19 Responses to “TPE Theory: Range Construction with Andrew Brokos (Part 1)”

  1. monkeyfish18

    Andrew, fantastic start to the series. I had contionous “ah-ha” moments throughout, especially playing around with the charts that was so helpful and you made each example easily relatable to circumstances that happen in poker, thank you for putting in as much time in as you did. Looking forward to each additional video.

  2. Foucault

    Thanks very much for the great compliments! Please don’t be shy about asking questions, I know this is very tough material, and I’m sure you won’t be the only one to have any question you come up with.

  5. monkeyfish18

    Andrew I sent you an email to contact@thinkingpoker, not sure if you use that one still but I wasn’t able to msg you on TPE’s email platform, is there a better place to message you?

  7. JMR72

    Thanks Andrew. One other question before I get started watching that series. What is the difference between Range construction & Hand reading?

  8. Foucault

    Hand reading is about figuring out what your opponent is or is not likely to have. Range construction is about deciding how you should play various types of hands, especially when you’re having trouble reading your opponent’s hand or predicting what he will do with it.

  10. Barthold

    Hi Andrew, hope you still read this, because this video is already posted a while ago. Anyway, when I read you slide on the AKQ game where you say you should bet 25% of Q’s en check call 80% of your kings. Shouldn’t it be bet 20% of Q’s . And with the check call 80% of your kings ? For example with the check calling, 80% of the time I lose 800. but 20% the time I win 4000 (3k pot + bet villain) ?

  12. jazzle88

    Hi Andrew. Great video. Any chance you can make that spreadsheet available? I would love to play around with the numbers like you were in the video.

  13. Foucault

    The numbers in the slide are correct. Your goal when bluffing is to make your opponent indifferent to bluff-catching. When bluff-catching, your goal is to make your opponent indifferent to bluffing. So you need to look at his expected value. When he calls a 1/3 pot bet on the river, he is risking 1 unit to 4. Thus, you need to make sure that if he calls with a bluff-catcher, he wins exactly 1/5 of the time (4 losses for every 1 win causes him to break even). So you bet all of your As plus 25% of Qs. Because your odds of being dealt an A and Q are the same, this will result in 1 bluff for every 4 value bets, which is exactly what you want.

  14. Gsmyth5

    I can’t get my head around why, when we’re IP, we call with 50% of our Ks given that V is getting 3/1 on a bluff – any chance you can elaborate? I do understand intuitively why it would be less than 75%, given that we can have As in our range, but I can’t work back to 50%? Love your work, thanks!

  15. Foucault

    Your goal is to make the EV of a bluff equal to 0. When Villain holds a Q, you have either a K or an A. You need to call 75% of the time to make him indifferent to bluffing. So you call with all of your As (2/4 of your range) plus half of your Ks (1/4 of your range) for a total of 3/4 of your range

  16. GunnJD

    I’m not sure that this is entirely on topic, but at the end you talk about the importance of big value bets and big bluffs.

    Is it always theoretically better to do this? If villain’s range is perceived to be on the weaker side, for example, shouldn’t our sizing get smaller? Just watched your live WCOOP series, and the Q2 hand comes to mind. Maybe the fact that it is a tournament and stack size considerations end up being more important.

    Very excited to continue watching this series, making me think as usual. Thanks, Andrew!

  17. GunnJD

    That Q2 example is the wrong one, actually. There was another instance where I believe you flopped trips, and bet small because your opponents range was so weak, and mentioned that you would do so with bluffs as well.

  18. Kingsfull

    I hope I wasn’t the only one who’s brain melted during this video. This isn’t exactly my learning style. I hope I can move on to part 2 and still be able to know whats going on. Crossing my figures it will be more “visual” from now on. (Not complaining, just my input)

  19. smallcat66

    I have watched it twice and still don’t understand a lot of it. Is there any point in me going on to watch the rest of the series if I don’t fully understand this video. Because I do not understand this episode and you do, does this mean that you would always beat me in the A K Q game ?

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.