able to get back to this until next week. My goal is to post some new hand charts, and begin a discussion about the differences in realized EV between GTO play and exploitative play.

 

[Aballinamion]

I'm dealing w/ some major unexpected family issues right now, so not sure I'll be able to get back to this until next week. My goal is to post some new hand charts, and begin a discussion about the differences in realized EV between GTO play and exploitative play.

No problem professor. Take your time. I hope your family is good/get good and don’t worry. Thanks for your attention and I will be praying for you and them to be better.

 

[Aballinamion]

How do you do professor? Do you have any plans to continue this thread? If you don’t I will take care and control of the situation here.