What ACTUALLY Matters in Poker
Vložit
- čas přidán 28. 03. 2024
- 🎓 Our Comprehensive Cash Game Course: THE CARROT POKER SCHOOL: www.carrotcorner.com/school/
📈Use Mass Data to Crush your Opponents with Grade E 👉 www.carrotcorner.com/school/
💸 Boost Your Win Rate with CASH INJECTION: 👉 www.carrotcorner.com/cash-inj...
🛒 For all our poker courses and products 👉 www.carrotcorner.com/store/
🥇 For poker coaching 👉 www.carrotcorner.com/coaching/
Follow me on Twitch 👉 / carrot_corner
Follow me on Twitter 👉 / carroters1
📜 Video Description 📜
Carrot Corner has just signed its latest video creator for the subscription service coming April 2024 - a professional cash game poker player who chooses to put in volume on PokerStars and consistently wins in some of the toughest mid-stakes poker games available. This player has chosen 200 ZOOM as his battleground and triumphed over a massive sample against one of the toughest fast fold poker pools on the internet. In this video we look at his yearly results and I analyse some hands I recently played at 200 ZOOM. - Hry
Just discovered your content. Great stuff man. Have been playing on and off for over 20 years and this is exactly what I needed for some practice.
Thank you! Wonderful content! I learned a lot.
Excellent work Pete!
Thank you sir, I'll have another
The most important video I need right now. Thank you, Pete!
Thank you Pete!
I love these videos I play mostly online tournaments and I splash around in live cash sometimes. When I am playing live cash my goal is really just bet my big hands and get it all in and it's done pretty well for me with 0 cash game studying. The preflop 3b range thing is so true when a guy 3 bets it's almost always QQ-AA in live cash so if I have 2 p or better you know I am fast playing.
Great content! Thanks!
Awesome content! Thanks for bringing it!! #letsgo!!!
Appreciate your content, have a great day!
i never give interaction on these videos because of the traction it brings it brings down my true EV in the real world. Year after year the pool will get stronger with a plethora of ingenious content!
Fantastic work Pete! Really looking forward to the subscription service. As a live player, you and Bart Hanson are my main poker gurus.
Really liked this Pete thx it's kind of ironic because in a way of kind of always played this way and it's only when I try to implement what other people have said that I've done not so great it's pretty hard to imagine what your opponent thinks of your range and it doesn't matter anyways I like the way you think the game sir keep it up
I have lost more stacks than I care to admit in the exact situation of the AQo hand.
Luckily, you have shown the solution to the problem.
You keep me out of the poor house.
As always, I appreciate your content.
This is great content cheers
What the hell, no drum rolls?
Great stuff as usual Pete. Thank you and happy easter!
He posted this as a sneak peak to paid content. This is not his usual CZcams video
Thanks Carrotman!
Great content Pete. I've noticed some streamers instantly tag players as rec/reg based on certain things like if someone buys in less than 100BB,too low 3 bet sizing etc. You've said to play differently against different types of players so would you recommend throwing by players off by buying in for only 50BB etc for a few hands to get other players to incorrectly tag as a rec?
thanks carrot dude
Really well done
Do we need bluffs on J984 against regs on the turn
"[The concep of] elasticity is powerful, use it." I love your your content already and I love your accent! Two thumbs up!! I'll be back!!!
Looking for the biggest mistake that your opponents are most likely commonly making is always the way to go, Mr. "Plus EV".
Good job and thank you.
How does the easter sale work, prices seem the same, is there a coupon?
Everything is 25% off the normal price. You can see the discount on each product page EG. The Cash Injection page but in the store things are just 25% cheaper than usual.
Nice Runouts!
This is great and deals with some ideas the stable I've been working with has applied to live poker, where I imagine this sort of extremely exploitative thinking is even better. In HH1, though, shouldn't we consider sizing bigger on the flop, for all the same reasons you (correctly, imo) chose to jam the turn? I'd imagine tons of villain's hands aren't folding to a 4.5x or 5x raise.
