REDLINE SECRETS REVEALED | $200z Play & Explain
Vložit
- čas přidán 14. 12. 2023
- 📚 Signup to my newsletter to get free advanced strategy tips 👉🏽 saulocosta.poker/newsletter
💲 If you are looking for a staking deal, or a coaching for profits deal, send an application to Metagame 👉🏽 www.metagame.poker;
📩 If you want to get in touch with me about doing other types of business, send me an email 👉🏽 business@saulocosta.poker.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In this Play & Explain session, I talk about an always hot topic in poker, specially in cash games: REDLINE. The redline represents the non showdown winnings of a player, meaning that it represents how much money a player has won without showing his cards.
The typical graph of a poker player will have such line as negative, particularly because we lose money before showdown compulsorily by having to pay the blinds. However, it's possible to make a lot of money before showdown by applying exploits against our opponents.
In this video, I reveal many of the secrets that I've used throughout my career to achieve a better looking redline. Hope it helps you!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- The HUD/Tracker that I use: hand2note.com/?aid=e30e Use 'pokermadesimple' promo code on checkout for 10% discount on first purchase!
- The training platform I use for my studies:
gtowizard.com/p/pokermadesimple
- The software I use for Betsizings, RNG and Tiling: affiliate.jurojinpoker.com/sa...
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Follow me on Twitter: / @saulocostapoker
- Follow Metagame on Instagram: / metagame_poker
#poker #pokerstrategy #pokercoaching #onlinepoker #pokermadesimple - Zábava
📚 Signup to my newsletter to get free advanced strategy tips 👉🏽 saulocosta.poker/newsletter
These themed play and exolains are extremely helpful to me! ❤
Muy buen video! Gracias.
Huge insights and data shared in this one. Thanks !!!
My pleasure!
Thx a lot, Mr. Senna of Poker!
Que aula! Vou aplicar no meu humilde NL10. Valeu Saulo!
Mete bala!
Excellent!
So many gems in there, thanks for the videos, Saulo!
Glad you liked it mate 👊🏽
Saullo's videos are off-the-charts fabulous; even the Poier Giraffe loves them!
Tu da aula cara, joga muito. Sonho ter uma coaching session contigo, tive a primeira da vida hoje com um jogador que respeito. To tentando fazer a red subir faz 1 ano e meio e ainda ta dificil. É tanta coisa pra considerar
Focus on making good decisions, not on changing your graph.
But if you've been trying to get better for a year and a half and still no progress, then you're just folding too much. Stop overfolding everywhere and the redline should improve quickly
Dicas preciosas, mestre! Aplicando muita em coisa em meus games, mesmo em limites mais baixos, NL 25, NL50 e tem dado muito certo! Teu jogo tá bonito demais, dá gosto de ver e aprender com suas dicas!
Muito obrigado! ❤🧡
Great content! Question, why would you overbet in the Ac 4x hand with the nuts on river (6:00) when u say he has a super weak range because he snaps bets then snap checks? It is not better to bet small to induce calls/raises?
Yeah I think this was a mistake by Saulo. It was obvious he was going to get a really quick fold. Not ideal when you have the nuts…
I assume because betting big polarizes his range, meaning theoretically it should also contain some bluffs. Villain is folding their air anyway, but might sometimes see people hero call big sizes, especially vs someone with an aggro reputation. That would be my guess 🤷♂️
its a mistake and he made several bet sizing mistakes in this video tbh. betting way too big against ranges that clearly cant call
Hey. This is a common theoretical misconception about betsizing. The fact that my opponent's range is weak does not incentivize me to size down with value bets. In fact it's the complete opposite - the less strong hands a range has, the more you should size up with your value bets.
What most people don't understand is that sizing down does not increase your value betting EV against a weak range. Your opponent is likely to overfold against ALL betsizes, not just the big one. So you think you are capturing more value by betting smaller, but in fact you aren't, because you are still facing a lot of folds from hands he is not gonna call against any size and then making the minimum vs the hands he will call.
The only instances where it's optimal to size down with nutted hands is when you are OOP facing a very air heavy range. In those circumstances, sizing down is good because it captures EV from the air portion of villain's range, which will start raise bluffing you to stop you from betting all your middling hands for a small size.
