Matt Vaughan (Poker Vlogger) - Ask Me Anything - Including Hand Analysis
F
fundiver199
Legend
Loyaler
Matt Vaughan
King of Moody Rants
Bronze Level
This is a hard question. If you're having trouble not risking amounts of your bankroll that you shouldn't, you need to look at where that's coming from and get to the bottom of it. Is it because you don't truly see poker as a skill game? Do you need further reinforcement for the idea that variance requires us to have a certain amount set aside? Should you actually be playing poker?
I think tools like the Poker Dope Variance Calculator are great for this. Really getting down in dirty in the types of runs that are possible. But you also have to keep in mind that all of this is reliant on being a winning player at your stakes with a certain win rate.
If you aren't yet (and that's totally fine, by the way), then you don't need a poker bankroll, you need a poker BUDGET. Essentially this means you are willing to lose a certain amount over a certain time frame while you improve your game. OR that you just want to play poker for entertainment and budget it like a normal monthly expense.
So all that being said, I think the most important things are to 1) identify why you play poker and then 2) identify why you feel the need to play outside your bankroll (or budget) constraints. And just be brutally honest with yourself.
Thank you to Matt for reviewing my hand
My pleasure!!
Operakid
Rising Star
Bronze Level
Correlation between villains bet size and my outs
Hi Matt,
Maths isn't my greatest subject, but I'm trying to build a table where the villain's bet size is related to my outs. Is this possible? For instance, a pot bet by the villain means I'm getting 2:1 and my equity against his range needs to be 33% (I think!) so if villain goes all-in on the flop and I have say a flush draw with 9 outs, as this is around 35% does that mean I'm good to go but with an OESD having only 31.5% should I - in theory - fold? Also, is any of this making sense? Thanks.
Hi Matt,
Maths isn't my greatest subject, but I'm trying to build a table where the villain's bet size is related to my outs. Is this possible? For instance, a pot bet by the villain means I'm getting 2:1 and my equity against his range needs to be 33% (I think!) so if villain goes all-in on the flop and I have say a flush draw with 9 outs, as this is around 35% does that mean I'm good to go but with an OESD having only 31.5% should I - in theory - fold? Also, is any of this making sense? Thanks.
Matt Vaughan
King of Moody Rants
Bronze Level
After I sent my reply for this, I ended up posting it on twitter. It got some interesting replies, so that's worth checking out imo.
https://twitter.com/mEVpoker/status/1465416631484485634?s=20
Hey! Thanks for the question. I might start making some videos later on down the line about math in poker, because there are a lot of misconceptions about how it's used.
So first to answer your actual question: Yes you can make a table for that, and yes you are right in your example! Facing a pot size bet would imply needing 33% equity to continue in the hand.
However poker is rarely this simple. Your example essentially requires that you realize ALL of that 33% equity ALL of the time. And that's not always the case. Here are some examples where this IS a good assumption:
- Your opponent is all in on the flop
- Your opponent is betting the turn, but if you don't improve the river you are never calling anyway
An example where this is NOT a good assumption would be when your opponent bets a non all in amount on the flop, there is more to play for, and the board could change dramatically on the turn, forcing you to potentially fold your equity prior to getting to the river if you face another bet.
So basically you can do what you're talking about, but you want to be aware of the moments it's the most useful, and not over-apply this kind of thinking in the scenarios where it's not useful. There are very few hard and fast "rules" in poker, so it's more important to focus on the "why's" of these kinds of mathematical guidelines, and to understand their constraints and limitations.
Hope that helps!
Operakid
Rising Star
Bronze Level
Thanks Matt, yes that's why I gave the all-in example, I know that after the turn card it might go belly-up. I'm rubbish at math on the fly so I'm trying to create a table that's easy to remember. At least now I know the idea works. Thanks again.
