Holy shhh...just stumbled upon your video and you are really good at explaining these concepts. Good stuff!

He is our ONLY Poker teacher we need in these times.

Amazing video, thank you!

@AlvinTeachesPoker

2 жыл бұрын

Thank you!

yo, that fleshy spade with the veins and eyeball is a cool image

Are you implementing overbets on the flop when only 100BB deep? Or is this for 150BB+ ?

Hi Alvin how do you construct your vs aggressive Opponents?

thx Alvin

@AlvinTeachesPoker

2 жыл бұрын

All the time

Best poker content out there - thanks for another great video!

@AlvinTeachesPoker

2 жыл бұрын

Thank you so much for watching!

Not related tô this vídeo, but why do KQo is shown as stronger than A5s on pokerstove but when we compare the raw equity of them, It shows A5s as stronger? Which hand is best to open raise pra flat call pre flop?

Do you reckon this strategy is equally profitable against fish? How should we adjust vs recs? Do it more often or favour a smaller sizing? I ask as I know recs play notoriously terribly vs small bets.

@St-ho8kj

Жыл бұрын

@Bryan Smith Why?

hey, man. what do you think about stabing and probing our entire range on the turn using a small size in a lot of situations and then play an overbet and a 3/4 bet on the river?

@AlvinTeachesPoker

2 жыл бұрын

Too vague of a question for me to give a concrete answer but can't be bad on some boards and opponents and is horrible on others

I just dont get it why we overbet flop with 2 top pairs as we heavy block opponents continue range.

@AlvinTeachesPoker

4 ай бұрын

Because we're so nutted that we still prefer playing a big azz pot

So why 10 7?

Knowing the right way to build your crypto portfolio is very important connect for guidance

Kinda wondering why you would want to overbet the flop with these instead of the turn when you have more information about your opponents range. Seems like if V calls a small cbet then we can bomb the turn/river with the same hand candidates since V would have raised to protect his 2pair+ holdings.

@AlvinTeachesPoker

Жыл бұрын

You're trying to get him to call as much money as possible then fold a future street! It's not about winning as many pots as possible, it's about the most money.

@ticenits1926

Жыл бұрын

@@AlvinTeachesPoker yeah but if your opponent is shoveling money in on the flop what makes you think he's just going to give up on the turn?

Ｐｒⓞм???

$82 into $55

@illegitimate0

Жыл бұрын

It says a bet of $82 into a pot of $55.

@EricSmyth4Christ

Жыл бұрын

@@illegitimate0 Thanks I watched again it was a much better experience

I want to know more about the 'everything else' that 'plays out straightforwardly' because of the circumstantial nature of a BTN Vs BB SRP spot constituting the widest ranges in poker that are similar to each other (in quantity more than quality I suppose). The distribution of combos is one of the drivers for betting big. That has both been abstracted and observed in databases since years past. This is pretty common knowledge and has different reasons for application than the truly narrow one provided here. I am certain vs a 40-50bb half BI fish the reason for betting big is to make him jam hands that he won't be able to face two barrels with. Making value hands like TPTK an absolute bomb of a bet making the weaker part of villains range biased to ripping it in, & also giving us a very good bet big jam turn or 3bet if the silly fish improves and idk maybe donks - but we weren't shown any of that. Bluffing portion is more applicable to CO vs BB since CO's linear expansion for RFI bottoms out with kickers that have more dominating bigger cards vs practically the same defend range of BB. BTN has some of those combos outkicked. Also, Over betting is just a silly proxy for a heroic assumption that actually implies a sub-optimal choice of sizing. LP play is important. Getting 100x better from EP doesn't come close to impacting how much more you will earn from a mere 10x improvement from the most VPIP'd position. BB is obviously so sensitive a position that rake changes can make a winning player a pretty consistent loser. The tactical analysis of such a spot is worthless. It demands more than a declarative 'this contrasted against the rest' condition which is predicating 'because' as a Boolean conjunction lacking in all explanatory domains - a request for causal factors, request for justification, motive and general purpose - are antecedent in the predicate. Distilling the actual answers in a 11 minute video is beyond this foe. Shot further in the foot because a big portion goes into irrelevant introduction and then a narrative-based subjective and highly motivated prediction of future states and usage of 'solvers'. Cost of computing will determine the future of solvers, not the request for sophistication, silly. Further - Rather than a explanation, this is just a description of availability to unfiltered information that does serve a contextually determined purpose, namely that of answering why this video was made - a diabolical use of a 'when question' more declarative than inquisitive & further subjected to strict constraints while at the same time purportedly assuming the position that occupies the largest portion of logic space with a tautological force of reasoning 'I know when to do X. The reason r' is just one single element of all R but all R is presupposed in the title of the video & since I know the now and future situation of tools that drive strategy - I know relational truth values of this proposition because of the whole backward induction both in-game & about-game. Also, there is a secret and OMG it is out there. However, I know more about it due to the fact that I am a prediction engine when it comes to the evolution of strategy in NLHE. I will declare a broad statement that does not follow from anything I have so far argued. My video contains zero novel information & does not expand on the 'when condition' at all, instead collapses to barely a couple of nodes in width and couple in depth. Shambolic. A spot that has grave systemic consequences explained in a fashion that only an out-dated and unqualified opinion can. Richard Feynman once said - "People who wish to analyse nature without using mathematics must settle for a reduced understanding." He obviously did not consider the reduction in understanding from abuse of math. GT and Optimization are two separate subjects in math. Both are relatively linear in their solution set up. It's a question of solving ODE usually concerning inequality. Yes, we all know John Nash was solving them in 18 dimensional hyper-space - a study that is so obviously relevant to poker that I will forego simple linear combinatory statics because....well secrets. 2022 and the understanding of GTO is still botched to the core. Pardon lack of brevity. All I meant was, nothing new to see here but lots to learn from one flop, applied to wide ranges in a solver that used to be, certainly is not anymore, what one would consider the top of the line anymore.

@ptantonioalves

2 жыл бұрын

Man your life must suck a lot 🤦‍♂️🤷‍♂️

@AlvinTeachesPoker

2 жыл бұрын

This guys plays $8 mtts but thinks he's a poker master lol, I've lost single hands worth more than his lifetime winnings :D

nice bandage on your face, Nelly

@AlvinTeachesPoker

2 жыл бұрын

I was literally listening to country grammar when I put it on :D Just trying to express my rapperly heritage

Jesus Christ is LORD