Great video
TT set spot vs AK - "it is a disaster if they have QJo" - well do they not? The monker ranges I have open QJo some 60% of the time and I personally play it from UTG. Considering the fact that in the second hand of the video some other villain does not fold KQo on UTG vs 3b (which he should), this assumption of "vill does not have QJo on UTG" feels somewhat wonky to me.
It's not that in theory you can bet or check a node. In equilibrium both actions are used at specific frequencies. That is very different than saying that in theory you can do either at full frequency or random frequencies.
Equilibrium and theory are different things. Maximizing ev against villains strategy is not "anti theory" or "anti solver" as you very well know.
Actions need to be =EV in order to be mixing in solverland. The premise of this video is that actions are not =EV, and therefore shouldn't mix. Solvers' outputs are relying on clairvoyance. Human strategies are not clairvoyant. Or, as you would put it : solver and reality are different things.
@@messieursxs9079 yes, that doesn't mean we should do one thing "in theory" and another one "in practice", it means population doesn't play at equilibrium and we should adjust accordingly.
I just don't understand why Pete is being vague and not using solver outputs to show exploit assumptions, not mentioning implications of extreme strategies for your HUD, pretending like solver doesn't bet big for value anyway, etc.
@@roderick8254 I think he is more demonstrating that humans do not react perfectly to sizing.
I think the point is that certain actions will produce better results, like a lot of the red line guys know all the board textures that are over folded relative to bet size.
So in the red line guy case bet is way better than check because you can make a lot more money there, or better is check raise because you can squeeze a couple more bb out of V in that spot.
@@jeffshackleford3152 yes but he is being vague about the aspects in play which fair enough he has courses to sell, but this is supposed to be on the subscription thing.
@@roderick8254poker is a very vague game, so i don't think skipping over the super granular details is bad.
The idea is one line is superior to others against humans, so we figure out what line is best and go for it.
Hey there! Relatively new watcher and wanted to ask a question and give a compliment. First, really enjoy how you navigate these hands building off the premise of "true ev" or equity imbalance. What I wanted to ask was, in this series will you be supporting your claims with node locking solvers? I believe everything you laid out is quite logical and I tend to agree but the content would be that much more compelling if proofed with a tool like PIO or GTOwizard? This could be a consideration for potential future subscribers as myself.
Potential future subscriber
Get over urself
@@beanhoudinibruh 😂😂😂😂😂😂
@@beanhoudini It was just a question, everyone has different goals kind of like your goal is to be an asshole. Totally fine
@@galenandnichole7588 never commented about ur question
Omg he sourced some really good players
Very interesting and tempting approach. I wonder if it may not be a reason to take this approach as shortcut to avoid understanding GTO play in depth. Having a "rough idea" of the correct play is definitely less of a challenge than really understanding. So maybe lazy people like myself might feel tempted as I said above....
No the point is to first learn GTO, then move past it, you have to known GTO before you exploit. Otherwise how do you know if a spot is over or under defended, over or under bluffed?
@@PhonyBologna Of course, I agree with you. But, more often than not, people with quasi-knowledge will use this line of reasoning to justify play which goes against GTO. For this reason CPS first
@@fatkinglouie1669 fair, I have always longed for the preset node lock feature like player profiles to see what shifts. Versus having to manually node lock. Even a player profile each street, under 3b by x %, then flop over bluff or under bluff by %, then things like normal, but overbluff when flush draw, things like that...
@@PhonyBolognaI am not super familiar with pio, but I do know you can have preset ranges.
Can you export preset ranges, so someone else can use them?
............*WHISPERS true EV
Hey Pete,
the AQ hand example really caught me offguard, maybe I am simplifying to much but wasn't one of the cash injection exploits that in 3-bet pots population overfolds to triple barrels?