C
Carlo35
Enthusiast
Silver Level
Hello Matt!! I was wondering how many mtts a pro have to play each day to reduce variance etc.. ive read things about stables that only accept players if they put in tons of volume and have to play like 50 mtts a day?? Do you think 5 or 6 tourneys a day could be enough for a player?? Im talking about myself ..thanxs carlo
Matt Vaughan
King of Moody Rants
Bronze Level
There's a big tradeoff between volume and how well you can play. Most players delude themselves imo, thinking they can play their same A game at 8-12 tables as 1-4 tabling.
That being said, there's obviously a massive benefit to playing more games because you multiply whatever edge you can bring to bear.
So if you can play 4 tables at 30% ROI, or 8 tables at 20% ROI, you should still play 8 tables because in general at equivalent stakes that will generate more EV.
But I think for most players there's a decay curve where they only lose a little of their edge to a point, and then when they go past point, they fall off the deep end and just start straight up autopiloting. The sweet spot for most people is probably just a little before that.
But to be fair that's also only talking about truly profitable players. If a player isn't profitable yet, they should play as few tables as possible while maximizing their study and their ability to bring what they are studying to bear at the table.
Personally, 50 tourneys a day would be too much for me with where I'm at right now. That would be full autopilot mode, and my autopilot isn't good enough to win enough and outpace the table count. I'd rather play 10-25 per day, and that's what I did in early to mid 2020 online when I was mostly grinding MTTs.
C
Carlo35
Enthusiast
Silver Level
Oke thanxs! Thats a helpfull Answer!! And how long did it take you to break out of microstakes and gettin big scores?? Im playing for over an year now at mtt 1-10$ im not totally unsatisfied with my results but i still have to deposit .. from the last 10 tourneys i played i got position 26 19 53 and 2 mincash.is that like an averageplayer? Or is that good?? I dont know if i have to study because i can get so far bymself.... or that i have to study because i do something wrong...or that i just need more luck ..or that i have to put in more volume.. or that these days everybody know how to play.how will i find out???
Matt Vaughan
King of Moody Rants
Bronze Level
I played microstakes cash for about 2 years moving up stakes, then transitioned mostly to live poker.
Your results are not enough to really say anything specific or concrete, but I would say that essentially ALL players who want to compete seriously at this game need to study. Going deep in a handful of tournaments is not a significant indicator of poker prowess! There's way too much variance in the game for that to be true.
O
olddawgrob
Rising Star
Bronze Level
Hey everyone, my name is Matt Vaughan, and many of you will actually know me from years of posting on the forum. Lurker since 2008ish, and poster since 2011ish I think.
I'm a poker pro, vlogger, and coach, and now a CardsChat Professional. I'm so excited to be back on CardsChat in an official capacity. If you'd like to take a look at what I do day to day, the best places to find me are:
https://www.youtube.com/MattVaughan
Matt Vaughan on Twitch
- Poker vlogs weekly
- Streaming online play once a month or more during online WSOP
https://www.youtube.com/CardsChat
- Very occasional streaming if I get bored of YouTube streaming
Live Online Grind: ... Don’t Get In An UPROAR About It
- Strategy and hand review videos monthly
- Streaming Q&As and play & explains occasionally
- Progress thread I've maintained on and off for years
- Looking to maintain it with somewhere between daily and weekly posts (more of a check in)
I'm also on Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram as mEVpoker, so feel free to drop follows or questions any of those places.
Last but not least... I'll be in this thread! :angel:
The purpose is to give you guys a platform to ask me strategy questions, send me hand histories, or just gain insight into the mind of a pro poker player and content creator...
I'll respond to every question here, but the best hands and questions sent in might make it onto a YouTube video!
I'm looking forward to interacting with everybody here and elsewhere on the internet. Ask away!
Ask Away It Is: Hey Matt, I'm Rob
Olddawgrob and I am still going out of my mind over a poker tournament
today. After almost 2 hours & kicking some butt I'm high man with 43thou when all of a sudden they annouce a winner of the tournament (not at my table) they close my table & don't even tell me what place I finished in. they are quick to tell me when I am 84th or even 28th. Man I wish this old man could have crawled through the internent waves!!!! Can you give me any peace of mind here?
