Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Leo Wolpert, who’s been both an interviewee and guest host on the show before, returns in the latter capacity. We talk cold war politics, getting value from maniacs, Who Wants to Be a Millionaire? strategy, and the difference between good and great opponents.
Timestamps
0:30 – Hello and welcome
15:59 – Mailbag: Fish, Phil Ivey, and everything in between
23:12 – Strategy: Getting max value from a maniac
Strategy
Blinds are at 50/100 (2nd level of the tournament), effective stacks are ~10k
Preflop: V1 limps UTG, 1 fold, V2 limps in MP1, couple more limpers to Hero on Btn who calls with QcJh, blinds come along.
Flop ($700): Qs7s6d
Checks to V2 who bets 300, folds to Hero who calls, blinds fold, V1 calls
Turn ($1600): Qs7s6d 2c
V1 checks, V2 bets 600, Hero calls, V1 calls
River ($3400): Qs7s6d2c 2s
Checks around
Wait Leo! You can get through Sklansky but you have trouble with Hannah Arendt? Youre kidding me.LOL!
As i read further, i appreciated more the sarcastic/bitter/gallows humor gems Arendt sprinkles throughout Eichmann in Jerusalem. It’s not a breezy read, especially when one frequently pauses to contemplate the enormity of the Nazi atrocities documented in the book, but I’ve come around on it. Eagerly awaiting Sklansky’s 300 page take on the Holocaust though.
The section on optimal freq
The section on optimal frequencies for invading Russia is going to totally change the way we think about war in Europe, I expect.
I’ve long wondered whether the idea that playing bigger pots in position than out of position is a major advantage isn’t a strong argument against the standard approach of making smaller raises in late position than in early position. Obviously it’s a complex balance of calling ranges and the price you get on a steal and 3 betting frequencies, but it seems to me that by minopening the button rather than 3xing it, you’re systematically starting out with a smaller pot in a position where you want to play the significant hands.
I would think that this is villain-dependent. When we open the button with a wide range against good villains in the blinds, we want to make the open smaller to make it incorrect for the villain to frequently fold (i.e., if villain continues with a tight range, he is making a mistake) while making it less profitable for villain to 3bet us when we can’t continue against a 3bet. On the other hand, against fish in the blinds who will call widely oop and rarely 3bet, I think we should strongly consider opening 3x (or larger) and an autopilot minraise on the button is not the most profitable line.
It’s a testament to how far we still have to go to understand NLHE fully that we still don’t quite understand even preflop opening. There are some very good reasons to think that minraising is best in a wide set of circumstances, but I don’t think we have a proof of that yet, and I routinely see even winning players make open-sizing mistakes (at least from an exploitive point of view).
FWIW I think a common mistake is not to inflate the pot before the flop when stacks are deep and you have a strong hand in position. If it folds to me on the button, and both I and the big blind have $1500 in a 2-5 game, I will be opening for $20 with T9s unless I have a good reason not to (e.g., I want to establish a standard $15 open and I think people will notice if I make it different sizes with different hands).