Learning GTO through Poker Trainer. Question about sizing.
As per the image it has the game plan under View Gamplan Overview in blue. The hand is 3-bet pre flop we flat call with KQs. On the flop we hit trips with a solid kicker. It recommends to bet 25%, which is less than the usual bet of 33% it recommends in the flop. On the turn it also recommends 25%, which is a bigger deviation from the usual 66%. I was wondering if someone could help explain why the solver is suggesting this deviation here. Thank you very much for your help in advance this is my first post here, and will hopefully rely on you guys a little more on my poker journey.
8 Replies
Seems to me this is a 4bp, not a 3bp.
CO raised. You reraised in BTN. CO reraised.
You called in BTN. CO checked flop. You bet
flop. CO called flop. CO checked turn. You bet
turn. CO called turn. CO checked river.
In that case, SPR is probably about 2:1 and geometric bet size is ~B35--assuming 100bb stacks.
You have an invulnerable value hand so really no reason to go higher than the geometric size.
Sorry if I'm misunderstanding the screenshot. It seems like there's a lot of app-specific jargon that we couldn't possibly interpret without ourselves being users of this tool.
I'd recommend playing more hours and less gto trainer waste of time bs for live poker posting.
Is the solver not trying to make sure that you get called by using small sizes. Not many great hands villain can have to be second best. On the turn, it’s amplified because you don’t want fold equity, you want to be called.
Seems to me this is a 4bp, not a 3bp....
You have an invulnerable value hand so really no reason to go higher than the geometric size... It seems like there's a lot of app-specific jargon that we couldn't possibly interpret without ourselves being users of this tool.
I too, am misinterpreting the screenshot. Plus marveling at H calling a 4! with KQs. Even IP. H loses to the one combo of KK, and what is a LL V's 4! range anyway, but QQ+/AK? Robots are different, ofc.
I've not used this tool, but wouldn't users need more granularity in a NLHE tool than merely "bet"? Or is OP asking us what the bet sizes should be in the set for V?
KQs is honestly pretty middle-of-range for continuation against 4b CO vs BTN at equilibrium.
In practice, nobody 4bs this config enough. (But they'd have to be WAY under-4bing for KQs to fold.
KQs is honestly pretty middle-of-range for continuation against 4b CO vs BTN at equilibrium.
In practice, nobody 4bs this config enough. (But they'd have to be WAY under-4bing for KQs to fold.
Aren't our Vs way under 4!'ing vs bots? We have people here getting antsy 4!'ing AKo, for cryin out loud. And we're supposed to be more aggressive and learned than the population.
SolverLand/tough games sure. Or call with position (depending on stacks). I gave typical LL OOP V 4! range as JJ+/AQs+/AK. KQs does poorly...
Hit the mother lode here, ofc.
I’m not sure I understand your trainer, I just play games on mine. To be honest, I hate my poker trainer most of the time. I have it set on online million, face tough players, and get crushed regularly. I’m convinced that if you don’t follow their advice, the algorithm coolers you.
I don’t follow the program or the suggestions for study, I just show up and play the online million tournament. It’s not costing me anything, but I don’t like getting knocked out. I am certainly learning better play, but it pisses me off often. The coolers are real.
I need to ‘do better’ and at least look at their weekly training plan. The plus side is I am practicing lots and lots of hands and situations every day at a high level without risking money. So, when I show up at the card-room Friday, I’m better than I was last Friday.
I spend all week getting ready, much the way I did when I had a football game to prepare for earlier in life. Just another game where no one will ever have all the answers, but strategy & tactics are king. I love it!
KQs is honestly pretty middle-of-range for continuation against 4b CO vs BTN at equilibrium.In practice, nobody 4bs this config enough. (But they'd have to be WAY under-4bing for KQs to fold.
Aren't our Vs way under 4!'ing vs bots? We have people here getting antsy 4!'ing AKo, for cryin out loud. And we're supposed to be more aggressive and learned than the population.SolverLa
Yes, Vs are way under 4bing this config. Humans would honestly be better served just playing 4b-or-fold OOP than doing the whack BS that they do.
The sizings a human is likely to use at the stack sizes you're likely to have in a live game can also vary from the optimal sizings in a 100bb deep scenario. (4bs are so awkward at specifically 100bbs deep using specifically the sizes used in most sims there are probably a lot more wrong lessons to learn from static charts than right lessons.)
In any case, against someone making a pot-sized raise OOP with a 3.5% 4b, you should still continue.
You have 30% hot-and-cold equity against the stated range with position and a hand that realizes reasonably well. (Your flatting range also shouldn't be capped here.)
