Phil Galfond Midstakes NL (1)

Discussion for Phil Galfond Midstakes NL (1).

I agree, a leakfinder 3 part series would be very cool!=)

perfect love phil

Very helpful! I think that raising with KTo instead of floating when he leads on dry flop is slightly more EV than calling. You have fold equity and you can barrell off so many turn.

Hey Guys. Thanks for the feedback. I agree, a leakfinder would be good. I'll look for some footage.

Possu- I wasn't too confident before this hand that he was a fish. However, your point about me worrying too much about balance is absolutely true. Even if he's not a fish, I don't need to be as worried as I usually am about being unexploitable.

RC- Thank you. I'm going to look into getting some footage from members for a leakfinder. I think I busted my cake roll :(

Great Content, I enjoyed it. But can you please downgrade your hud. About 85 percent of the stats you have on that hud there cannot be used unless you have over 200 + hands even then its still very marginal to gain any read whats so ever from those stats. Example the 4Bet stat and 3bet stat wont be very clear until 500 plus hands. I found it to be to much clutter and at times I could not even see the villians whole cards at Showdown.VPIP PFR # hands thats all you need. TY sir.

I agree the T9 valuebet vs the half stack is too thin. A fish plays all better combos of Tx than Tx and prob not many worse, and hoping a fish hero's 3rd pair is overly optimistic imo. I think its a big diff you're not used to playing 2/4 or 3/6 vs 10/20+. You don't need to be balanced here, esp vs a fish whose hero-calling range still beats T9 quite often.

Just looking back at this video and comments from a while ago. People talked about using HUD stats too soon. I used to be the kind of person that didn't even look at VPIP until 30 to 50 hands and waited even longer before using other stats, but I recently heard Jose "Girah" Macedo say that one of his strengths is adjusting to his opponents fast. He says that many players don't adjust fast enough because they don't fully understand the implications of Bayesian probability. You can start adjusting to ANY amount of information and you just let each and every new hand reshape your image of that player. While the reads won't be as accurate, you might be playing more optimally 60% of the time against that opponent while the other 40% (when the opponent actually is a nit) you might be playing a little less optimally, but you still gain from making no adjustment at all. Just a thought.