---

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

NW I discuss why I like a turn call quite a bit during the video, I still think its a call watching it again, tons of spade draws and random spews make sense to me. We have nut no pair vs a non passive player, I need more convincing

Agree with this. Think there are probably enough worse hands you can fold that AQ is a turn call. Depends on how often you are c-betting the flop 4-way I guess.

Time Link to 00:32:23

Agree with DD on just calling down the ace-high flush draw unimproved. One benefit is it allows you to represent a flush if you just call flop and turn and the flush comes in on the river.

NW I discuss why I like a turn call quite a bit during the video, I still think its a call watching it again, tons of spade draws and random spews make sense to me. We have nut no pair vs a non passive player, I need more convincing

Basically what you said was that you think our hand is too good to fold without really going into detail about villain's range.

Let's look at how we should weight each part of his range:

K and monsters is most heavily weighted as he c/rs the flop most of the time when he holds this.
Flush draw is next most likely. He's aggro so he does have this although he's not always c/r'ing due to the pot being multiway
Non K pairs is third most likely. His hand isn't that great and a K smacks your range. There is some chance he does c/r it though.
Air: maybe occasionally but not especially likely. How often in a live game do you see someone c/r bluff the flop in spots like this?

The fact that he had KT here is telling. Not to be results oriented, but I am using it to set the perimeters of his range. K9s+ KTo-KQ is 36 combos at the highest weight. add in As6s and that's 37 combos that I weight pretty heavily. Add in sets and its 43. Note that our equity is pretty miserable vs this part of his range.

Now which combos of flush draws does he have that we beat? 45s T9s QJs JTs QTs 89s A3s A4s A5s A8s A9s ATs AJs. That's 13 combos non discounted. But all of them have 12 outs minimum. 78s and A7s also beat us now.

non K pairs. Maybe 2 combos A6s and 2 of 67s with some pocket pairs sprinkled in. 86s and stuff too is possible. I'd heavily discount this part of his range though. Calling vs this part of his range is also a mistake because we are not getting the correct price to draw for 6 outs.

Air: sure he has a lot of combos of it, but how much of it is he going to take and c/r in a multiway pot on a K hi board vs an ep raiser?

AQ is really not looking very good against this range. Add into this the fact that the river is going to be an absolute nightmare. He's going to be value betting Kx nearly always while not necessarily bluffing with his flush draws. If you intend to call the river which is looks like you did(ignoring the terrible raise) , your price for calling down is almost doubled(not quite doubled because you can safely fold a spade).

Now if you want to look at it from a perspective of being unexploitable, you say our hand is too high in our range, but is it really? We opened in early position and we do have a lot of pairs. Also when we do call down with this type of hand, villains semibluffs are cheaper because he has more outs on average. The better price villain is getting, the more we need to call to make him indifferent to bluffing/semibluffing. This could lead to a pretty slippery slope.

This is how a guy like this is going to beat you. Inducing you to make thin/bad call downs(and a raise?!) in spots where he's playing mostly straightforwardly.

AQ is really not looking very good against this range.

I think when I tell you who my opponent is you will make some drastic changes to your range assumptions. Remind me next time I see you.

I think when I tell you who my opponent is you will make some drastic changes to your range assumptions. Remind me next time I see you.

can you just tell me now?

I think when I tell you who my opponent is you will make some drastic changes to your range assumptions. Remind me next time I see you.

doug,

when a poster goes into great detail elaborating on why you action is not best, and your reply does NOT address his points, it makes it seem like you agree with [NW].

when your only response is: "Well this specific opponent is [so different as to discount the poster] should you not have included that info in either the video or in your original thread response?

I guess I am thinking that any hand you have played, that gets posted about, could perhaps wind up with the same response "sure, but you will change your mind once you find out who it was"

so if there is a specific game/player dynamic going on in the rest of the videos, could you and DD please point it out?

which

I guess I am thinking that any hand you have played, that gets posted about, could perhaps wind up with the same response "sure, but you will change your mind once you find out who it was"

so if there is a specific game/player dynamic going on in the rest of the videos, could you and DD please point it out?

which

I agree with what you say wholeheartedly. There are only two ways a player can make a mistake in any given hand, right? He can either make poor assumptions about his opponents range, or he can draw inaccurate/incomplete conclusions about how to play against that player's range. The second part lends itself to strategy discussion much more easily than the first, simply because perceptions of range are subjective and unprovable (at least in a live poker environment).