I realize it's hard for most people to grasp this concept, and I've seen people commentating on it on several occasions. Even though I can give the explanation above, you won't really understand it unless you run the numbers and see for yourself.
One of the biggest problems with the poker community is that it doesn't do quantitative work. 99.9% of regs only do qualitative work, and use qualitative reasonings in their thought process. "I size down because my opponent's range is weak" is a qualitative reasoning.
Determining the best value bet sizing for your hand is a quantitative problem, not qualitative. You only get the right answer by running the numbers and making models.
Hope that helps!
@@saulocostapoker What you said is all true in theory. But in practice if you are betting 1.5x pot and villain was only calling about 10% of the time (tops, because his range was so damn weak) -- it would be way better to bet 0.5x pot and get calls around 40% of the time. Or bet 33% pot, get called 50% of the time and get raised 5% of the time.
What you said is just a theoretical concept. In practice, it’s almost impossible that they will overfold an exactly the same vs all sizes, and it is your job to figure out what is the best sizing based on his range.
Thanks
love your reaction after discovering the villain bluffed with 99!!! 😍😍😍
Hi Saulo,
As a reg at zoom games, I enjoy watching these videos. I don't necessarily agree with every single one of your teachings, but it's a part of my study routine to try to learn how other people play and what their thought process might be like during each hand. Your videos have much more valuable ideas than most on youtube, but I never take any advice from anyone without a grain of salt. I know you wouldn't either ;)
@3:44 I agree the B50 cbet looks intuitively weird on that wet but not complete board, and most regs wouldn't use it, but because I've been wrong before, I just had to double check it. UTG open 2.5 vs BB flat. Kd9d7c solver actually mostly mixes between B25 and B50, going larger B75 only 10% of the time. However, it mixes between B50 and B75 and some times (8%) OB B125 when UTG opens 2 BB. So I wouldn't tag the villain as a fish just based on that yet :), in solver world they played the hand pretty much perfectly. I think it has to do with the fact that our flatting range on the BB should be significantly tighter against a 2.5 UTG open compared to our range against a min-raise, and with the 2.5 open our SPR OTF is lower, justifying the lower bet size. In either case, with those preferred cbet sizes we mostly end up with the same pot size OTT, so it works from the geometrical bet sizing point of view. I do tend to prefer the larger sizing myself as well in this case, because people tend to be a bit too sticky with their draws OOP and rarely x/r bluff against it. Then Ts OTT villain's B75 is indeed the most preferred GTO sizing. If preflop went open 2 and call, flop B50 and call, then they would go B75-B125, so on average larger.
Good stuff, I like the 3BB open from the BTN idea against the nits with the bottom of our range. Probably works in zoom, regular tables even the worst button clickers will notice pretty soon. But if the population under 3-bets BB vs IP 3 bb open as much as they do against all opening sizes, then I doubt it has a major effect on our winrate. I personaly do prefer smaller opening sizes in general, because it lets me play wider ranges against weaker players. But from red line perspective opening larger with the bottom of our range certainly works. In fact, if you open or 3-bet jammed every single hand, your red line would be fantastic :)
Hey, its not really about whether that sizing is good or not in theory. It's just an application of Bayes theorem. Regs don't use half pot cbets almost ever, while its the highest frequently used size by recs. So its an evidence that increases likelyhood of the player being a rec.
We use bayes theorem all the time. For instance, if you see a broken stack you will typically assume its a rec. That's because recs have a broken stack very often, while regs almost never. Recs will have a 100bb or higher stack plenty of times, and regs will sometimes have a broken stack, but when the stack goes below 100bb you can assing high probability of the player being a rec.
It's the same idea for any other evidence you see at the tables. If there is a big difference in the chance of seeing something happen between the 2 profiles, then once you see the evidence the probability of the profile of the player skews towards the profile that has the highest probability of displaying the behaviour observed.
I show the math for it in this video for the case of CO cold calls. An unknown cold calling from CO will be a rec 73% of the time: czcams.com/video/ukb4jIFk0cE/video.html
Hope that helps
Yeah cheers good clarification, appreciate you getting back to me. Could kind of say the same about the UTG 2.5 BB opening size itself as well in many player pools right now. I agree, those pieces of information together and we can pretty safely make certain assumptions about that particular player until proven otherwise. Applies to HUD stats with low sample sizes as well. However, I know people who are good enough to intentionally manipulate the kind of information they give out, and regularly switch gears. In fact, I don't know a good reg who doesn't do that from time to time. It is important to quickly identify those players as well. @ostapoker
10:17 What do you think about betting 1/10 pot here to have him call with weak hands / induce him to bluff-raise you? He might even be more aggressive against that size than against a check..