Isn't our opponent very caped on the river aswell?
Maybe someone in the comments can tell me why jamming in this river spot is bad.
Love your content!
Hey!
True EV comes from maximizing your EV by exploiting the opponents tendencies (like we all used to do 20 years ago). And Pete's point remains the same: we are playing against humans. They are balanced in one way or the other.
I am not sure, but I think against humans it's sometimes tricky. Their are ether stationy or way to tight and nitty in that specific situation .
So, I think it's optional in theory to bluff in the first place and if we know that his river range is quite strong, we can avoid loosing a stack here by bluffing less then we should in equilibrium.
We don't know if he would fold Kx or not. Basically, we do not need to know. We gained enough info on the turn.
I think the concept easy and pragmatic, o.c. mainly against recreational players.
The point was don't bluff recs that you perceive to have a strong hand. They aren't going to fold enough to make bluffing the best play. You are going to get called down by a player with a hand like KQ in that example and you'll be sitting there crying to your friends later about how villian "should have folded" .
@@H1ghL1ghT1 Hey, thanks for your answer.
I think the point I struggle with is that I thought a good exploit against general population was to triple barrel bluff more often in 3-bet pots. But when I bet on the turn the range of the villain is very often going to be condense on the river. But maybe that depends on the texture and in this specific spot we looked at here the villains range is so condensed that bluffing is a punt.
Will this replace CPS?
Never. It’s a totally separate product. CPS is forever.
Is there a carrot corner discord server?
Yes it’s accessible for customers who have purchases one or more grades of The Carrot Poker School.
15" POKER HAAAAARRRRDDD
You definately talk a better game than play
this concept was inspired by charlie carrel
Why are so many in the comments surprised that exploits exist in poker and the strongest players rely on them
My simplification: don’t bluff or slow play against recreational players. They won’t fold when they have any kind of hand or draw and aren’t that sensitive to bet sizing.
Recs play WAY too many hands, you must bluff bs their capped ranges or you're losing massive amounts of ev
Your simplification may not be correct and could be leading into very, VERY bad thinking in-game. You are not supposed to pull a trigger and execute that 3-barrel bluff when recreational player calls a huge bet on the turn in a 3bet pots / in pots with lower SPR.
You are supposed to bluff them in smaller pots + where ranges are really capped towards the weaker holdings.
But yes, your second part is correct. They are not that sizing sensitive + they may over-fold on scary River card even when they are supposed to call it off, so sometimes it's better to just ship it on the Turn already to get all the money in the pot. Also scary River card could be bad for you and it goes check-check on the River and you win way less money from the pot, where you could easily stack the opponent.
@@founik thank you, appreciate the refinement to my thinking, helpful!
What happened in the last hand 😅 left us hanging the QJ
Watch it again. Villain had AJ and called
I hate the vernacular around GTO/Solvers. GTO as a competitive concept depends totally on your opponent!!! So max true EV IS Game Theory Optimal. If you plug some donkey's node locked ranges into Piosolver you will get "exploits from a solver". Solvers are only balanced when they expect perfect play, not innately. That's why I suggest we use terms differently, GTO for solver approved exploits, Exploitative for intuitive exploits, and Solver as short for solver vs solver plays like what Pio will output (where the range is known but not the reaction to the Hero's play)
Exactly. Gto (optimal) is missused as a term. Its nash equilibrium - breakeven strategy.
For example if we assume your pool is more passive overall. After changing Solver input -> GTO would stop trapping, instead always go for value itself. And in spots where you use medium size to hope for thin and bluff raises from villain, you would now overbet yourself to get money in (because passive villain doesnt help putting money in)
Thats GTO solution now.
Nash equilbrium doesnt change, GTO always change
@@vojtechmatulik1292 GTO always depends on other actors in a system whose choices change our outcomes. The problem with poker players is there is finite permutations if you group very similar ones so you can try to solve as unexplotable. If you think of sports like football(soccer) or a stockmarket where you can't "solve" them with brute force logic and batching/grouping similar outcomes then you realise GTO is an irrelevant concept if just using a nash equilibrium in 99% of contexts.
