---

Poker Video: Limit Hold'Em by DeathDonkey (High Stakes)

DD on limping A8 here bc "there's no reason to raise". I guess I need some explanation, b/c this may be a leak of mine. I raise here because I really want the btn and sb to fold any card higher than eight. I also want the button.

Yeah I suppose it was overstated to say there is 'no reason', but the thing is its clearly going to be a multiway pot already, we don't have a large equity edge with a hand like this, and definitely some reverse implied odds as the pot gets bloated. Hands like this don't play great multiway or in bloated pots (they make one pair a lot), and we are usually going to expect to need to improve to win, so I like limping there hoping to hit a good flop where we should have good equity but still a bit of flexibility if all hell breaks loose. I'd rather lose position and let the button overlimp with a piece of cheese, since we are pretty much going to be playing fit/fold anyway.

Any merit to just value checking this turn given the range of his limp preflop, or is it too expensive/likely that we'd be giving a free card to hands like 34s, 45s, and 79s?

With the 98hh? Being out of position makes it not super attractive for me as a value check, because he can then play pretty well vs me in position. I'm not sure how to chop up his range exactly, but let's assume it's some fraction pairs and some fraction draws. If I check, he checks back draws, checks back weak pairs some, and valuebets good pairs some, as well as trips.

If I bet, he has to continue with draws as well as weak pairs, and he only owns me if he has trips+ (which is a small fraction of his overall combos IMO). My kicker still plays on my top pair, and I think if he had a better kicker he'd have raised preflop.

I don't expect him to semibluff draws if checked to, since I look like I have something (so he has little fold equity), so I guess I wouldn't say that checking would be an 'expensive' mistake, since the pot is very small. But I think that it would be passing up solid value. So overall I think it should be a bet.

BBB's OMG at the end makes me laugh to no end. the series

I looked at it some more and I give myself about a weighted 3 outs, because sometimes he has flushes that I have 4 outs against, and sometimes he has sets that I only have 2 outs against. And like DD said the decision to call the river UI will be silly. Overall quite a yucky play imo. Glad you guys are enjoying the series.

BBB, how do you not look at results on FT? When you're taking a seat, the FT pop up shows your available funds, and this gives it away. Is there a way around it?

Stars does the same. I just look away and hit enter, or hold my hand up over the window on the screen. If using TableNinja I believe it autobuys you in when you click on the seat -- saving that step.

26:00 - The biggest factor is how much the bad players are giving up to the table. This table is WAY too good to leave. Even if the 49/2 were the only fish and you replace the other 2 poor players with Heisenberg and Dr Olson I am not leaving. The guys is giving up probably way over 10BB/100 to the table.

Stars does the same. I just look away and hit enter, or hold my hand up over the window on the screen. If using TableNinja I believe it autobuys you in when you click on the seat -- saving that step.

Fwiw with stars you can set auto-seat where it buys you however many BBs without showing the cash window. No extra software needed.

26:00 - The biggest factor is how much the bad players are giving up to the table. This table is WAY too good to leave. Even if the 49/2 were the only fish and you replace the other 2 poor players with Heisenberg and Dr Olson I am not leaving. The guys is giving up probably way over 10BB/100 to the table.

Yeah, sounds like I've been seat selecting too rigidly in many cases. At say 5/10 would you take this seat? 3/6? I imagine the effect of the rake kicks in somewhere around there, where without direct position the edge could get pretty dodgy.

Fwiw with stars you can set auto-seat where it buys you however many BBs without showing the cash window. No extra software needed.

found it - in the lobby - Options, Auto-Buy-In

thanks!

I would take the seat at 5/T but then again I am typically on a few more tables than you.

26:00 - The biggest factor is how much the bad players are giving up to the table. This table is WAY too good to leave. Even if the 49/2 were the only fish and you replace the other 2 poor players with Heisenberg and Dr Olson I am not leaving. The guys is giving up probably way over 10BB/100 to the table.

I was talking with someone on IM earlier and they mentioned that the guy's 10 BB/100 is not going to be distributed close to evenly, however. The guys to his left get the vast bulk of it, and maybe the guy to his right gets a little. Across the table can't actually be benefiting that much, right? Thoughts?

Yeah, I understand its not distributed evenly, but he is giving up so much to the table that I still think it is worth playing. You don't come across 49/2 type players at T/20 often enough to pass spots like this by. I know the distribution is weighted towards the better seats but how would you quantify it? My random guess: The seat to his left (assuming a very good player) takes 3.5BB/100, 2 to the left 2.5BB/100 and the other 3 just over 1BB/100? As long as you are not giving up a ton of edge to the other good players (which is highly unlikely and probably more likely that you have an edge on the rest of the table) then it is a fine spot imo.

Time Link to 00:47:54

what do you think about checking back the flop here? I think its a good against most players, induce some bluffs and save yourself money against Ax or better thats liable to c/r the flop. Plus your hardpressed to get three streets of value from your hand.

what do you think about checking back the flop here? I think its a good against most players, induce some bluffs and save yourself money against Ax or better thats liable to c/r the flop. Plus your hardpressed to get three streets of value from your hand.

I prefer a bet, not only because I always cbet HU, but also because in this particular case as a loose passive player his calling range for the first two streets is going to be pretty wide and I don't think he'll be very induceable (the auto-correct says inducible? but that doesn't seem right). You listed some scenarios where I'm not doing very well, but I have to plan vs. his entire range of hands.

I'm also not sure what you mean about not getting three streets of value from my hand - there are hands all the time in LHE where one can't get three streets of value. In general, putting the bets in on the earlier streets, when LP opponents will call passively with their draws, lets me get more value from the marginal/middle part of my range.

Time Link to 00:49:24

What do you think of leading out the flop here? BB has any two and the limper doesn't have Kx or 5x that often in his range.

Also, if I was BB, I would bet 99% of my range in this spot, only maybe checking twopairs. So it would maybe be nice to checkraise him, although the small pot really isn't worth fighting.