I need your datas😅 i want to do it in the same way. I want this statistics. I want too see all this gto stats, in any sitations and see all pool deviations 😅
What is the software you are using that shows the hand actions and gives you an rng? Is it available to use on gg?
Jurojin
What kind of software are using to give you the past actions and bet sizes?
Pretty sure it's Jurojin
What about instead of checking to induce bets on the river you min bet 10% or something to trigger their bluffs?
Can work quite well too, I do it sometimes
7:14 lets be clear, people UNDERBLUFF rivers in general. they overbluff in certain circumstances like the hand in question where you likely checked turn and river
Wrong
Ty 🙏🙏🙏
nice one
17:00 WOW!
impressed by this fold! I would just put him on Acx and call down as brazilians like to bluff with blockers.
I have a question Saulo. The fast fold coach at raise your edge was raising 3bbs UTG and 2.2BBs from the BTN. A person had asked him why he was doing the opposite of what the solver usually does (raise small from early and big from late). He said it was an exploitive play to punish the BTN caller. Given that you've suggested a decent red line exploit is to raise 3bbs from the BTN... In conjunction what he said is it then reasonable to raise 4bbs UTG at micro stakes and 3BBs from the BTN. What are your thoughts?
What he is saying is a blue line exploit. Putting more money into the pot with strong hands against players who are likely to call too much. I think that's an okay exploit, but only with the top of your range, like TT+, AQ+. Other hands won't necessarily have their EV increased by sizing up pre. There is plenty of people to squeeze and those hands won't have high EV as calls. And then postflop they won't make very strong hands and will end up having to check-fold a lot. So I would only use it with specific hands, certainly not with my entire range.
And 2.2bbs from BTN is just not good I'm afraid. Not in theory, nor in practice.
@@saulocostapoker Thank you Saulo. I love your content man!
What’s ur sn? That’s a rec sizing and saulo will tag u as such.
Hi Saulo
in min 13:46, do you consider triple barreling against all the Ax?
I think fish are not folding Ax on the river
Hey. This is a common misconception about recreational players. Fish don't calldown sufficiently on A high board to prevent you from bluffing. They only fold 1% more on A high boards compared to other textures, and they fold more often than needed to make a profit with a random 0 equity hand. So yeah I would bluff the fish If I had a bluffing hand
@@saulocostapoker My question was about value betting 3 streets with your two pairs (Q3), I think he can be overcalling on the river with hands like AT, A9, etc; Could the EV of that hand come from there maybe?
thanks for your answer !!!!!! great content
I have to say, you laughing at that guy bluffing you with the 99 hand was pretty cool.
Like before see video. Lets gouuu overbeting🤑. Beautiful pictures master!
Hi Saulo. You saying that we should open very wide SB vs BB rec on small stack. Still 3x or or can we go smaller like 2.2-2.5bb? And what about Fish on 100bb+ open ~50% with 3x? thanks!
Yeah you can go smaller, same exploits will apply. At higher stack depths you can open even wider, not tighter, cuz there will be more room for exploitation postflop. If you are good and understand pool tendencies, you can open any 2 cards vs a fish and make it better than open folding
Hey, man. When it is a discontinued aggression line (as XC-X-B) from villain, but the board is A-high and/or his size is an overbet, could we make a case that people are under bluffing on average even tho this discontinued aggression line is usually overbluffed?
Depends on the profile. Regs overbluff more when they size up, so you should be happier about the overbet sizing. Recs on the other hand underbluff with those sizes, so you can overfold exploitatively
@@saulocostapoker thank you! You are the best.
You are awesome!
Thank you 💛💚
19:00 what is that number in the purple-ish box? a software?