In poker there is only 4 decision trees that branch at each spot for any individual player
OOP
Bet -> Bet Size -> Villain Calls
Bet -> Bet Size -> Villian raises -> Raise -> Raise Size which can repeat if V 4bets,
IP
IF Check THEN Bet -> Bet Size -> V Calls/ IF Check THEN Bet -> Bet Size -> V Raises -> Raise.
And IF Bet THEN Raise ""
Any line where hero chooses to check, call or fold and never bets is completely defined as one tree no new branches because hero is only choosing from the check, call, bet, fold 4 choice discrete decision tree and not entering the finit but large bet size discrete decision tree with potentially hundreds of branches. Solver doesn't even do that, they give it only a few sizings. GTO is not just a poker concept and just because we can use a software to solve defined bet size spots doesn't mean we need to misdefine GTO as all players at Nash Equilibrium
Every individual hand has given amount of money wanting to be put into pot.
F.e.
If you have 3street hand wich wanna go direction all in.
And GTO flop strategy is mixing bet and check. Itw counting with all vilain raises if we bet, with all the corect stabbing and bluff barelling etc from villain.
Lets take extreme example - villain is super passive and he doesnt have raise button. Suddenly it becomes only your work to put the whole stack in over 3 streets!!!
been watching your content for a few months now and lost KJ for K9 on the river today? whats up? who’s going to reimburse me?
Big misconception on how solvers work and what GTO means. A solver is nothing but a calculator. YOUR INPUT determines the result.
GTO is ALWAYS max EV. Change the input for the first hand to QQ-AA 3-bet pre and c-bet Flop and you will get a different solution for your MAX EV line. That's GTO!
This line only works vs fish, tight bad, maniacs, and some whales. I do love this line vs them 👏
So are you saying to take every single decision maximally exploitatively? If you do this against any reasonable reg they can quickly counter exploit or you start a levelling war and kill the thing you were exploiting
Well here's a thought: if you're breaking even in a game with rake then you are significantly stronger than the average player in that game and so should be seeking to maximise your EV rather than defensively balance your own strategy for the most part. You will want to keep an eye out for who the stronger players are and might not feel like you have as clear an idea of what line is best vs them and of course you may want to adjust as specific opponents adjust to you. This meta-game can also be an ingredient of trueEV.
In general strong regs for your stake are not doing anything so egregiously incorrect to lead to you making major deviations from your normal play - just play an approximation of GTO, maybe with pool adjustments and you will be fine. It is the recreational players that you need to exploit - that is where I think the true EV lies.
@maxwelllittle5291 ~80% of your profits come from recreations, if you double that, but literally go negative EV to regs, due to being counter exploited you're still profiting.
GTO WR:
WR = .8x + .2x = 1.0x
Exploitative WR assuming half winrate vs regs:
WR = 2(.8x) + 0.5(.2x) = 1.7x (+70%)
Exploitative WR assuming now losing at same clip you were winning at vs regs:
WR = 2(.8x) - (.2x) = 1.4x (+40%)
Thus even if your win rate vs reg decreases by half or even goes to worse case negative .2, you still net more profit.
I just have one thing to say: you give a long long explanations. Be more precise and faster to move to a new hand.
This is true in some regard, being more concise is definitely good but he has a lot to say so I'd rather longer explanations than the information not being there at all
I prefer the detailed analysis, recognize you may be more advanced than the majority of viewers. It gives them a chance to catch up and also let's us know if he really knows game theory
Yeah, we just want to see hands and results, not your decision making explanation and learn how to apply concepts and strategies.
@@roderick8254 then you need to go somewhere else not the right channel for you
@@346azul i like pete's voice. I like when he shows hands and shows the results.