Thanks,
Rob
Chica_bonita
Sad Funny Lady🌬
Bronze Level
Matt, hello!:ciao:
I'm new to the community, but I've already managed to see your videos on YouTube. You describe your actions in a specific situation in a very interesting way. If I have any questions about the analysis of my hands, I will definitely contact you. Thank you and Cardschat for the opportunity.:flowers:
I'm new to the community, but I've already managed to see your videos on YouTube. You describe your actions in a specific situation in a very interesting way. If I have any questions about the analysis of my hands, I will definitely contact you. Thank you and Cardschat for the opportunity.:flowers:
M
Marcos1315
Rock Star
Silver Level
Hello Matt!
I have a question for you. It's about changing the format I play.
I made a deposit at betsafe and am playing a 6-max double or nothing ($0.10 buy-in, top 3 wins $0.18). I think it would be good to start, but I'm having difficulties. I played 44 hands, finished in the top 3 19 times, which results in a deficit of $0.98.
This SNG is super/hyper turbo. Levels change every 2 minutes, and I have 12 seconds to act (no bank time).
I started to realize that I'm not thinking about ranges and I'm playing like crazy, because the format is very different from MTTs. For example, if I'm the big stack (by far), and there are 3 other players, I often fold and let them kill each other.
And I tried to play more aggressive, more passive, tighter, looser, etc. and nothing worked very well.
So I was thinking about changing the format. I'm more used to playing MTTs (freerolls) and I think my game fits better there. And I think it will be better for my learning process (I think I'll play more wisely, be able to create a line of thinking, which will create a standard game, allowing me to adapt).
But I don't know if this behavior, of changing because I failed, is good. And I don't know if I should figure out how to succeed in this format first, or if I should move on.
Thank you in advance!
I have a question for you. It's about changing the format I play.
I made a deposit at betsafe and am playing a 6-max double or nothing ($0.10 buy-in, top 3 wins $0.18). I think it would be good to start, but I'm having difficulties. I played 44 hands, finished in the top 3 19 times, which results in a deficit of $0.98.
This SNG is super/hyper turbo. Levels change every 2 minutes, and I have 12 seconds to act (no bank time).
I started to realize that I'm not thinking about ranges and I'm playing like crazy, because the format is very different from MTTs. For example, if I'm the big stack (by far), and there are 3 other players, I often fold and let them kill each other.
And I tried to play more aggressive, more passive, tighter, looser, etc. and nothing worked very well.
So I was thinking about changing the format. I'm more used to playing MTTs (freerolls) and I think my game fits better there. And I think it will be better for my learning process (I think I'll play more wisely, be able to create a line of thinking, which will create a standard game, allowing me to adapt).
But I don't know if this behavior, of changing because I failed, is good. And I don't know if I should figure out how to succeed in this format first, or if I should move on.
Thank you in advance!
Matt Vaughan
King of Moody Rants
Bronze Level
Hey Rob - thanks for your interest. I'm not sure I understand what your question is, though. Is it possible you were playing a double or nothing, or perhaps a satellite? I don't really know what you're describing, but if it's neither of those, it's possible there was a problem with the tournament or the site.
Thanks so much!!
Thanks for the great question! I don't see this necessarily as changing "because you failed." In fact, I really don't see it as a failure. You played 44 of these DoN events. You don't even know if you are profitable in them or not, based on that data alone, but you've done a reasonable assessment of the fact that you are unlikely to improve rapidly while playing them due to the time constraints.
I actually strongly agree with this. Twelve seconds to act and no time bank is very little, and you'll be on autopilot the vast majority of the time. You could do a bunch of study away from the table instead to improve, but if you're doing that I'd just move up. It's very hard for it to be worth your time to study if you're playing so small.
If you only care about having fun then all that goes out the window - just play the format you most enjoy. But it sounds like that's MTTs anyway, so either way that's probably where I'd focus my energy!
Kennemelo
Rock Star
Bronze Level
Hi Matt!
I have an interesting question!
In the case of a clear advantage on the table (that is, taking on the role of captain for the moment), is it really necessary to press the entire table with all your might or is there still a safe strategy to be in? (we are talking about both turbo and normal tournaments)
I have an interesting question!