It's a random number generator from a software called Jurojin. It's used to play mixed strategies in poker - balance two or more actions with the same hand in the same spot
@@saulocostapoker Holy fuck that's cool as fuck. I use minutes on the clock, even or odd and stuff like that. but this is way better. I'll look for it, thanks Saulo
LUISITO SUAREZ IS ONNNN!!!! 😍😍😍
i get this is 200nl, but is the river overbluffed in small stakes ? i have a feeling its underbluffed at lower stakes but idk
The data actually shows a trend for less overbluffs as you go higher in stakes. My guess is that people start to get better at value betting; and also controlling their bluffing frequencies.
So yeah, small stakes is the same thing.
@@saulocostapoker this is a very new way for me to think, i assumed that weaker players were more honest on the river, i know i am but my river frequenceis according to leak tracer are good so maybe being a bit more honest is correct. Thanks again for the interesting info, i think my problem is ive been too sticky in the past so i fold too much to correct that previous mistake, which is not very smart
Is population overbluffing straight outs and flushed outs vs underbluffing paired boards and full houses?
Depends on the specifics of the line and size sequence man. There is no super general heuristic like that for board textures
You said at one point that recreationals overbluff, but later on you folded 99 vs a river overbet saying that you did so because opponent was a rec, can you clarify on that Saulo? Thx
They overbluff except with overbets. Overbets from recs are typically underbluffed
@@saulocostapoker I see, nice tip thanks sm
@@saulocostapoker Hi, Saulo, hope you are doing great.
What about recreational players that go all-in overbet when they are short stacked? I know recreational players choose their sizes based on the pure strenght of their hand (nutted hands bet bigger), but after reviewing some Ignition hands (thanks you can get to see hole cards) I noticed that they have some bluffs in such spots, but I'd like to have some insights backed up by data. What do you think? If they shove 25bb on a 19bb pot, they are overbluffing? My coach adviced me to overfold when a recreational bets pot bet or bigger, but not sure if this holds true against short-stacked recreationals.
Do you really think there can't be many sets on that monotone raised board? I am always shoving turn there lol.
From a fish, yeah for sure. From a reg, no. This pool however is quite strange in the sense that a tight reg might play like a fish sometimes, so it's tough to know 😅
We flop the flush and we are folding for 100bb stack?? villain never semibluffing? or playing sets, 2pairs this way?
if the pot is HU, then maybe you can build a case for going broke with a small flush there... but 3 way the odds of them bluff is way reduced
@@lamm-prinzessin1116Their play looks more like 44 or 22 than a higher flush, hard to see a fold being good
Awesome content as always Saulo! Could you help me on one quick question? I wonder what should I play Rush&Cash (Zoom) or classic "static" cash game table?
I would play regular tables If I were you. Focus on game selecting well and adapting to specific opponents
A brilliant player! (From Russia with love ❤)
Thanks buddy, appreciate the compliment
yo mate, any chance you play 4-colored? this is exhausting af
Yeah, changed it already, next time it will be 4-color
Saulo i got a question, dont you think that WPT poker is a much more profitable site than GG, given the much lower rake and the sheer amount of fishes and whales per table? I know a couple of highstakes pros playing on WPT and they say that its much more profitable and whales concentrated than any other site including GG. Whats your opinion on that cause i dont see you or most of youtube poker pros or Twitch livestreamers playing ever there.
I have many players of my stable playing there. It's in fact a good site in terms of profitability and quality of games.
But it doesn't make for a good site for streaming and producing content purposes. Action is way too fast paced, only 3 tables per player are allowed, and it doesn't have all the additional features of other sites like GG that make playing more fun, like emojis and stuff like that.
Producing poker content and playing poker for a living are 2 very different endeavours. The #1 goal of a content producer is to maximize entertainment/educational content, not necessarily their hourly at the tables. Monetization from such work comes in other forms
@@saulocostapoker Ah, okey gotcha, so you do think that is the most profitable site, nowadays? Im thinking about switching there thats why.
@@LinusHate yeah winrate should be high, however volume will be low, so can't be your only site imo
You pronounce the word “left” as “laft”… it’s more of an “eh” sound. Like the sound in the word “text” or “dress”. That’s the e sound we are looking for.
What stakes are people not overbluffing river. I watched someone on raise your edges discord bring up that you said recreational players are overbluffing the river and their coaches said you only meant for 200NL not lower stakes. Is that true? What stakes does that become not true? Also I want to join your team! I'm willing to put in 60 hours a week
I would be willing to do work for free or anything to be valuable to the team!
