Hey guys,

As always with new instructors, please give us detailed feedback on the video. 

Thank you.

Welcome mers! Nice video, interesting stuff about creating a limping range when short.

If you ever 2 table again though, please tile the tables or something, that was tilting :)

Chip10Leader

Definitely let me know your comments, eager to learn what went well and what you'd like to be to expand more on. Happy to clarify concepts here as well if you have further questions about hands in the video.

Enjoy!
mers

Good video mers, welcome to the team!  Looking forward to chatting with you soon...

Brent
ITRIED2WARNU

Welcome aboard mate! Great to have you here at last.

great vid. 

the 'amenable' thing was sooososoos funny.

This is exactly the type of vid I was hoping for when I made the request in the forum, definitely learned from this vid..easy 5 stars imo

i think the way u made the video is ok ....but to be honest i think coinflips are just coinflips and there are noway to get a real advantage with coinflips

for my part shoving all in on 7000 hands (more than 5000 with best hand) and i m  losin more than 3000 of them

i really think shivin k8 vs aj vis versa is 50/50 some people wrote different stats etc ... but in my pok carreer that s how it is 

Awesome video!  Very insightful and helpful and I loved the format.  The short slideshows as an intro and wrap-up really help to solidify the concepts you're applying.  Can't wait to experiment with a limping range and polarized raising range at shorter effective stacks. thanks :)

lovelydonk this video is not about "coinflips", it's about making the most profitable decision against their range. If you know they are raising a wide range from the button then you know you have fold equity and can reshove proftably...if you think they only raise with strongs hands and limp with their marginal or weak hands then shoving your marginal hands becomes less good and a lot of times bad so you know it's better to fold or just flat with a hand that can flop well. You may want to check out PrimordialAA Advanced series (Part 1) to learn more about the math behind this and some in depth analysis.

You are welcome, Mersenneary! Great "Super Turbo manual"! :-)

lovelydonk: be more open-minded.

Great video Mers, well done! I'm happy to have been the donkey you exploited in the video...taught me quite a bit. 

You're great fydor, thanks for helping :)

lol ....ok hokie and newff ....just came out of a serie of bad beats... so i apologie..... u guys right ....interesting vid...

super tilting 2 tabling omg, tile tables please!
v.interesting video, ty

Hi, mers...i love your vids but worried about your limping range stuff.

Basically, your indicated range is indeed somewhat weak (hands with potential you dont want to raise/folding at given stacks...)so it seems to me you have to merge it with pretty strong hands you can call a shove with or reraising allin against a standard min 3 bet...Otherwise, it's very exploitable by ,for instance to begin to shove hands like Ax...as high as 20/23 bb deep against your limping range...so what?

you NEEd to begin to limp also some  random premiums and some AD/AR hands also,no? and then, the downside of that stuff is your 2X raising range becoming somewhat weaker, nor stronger. or, Whay i missed?

Against agressive BB shove/raisers , why not more easily adjust by widening enough your raise/calling range and stay unreadable?

Watching the top pros playing on fulltilt, it seems to me it is their chosen answer....

good vid, my eg is a big leak.Any answer to this:

you NEEd to begin to limp also some  random premiums and some AD/AR hands also,no? and then, the downside of that stuff is your 2X raising range becoming somewhat weaker, nor stronger. or, Whay i missed?

Against agressive BB shove/raisers , why not more easily adjust by widening enough your raise/calling range and stay unreadable?

Good question, thanks for pointing me to it.

Basically, exploitability is totally overrated. If you're playing unexploitably, you're playing suboptimally. In order to exploit your opponent's tendencies, you MUST become exploitable. You say to widen raise/calling ranges, but that's "exploitable" too - people can stop jamming so wide and have you make silly calls. Thus, let's take the route that exploits our opponent (and makes us exploitable in the process) that wins the max amount of money.

The desire to be "unexploitable" comes out of a fear of maybe not being a winning player, or someone being able to beat you. In order to win the most money you can, you have to get over that fear. It's a big thought process leak to worry too much about being exploitable.

Once your opponent starts wildly deviating in adjusting to you, then you can think about how to adjust yourself to take advantage of the new frequencies.

Hope that helps!mers

Hi Mers,

I read your E-Book and was incredibly impressed at how you have disected the game of HUSNG. As a result I have started watching all of your videos. I realise that this video was posted long ago but Ive noticed throughout your videos you like people to give feedback. So while normally I wouldnt 'nit pick' anyones videos I figure you might be a player who actually appreciates it. So, a couple of inconsistencies:

9:57 - You open fold Q5o in the small blind for 7bb "Q5o is a little...You could shove that there but I think hes calling pretty wide". In your ebook on page 38 you talk about Chubukov and how it helps: "If you ever openfold K3o at 10bb or Q5o at 7.5bb, you're losing money in that hand compared against openshoving, period, no matter how loose or tight or downright weird his calling range is... Chubukov is a quick place to check to confrim that yes, in fact just because your opponent is playing oddly and you can just feel yourself about to be snapped off by Q6o 7.5bb deep, you should still go all in with Q5o. The power of your queen high makes it so even if your hand was flipped up, it is still good enough to go all in with."

11:58 - quickly called a shove with 94o for 4.5bb and say that its pretty close but just get it in because at 3.8bb or so its a call according to Nash. If thats the case then why not fold? Also I checked Nash and it actually said only at 3.3bb its a call. I know it seems boring and like it doesnt really matter (and I would think that too) but after reading your ebook and your references to Ed Miller that stress the importance of minimising errors in common situations, even though they are boring and unsexy because they add up dramatically over time, I now think that this is quite important. I think this hand would be a clear example to people about one of those times where its boring and unsexy and you don't think about expectation. An example of the opposite would be at 26:36 where you actually do math to consider where 97o is a call for 4.25bb which you conclude that it is (and NASH agrees, saying its a call up to 5bb).

I look forward to learning lots more from you in your other videos. If my comments like this annoy you or you feel they dont add much significant value please let me know and ill only post actual questions rather than nitpicking comments :)