Ok, I thought the bluffing section was wild but after watching this video I'm now 100% sure I would die if I ever play Katie Dozier lol. Not even counting the fact that she's a pro who would wipe the floor with me her enthusiasm for shove/fold play is terrifying!
I will try it though! It would be fun to get away with a few preflop shoves 😉
I will try it though! It would be fun to get away with a few preflop shoves 😉
Hi Collin,
I have a question about software, HRC vs ICMizer.
In beta version of HRC there is a option that includes a card removal effect (which basic HRC and ICMizer don’t include). Push/fold ( call vs push etc) spots are quite different when you include CRE...
What’s your thoughts on that ?
Cheers 😎
I have a question about software, HRC vs ICMizer.
In beta version of HRC there is a option that includes a card removal effect (which basic HRC and ICMizer don’t include). Push/fold ( call vs push etc) spots are quite different when you include CRE...
What’s your thoughts on that ?
Cheers 😎
Good question P1!
I think card removal effects can absolutely be important. My belief was that both HRC and ICMizer included it. Searching now I see this discussion for ICMizer for example. If there are basic versions that exclude card removal, I think that would be fine for someone getting started if it meant getting a free or much cheaper version. But for serious study it's definitely important.
I think card removal effects can absolutely be important. My belief was that both HRC and ICMizer included it. Searching now I see this discussion for ICMizer for example. If there are basic versions that exclude card removal, I think that would be fine for someone getting started if it meant getting a free or much cheaper version. But for serious study it's definitely important.
Thanks for answer. But I'm talking about a bit different thing.
In HRC beta (paid version) there are two options "Basic Hand" and "Basic Monte Carlo Hand" which include CRE (pic nr 1). And there are different outputs from those two models.
The Basic outputs are the same like in ICMizer (pic nr 2).
1. https://imgshare.io/image/NL9Z7X
2. https://imgshare.io/image/NL9EUp
In short, CRE assumes that players before us folded weak hands ( like 32o etc) and then players behind will have better hands more often. And this affect to our range (width and composition).
In HRC beta (paid version) there are two options "Basic Hand" and "Basic Monte Carlo Hand" which include CRE (pic nr 1). And there are different outputs from those two models.
The Basic outputs are the same like in ICMizer (pic nr 2).
1. https://imgshare.io/image/NL9Z7X
2. https://imgshare.io/image/NL9EUp
In short, CRE assumes that players before us folded weak hands ( like 32o etc) and then players behind will have better hands more often. And this affect to our range (width and composition).
And this how looks the UTG 10bb jam (no ante) in 3 models:
https://imgshare.io/image/NL9yOd
https://imgshare.io/image/NL9yOd
OK I understand what you're saying P1. I don't know the answer unfortunately; it's definitely a much smaller effect but I agree could be important when it's close so I'll see if I can find anything out for you.
Thanks for pointing this distinction out.
Thanks for pointing this distinction out.
when you are short stacked...ie under 15 bbs in a tourney, and wake up with any hand in ' the shove range'...most especially in late pos when it has been folded to you... not necessarily when early position has led out, and mid position has 3 bet.
in cash games, or tourney games, when you are 95% convinced you have the best hand and your oppo will call.
as a bluff...when you are more or less sure that your oppo will fold...playing faithfully to the 'stories' you have both told up to the river...especially if the ' danger card' hits the river, and you are 95% sure your oppo wasn't on a draw.
just some ideas...of course there are more good examples.
A good question might also be..." when SHOULDN'T you go all in ?"
in cash games, or tourney games, when you are 95% convinced you have the best hand and your oppo will call.
as a bluff...when you are more or less sure that your oppo will fold...playing faithfully to the 'stories' you have both told up to the river...especially if the ' danger card' hits the river, and you are 95% sure your oppo wasn't on a draw.
just some ideas...of course there are more good examples.
A good question might also be..." when SHOULDN'T you go all in ?"
Collin Moshman said:
Thanks. For me it's important question if we should concern with it ? Or just use ICMizer and just play a bit tighter/ take bigger edge with those hands that include low cards like K2/76s etc. where the CRE will have biggest influence.
Few questions about ICMzier.
1. On final table we obv run sims in ICM (w/FGS) model.
2. At the beginning of tournament you use cEV, right? With FGS?
3. At what stage you use MTT-ICM model? Final two tables ?
4. You always use FGS option? Or there are specific spots for that?
1. On final table we obv run sims in ICM (w/FGS) model.
2. At the beginning of tournament you use cEV, right? With FGS?
3. At what stage you use MTT-ICM model? Final two tables ?
4. You always use FGS option? Or there are specific spots for that?
P1R35 said:
1. You definitely can, but it's also fine to just use normal ICM mode with (for example) 9 players left and no very short stacks.
2. At the beginning I would normally use cEV and no FGS.
3. As soon as possible, which depending on the situation is almost always with at least 100 left in ICMizer. So for example, if I'm importing a 90-man into ICMizer, I would check the MTT mode box and put in the right info so I would be using correct ICM from the start.
4. No, I tend to use FGS in spots where it's bubble or the payjumps are significant, as well as there being some very short stacks involved. ICMizer puts a checkmark next to recommended FGS depth which can be very helpful.
Hope this helps!
birdman666 said:
Sorry I'm not seeing the hand referenced, would you mind posting the spot? Sounds like an interesting one!
monkey23 said:
Usually you want your opponent to fold when you jam, since that way you win everything in the middle without a fight. But you're definitely right that there are times when you want a call if your equity is high enough against their range.
brunochano said:
Big blind ante is very similar. The main change would be that it impacts how long you have until you're totally blinded out if you're very short-stacked. But in terms of strategy, I would generally play the same with (for example) 10 0.1bb antes or 1 ante of 1bb.
Thank you so much for day 13.
Already did shove / fold action round 10bb or less, however what I miss here is a guideline, which cards can be used to shove. For myself is that 77+ and ATo + ATs.
Also position is for me key, thinking about UTG shove is stronger then Mid / late position at the tables.
Thank you so much for lesson 13! 🙂
PS, do we have to make an exam at the end?
Already did shove / fold action round 10bb or less, however what I miss here is a guideline, which cards can be used to shove. For myself is that 77+ and ATo + ATs.
Also position is for me key, thinking about UTG shove is stronger then Mid / late position at the tables.
Thank you so much for lesson 13! 🙂
PS, do we have to make an exam at the end?