I will literally move to Brazil! You are the best coach I've ever seen
Raise your edge isn't very good from what I've seen. Recs players overbluff at all stakes.
Recs overbluffing tendency is essentially a function of:
1 - Their super wide ranges preflop
2 - Their inability to value bet properly
Neither of these things have any direct correlation with the stakes being played.
So no, I never meant that it's only at 200nl or midstakes or whatever. Recs overbluff at 2nl and at 5knl - all it takes is to play over 30 VPIP (which pretty much all recs do)
Давай бразилец, покажи как надо переезжать😂
Eu gostaria de poder dar sub 2x, vc manda muito mestre!
200gg rnc rake will eat you alive... Barely any reg makes money pre RB on there. Whats the point?
just play nosebleeds theory
Well, putting all modesty aside, I'm accostumed with achieving what "barely anyone" achieves 😎
Besides, what matters is total winnings, not pre rb winnings. There are many regs printing money on GG Poker while losing pre-rb.
And if I were to nitpick I could even say that you can't say that because R&C is untracked so there is no way to know how people are actually doing.
The pool is very weak, would imagine the best regs are winning there
@@saulocostapoker if you are a rakeback reg is that really a career worth pursuing? Losing at the games to make maybe 40k in RB over a year? I would argue you cannot print with just rakeback winnings. You will be able to win pre RB in these games but fact is 80% or so of regs won't (% increase every year) . Better to find soft games where you make money without RB, if there even are any online anymore
There are sites that track GG winners/losers
What then would be the stakes that you would feel are the most challenging in terms of site and stakes?
Or, what stakes and site would you recommend AGAINST playing simply for it’s tough pool?
65s seems like an overfold, idk, worth checking out
Timestamp?
@@saulocostapoker 16:30
"Fish overbluffs" not sure whether this applies to all stakes. I would say on micros like 10NL, it's not that much truth.
Edit: Also 200NL on GG will be waaaaay softer than on Stars.
It does apply to all stakes. I debunk the myth you just referred to in this video czcams.com/video/we1vTe9t624/video.htmlsi=cilK6KgAnvOMOO4X
Inscrito só por conta da peita do Gremioso da massa
Why you deleted comments?
You dont run it twice, but why not cash out? Isnt it just giving you your equity and not caring about holding/not holding? I always cash out simply cause i dont like riding the emotional rollercoaster
I believe cashing out costs extra rake so there's no point doing that
Dear, Mr. Saulo, this 65 spot vs aces, why wouldn't you show it from the beginning, explaining why would you call 65 on a 3bet.
Hey mate. 65s is a standard call preflop against 3bet
@@saulocostapoker Ye, I know, not sure most viewers know, to be fair. Thanks for reply.
i did know that 3x size on the button exploit, on my pool, there is also another exploit opening 2.5x on the SB, they overfold waaaay more than 3x and 2x.
Overfold is not the only variable though, 3bet frequency is super important. The smaller you open the more you force IP to call but also allows IP to get away with less 3bets (its optimal to 3bet less vs smaller opens)
It is real? min 17:00
Tagging people as recs who use half pot instead of 1/3 or 85% instead of 75 or 150 doesn’t make sense. Like are they losing ev doing that? No. Betting more makes sense vs recs on bovada.
Hey mate. It's not about tagging them as recs because the play is incredibly bad or anything like that, it's just a practical application of Bayes theorem. When someone bets half pot on the flop, and you have no other information, then it's simply much more likely such player is a recreational - not because betting half pot is intrinsically bad, but because recs use that sizing super often, while regs don't use it much at all.
For a more detailed explanation of this concept, checkout this video from my channel czcams.com/video/ukb4jIFk0cE/video.html
i play less wide ranges against bad players because they dont fold enough imo, i this stupid ?
I wouldn't call it stupid, it's just incorrect. Recs in general don't call too much. It's in fact super hard for them to do so, as their ranges are super wide. They tend to fold more than solver in every spot
@@saulocostapoker yes that sounds logical they do have wider range i will try and correct my poor logic
First!!
5:19 How did you end up calling preflop here? Isn't it 100% squeeze?
Yeah I prefer squeezing there for sure. Might have been distracted