So I do agree with NW that if his assumptions are correct, then folding the turn is appropriate. But I feel he is wayyy off with his assumptions, and I feel DD and I did a reasonably decent job describing our range assumptions for villain in the video... He plays far too many hands from all spots on the table.

To be explicit, I feel NW did not give the guy credit for nearly enough spade draw, 6x or 2x combos. While I don't think Top 50% of starting hands accurately captures our opponent's range, it's reasonably close. I estimate he plays ~50% of hands from this spot, but compared to top 50%, he devalues some hands with disconnected high card value and mixes in more low-card hands with suitedness/connectedness value.

And that's all well and good, but it doesn't really make for good strategy discussion. Obviously if NW grants me this range assumption, his assessment of the turn call would be different.

I apologize if that did not come across clearly in the video.

the problem here is you can't just randomly add spade draws and not add more kings. Like you can't say he has Q3 spades but not the 3 combos of K3s. Him having 6x and 2x is also bad for us since we're not getting the right price to draw to 6 outs and it weights his hand more heavily towards value hands. It is hard to give the guy credit for a flush draw because each flush draw is only one combo.

I keep running the numbers and landing somewhere around 14-17% equity (getting 7:1), with a few other things working for us. Obviously implied odds is one, but also, if we fold this on the turn, we have no hands that call turn and fold river.

I keep running the numbers and landing somewhere around 14-17% equity (getting 7:1), with a few other things working for us. Obviously implied odds is one, but also, if we fold this on the turn, we have no hands that call turn and fold river.

we have flush draws that call turn/fold river.

Touche. Forgive me, I'm slow.

Time Link to 00:38:57

I dont understand the dick measuring contest thing. This hand is so bad, If I was going to be playing a lot with a tough loose aggressive player, I would focus more on playing well and making it difficult for him to play well against me instead of getting into a spew contest.

What do we know about our opponent: hes x/ring a lot of flops, you estimated 50%. In order to x/r that often, he is going to be relatively balanced between value hands and bluffs, as he is probably x/ring all of them and all pairs and all straight draws are going to pretty balanced. Therefore, I dont think there is going to be much to exploit as far as bluffing to value betting frequency and personally I wouldn't look to do anything with my showdownable hands but bluff catch with them and try to call down with an optimal frequency.

You say that three betting this hand allows you to three bet hands like KJ but when you do that, you make your calling range incredibly weak. Then all of the sudden, your opponents thinner value range becomes correct on the turn as your range is merely weak bluff catchers and youve made it incredibly easy to play against you.

Playing against this type of villain is so fun because you get to smash him over the head on the turn so often. Hes also fun to play with because he will do bad things like x/r everything on the flop, which is bad for the same reason three betting everything is bad in your shoes. When he x/cs this flop his range is very weak, easily defined and therefore easy to play against.

Time Link to 00:24:46

I think you can fold the turn. You're underestimating the number of times Villain has a pair here. The flop's pretty dry, and you mentioned that he can hand-read. Do you think he's firing a lot of air on the turn, given your EP raise, cBet into three people (is that standard?), and the hands in your range that are just calling the flop and raising the turn?

Time Link to 00:25:59

Oh, god, please don't raise this river.

I really dislike a raise here against any sort of thinking player. What hand, exactly are we representing when we c/r the turn here? a straight? Well we've already said that we're c/r all oesd on the flop so T8 is out of the question. I'd guess we have a very easy fold with 66, we don't open any 85s type hands from the HJ, and on the flop and we're going to c/r all TP+ hands in our range. This is exactly the kind of spot where, if I'm the button, I'd never fold any showdownable hand that I bet on the turn, which, as you guys pointed out accurately, includes every showdownable hand in my range. In fact, if I'm the button, I'm certainly considering 3betting every single hand that I bet the turn with either for extra value, a free showdown, or as a semibluff intending to barrel the river.

That's not to say this play will never work, but you need to read your own hand here and realize your c/r range on the turn is basically all semibluffs and misplayed hands imo.

I agree with this. The one thing that makes me slightly uncomfortable is that I pretty much feel this way every time I consider the check call flop/checkraise turn line. Whether I'm heads up or multiway I think when I take this line my hand is always either a monster or a semibluff. does anyone have any ideas regarding balance with this line?