2 Responses to “Highhands89 HH Review with Andrew Brokos (Part 1)”

  2. Richard

    Couple of questions, the 22 hand early on you say that we’re making a depolarized cbet which we are and you’re advocating for a smaller sizing for value/protection. I know we don’t neccesarily have to worry about getting exploited if villains aren’t going to exploit it but wouldn’t it make a lot of sense to treat this bottom of our range hand as a bluff regardless if it has some equity or not and go for a sizing like we did with the logic that that’s a similar sized bet we’d go for with our value range? Or are we worried that if we bluff 22 we’re gonna be too bluff heavy or not be able to bluff enough KJo combos or something?

    My second question is our 1010 hand, you call the turn call a “big mistake” and you attempt to show why with a “generous” 3betting range, isn’t it fair to assume that even weaker willains will be more polarized than this? You say we can be generous then you include no bluffs in his range and ofc if you do that we’re gonna be crushed since you literally only included hands that are ahead of us except for 99 which I think isn’t a good representation of villains actual range.

    Ofc he’s somewhat more likely to stab his air on the flop I feel like your analysis is completely based off off the assumption that he never 3bets us with 66 or 67s, in fact the only “bluff” you have in his range towards the end is 99-QQ (since the Kx combos are clearly betting turn for value not as a bluff) and those 99-QQ hands seem like the worst possible hands to bluff on the turn so I’m really not following your logic here

    There’s also the GTO aspect of this that unless our preflop range is completely crushed on this board which is probably is not we will want some hands that can check twice and still defend at least one bet, which hands would you do that with here? Do you think it’s enough to defend A10 and KQs-KJs? I’d assuming we’d lead AJ+ on the turn

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.