In the case of a clear advantage on the table (that is, taking on the role of captain for the moment), is it really necessary to press the entire table with all your might or is there still a safe strategy to be in? (we are talking about both turbo and normal tournaments)
M
Marcos1315
Rock Star
Silver Level
Thank you so much for your reply Matt!!
Yes, I'm leaving this format. I played an MTT (€0.20 + €0.20 add-on) and finished 9/199 (€1.81 prize). It's just a tournament, so it doesn't mean anything. But I felt much more comfortable.
My goal is to become a professional. I'm playing low-stakes because I don't think I should take a step bigger than my leg (I don't know if this expression is used in English - it's very common in brazil). And I don't have a lot of money (I'm not working, and neither are my parents), so I can't go higher and broke. But that means I have time to study (I'm studying every day, morning and afternoon). So I'm hoping to get more solid play at these lowest-stakes, build up my bankroll, and try bigger things (aka the second lowest-stakes).
M
Marcos1315
Rock Star
Silver Level
Question about a hand
Hi Matt! Me again.
I was playing the CC freeroll at 888poker and played this hand:
https://www.cardschat.com/replayer/4a1JoZ3A
I made a mistake?
I was in 4th (11 remaining) and playing aggressive and a little loose. I folded after facing a re-raise in a previous hand (3 hands before this one). So I was thinking that the opponent was trying to put the same pressure on me. And with a slightly loose image, he would put me in a not-so-strong range.
His range, at first, wasn't strong. I thought about calling his raise, but because of the idea of him trying to pressure me, I re-raised. If I called, I thought he would put more pressure on the turn and bluff a lot depending on the turn card. I thought he could also check-raise with a draw. And I called the all-in because I felt committed to the pot (although I don't like that idea - I think it was a bad call, and even though my stack would be smaller if I folded, I think I should fold, because it's better to play with a short stack than not playing).
I don't know how bad it would be in a cash game, but I think it was pretty bad (the re-raise, but especially the call) in a tournament. I won $2 dollars, and 4th place won $8.98. I don't think it's worth the risk.
But I'm a beginner and I don't know if my train of thought is correct, so I'd like to ask for your feedback.
Thank you in advance!!
Hi Matt! Me again.
I was playing the CC freeroll at 888poker and played this hand:
https://www.cardschat.com/replayer/4a1JoZ3A
I made a mistake?
I was in 4th (11 remaining) and playing aggressive and a little loose. I folded after facing a re-raise in a previous hand (3 hands before this one). So I was thinking that the opponent was trying to put the same pressure on me. And with a slightly loose image, he would put me in a not-so-strong range.
His range, at first, wasn't strong. I thought about calling his raise, but because of the idea of him trying to pressure me, I re-raised. If I called, I thought he would put more pressure on the turn and bluff a lot depending on the turn card. I thought he could also check-raise with a draw. And I called the all-in because I felt committed to the pot (although I don't like that idea - I think it was a bad call, and even though my stack would be smaller if I folded, I think I should fold, because it's better to play with a short stack than not playing).
I don't know how bad it would be in a cash game, but I think it was pretty bad (the re-raise, but especially the call) in a tournament. I won $2 dollars, and 4th place won $8.98. I don't think it's worth the risk.
But I'm a beginner and I don't know if my train of thought is correct, so I'd like to ask for your feedback.
Thank you in advance!!
Matt Vaughan
King of Moody Rants
Bronze Level
If you mean that your stack size is significantly more than that of your opponents, then you can usually choose to be more aggressive than normal. However, how aggressive you can or "should" be depends greatly on the stage of the tournament. If you are near the bubble, or on the final table or final two tables, then yes you can probably be VERY aggressive. But if not, you don't want to go too crazy unless your opponents are very timid.
You will also just get a better feel for this over time. But when you have more chips than all your opponents, you probably don't want to be playing it really "safe," as that's a good way to see your chip advantage decrease!
I'm not sure what the "main theorem of poker" is. Do you mean the fundamental theorem of poker by Sklansky?
Lol, this is not an expression in english, but now I hope it becomes one! That's awesome. Good luck with everything.
L
LOOPY
Rock Star
Bronze Level
Hi
I don’t quite understand the importance of “Equity” in playing a poker hand. I watched the video in the “30 day training course “ on this site.
How can you determine your equity in the hand, when you only know “your own cards”.
Seems like it’s only useful for commentators, analyzing hands at a tournament.
I don’t quite understand the importance of “Equity” in playing a poker hand. I watched the video in the “30 day training course “ on this site.
How can you determine your equity in the hand, when you only know “your own cards”.
Seems like it’s only useful for commentators, analyzing hands at a tournament.
Tammy
Can I help you?
Administrator
Check out Matt's latest video for CardsChat!
In this video, Matt gives us an introduction to GTOx: a web-based poker solver tool for analyzing hands. You can input live or online hands for analyzing - Matt walks us through it.
In this video, Matt gives us an introduction to GTOx: a web-based poker solver tool for analyzing hands. You can input live or online hands for analyzing - Matt walks us through it.
Matt Vaughan
King of Moody Rants
Bronze Level
Thanks for sharing your hand! I will say right away that a lot of times we assume players are reacting to us, or trying to exploit us, when in reality they are just playing how they would play. And I'm saying this before even watching the hand by the way, just from reading your question.
I think a lot of what you wrote about the spot makes sense. This is the kind of spot I'd call a "slippery slope mistake." The first mistake was probably 3betting the flop. You bet, BB raised VERY small. The sizing is already unlikely to be a bluff because you sized big on the flop, and he went tiny in response. It sure doesn't seem like they want you to fold.
Given this, I don't like 3betting the flop. There's also a bit of conflicting evidence in your thought process, because you say you wanted to 3bet the flop to stop him from possibly barreling the turn big as a bluff. But you should WANT them to continue with bluffs. You could definitely argue that the opponent will be committed with a lot of draws on this board while facing your 3bet, but I don't think that's necessarily the case.
Then once you HAVE 3bet, and they DO raise again, you're really just begging them to have a combo draw. JX of of hearts, open ended in hearts, etc. But there are only so many combinations of those hands, and I think that you're much more likely looking at a very strong range of 2pair and sets. And even the times when they DO have a combo draw, they are going to have a ton of equity anyway with a straight draw + overcard or FD + overcard or better.
So I do think you can cut ties with the hand there, but it's certainly a tough spot, and I can't really blame you when you get a premium at this point for going broke.
Matt Vaughan
King of Moody Rants
Bronze Level
There are multiple applications of equity that are relevant in poker. One would be a situation in which hand reading tells you your opponents has a very narrow range of only a couple types. Nutted hands that beat you, and bluffs that you beat. This is a "polarized" spot and often would occur on rivers because your opponents hands that you beat now, have 0% equity.
Equity is built on a concept of combinatorics - counting the number of combinations of each hand type. So knowing how to do this is critical in spots where you can identify that you beat 25% of your opponent's combos, but would need to be able to beat 30% of them to justify a call based on pot odds.
But what you're really getting at is an earlier street spot, where we DON'T know our opponent's exact hand or exact range, and we have to still make decisions. Knowing or being able to estimate equity of hand vs hand, hand vs range, and range vs range, often comes less into play because those exact numbers aren't what govern decisions at a higher level. The estimate of who is favored and by how much does define appropriate strategy, and this is why equity is important.
But at a very high level of the game, it's often the equity distribution we're most concerned with (meaning the equity range on range), and this isn't something you can just estimate at the table. It's something you can determine with the help of software, and then construct strategies around it.
At the end of the day, there aren't many spots where you will KNOW your exact equity, but being able to estimate it somewhat accurately is still important for higher level appropriate strategy, especially in contexts where your opponents are deviating significantly from good strategy themselves. And knowing that they deviate comes from paying attention to how they play. And that's what will allow you to also practice hand reading, which is how you know what your opponents' ranges look like even though you don't know their exact hand.
I know this was a bit of a roundabout answer, but it actually a bit of a deep question, so thank you!