Poker Video: Pot-Limit Omaha by n0whereman (Mid Stakes)

Time Link to 00:07:03

I didn't see the video that you guys played against each other HU, but it's definitely important to notice that you are 200BB deep here which lends a HUGE edge to the player in position if they're able to manipulate betsizes and bet/checking ranges well on boards like this to the effect that you're left with really awkward stacks on turn/river if you're checkraising the flop too frequently, even with really strong hands like sets.

Rob

Time Link to 00:14:28

What do you guys think he'd do with AT w/any two broadways, or something like ATJ8?

1 AA**|TT**|KQJn|ATff 6120 / 2.3% 80.20 0.24 80.32
2 Ks9s9h8h 1 / 0.0% 19.56 0.24 19.68

That's against the tight range, but I think that you may be using hindsight to underestimate the % of the time that he ships with some straight draws on this flop. Nonetheless a nasty spot.

With bottom set on such a highly connected board (9TA) the lead was great, but the reraise was not. By 3betting you've announced you are ready to get stacks in and you'll only get stacks in here vs another set or a big wrap that likely has some flush possibilities as well. With two pair, the opponent is most likely going to call and wait for a safe (non straightening card) to try to get the money in. 3betting also allows him to get away from his weaker holdings that he will raise on the flop.

Time Link to 00:36:02

What about bluffing by betting small to make it look like you are betting small to induce a raise. That's probably the line JT would take here, no?

I didn't see the video that you guys played against each other HU, but it's definitely important to notice that you are 200BB deep here which lends a HUGE edge to the player in position if they're able to manipulate betsizes and bet/checking ranges well on boards like this to the effect that you're left with really awkward stacks on turn/river if you're checkraising the flop too frequently, even with really strong hands like sets.

Rob

+1

What do you guys think he'd do with AT w/any two broadways, or something like ATJ8?

1 AA**|TT**|KQJn|ATff 6120 / 2.3% 80.20 0.24 80.32
2 Ks9s9h8h 1 / 0.0% 19.56 0.24 19.68

That's against the tight range, but I think that you may be using hindsight to underestimate the % of the time that he ships with some straight draws on this flop. Nonetheless a nasty spot.

The main point I was trying to make was that given the stack sizes and how I've basically announced how strong I am, he's only really coming over the top of me with better, or calling with his draws to see how it develops when I three-bet over him. With his draws, I would expect him to just play perfectly in position against me instead of get the money in quick, since I basically only have a set or top two here imo.

With bottom set on such a highly connected board (9TA) the lead was great, but the reraise was not. By 3betting you've announced you are ready to get stacks in and you'll only get stacks in here vs another set or a big wrap that likely has some flush possibilities as well. With two pair, the opponent is most likely going to call and wait for a safe (non straightening card) to try to get the money in. 3betting also allows him to get away from his weaker holdings that he will raise on the flop.

All great points. I think at the time, I really didn't think through the hand well enough. I think I resorted to the thought process of "we have an aggressive dynamic, I have a set, and I'm OOP, get the money in NOW", but obviously in hindsight when we see his cards it makes much more sense. All great points though, for sure.

Something else to point out about that hand is how he really just wasn't respecting my leads at all, so I thought this would widen his range a bit, but on this type of board it's unlikely he would raise me light since it's more connected than the other one's he was attacking my leads on.

What about bluffing by betting small to make it look like you are betting small to induce a raise. That's probably the line JT would take here, no?

I think my standard line against most opponents would be to bet smaller, and I believe during the video I mentioned how much I hate the bet sizing I chose here, but given our history I felt like betting pot would be perceived as stronger than betting smaller (since we've played a ton against each other and he knows I like to give myself good prices on bluffs). So I thought there was a chance he'd think I was polarizing my range on the river (which I basically did), but that I wouldn't bet full pot of I was bluffing, that I'd bet smaller (if that makes sense, lol).

I think my standard line against most opponents would be to bet smaller, and I believe during the video I mentioned how much I hate the bet sizing I chose here, but given our history I felt like betting pot would be perceived as stronger than betting smaller (since we've played a ton against each other and he knows I like to give myself good prices on bluffs). So I thought there was a chance he'd think I was polarizing my range on the river (which I basically did), but that I wouldn't bet full pot of I was bluffing, that I'd bet smaller (if that makes sense, lol).

When you say bet smaller, do you mean like 3/4 pot, or 1/4? Something like $45 on the river could get people to fold because it looks like it is begging for either a call or raise.

If you are polarizing your range, doesn't that mean you are saying you either have the nuts, a set or air? How could he think you were polarizing your range but wouldn't be bluffing? Are you just posting on a different level than me?

When you say bet smaller, do you mean like 3/4 pot, or 1/4? Something like $45 on the river could get people to fold because it looks like it is begging for either a call or raise.

1/4 encourages too much of a call, and I don't have any showdown value so I like betting bigger. 2/3 or 3/4 is much better, and is probably the amount I should've chosen.

If you are polarizing your range, doesn't that mean you are saying you either have the nuts, a set or air? How could he think you were polarizing your range but wouldn't be bluffing? Are you just posting on a different level than me?

So, basically when I'm betting full pot, I have TJ or complete nothing, since a set doesn't fit into my line really at all. I figured he would think that if I was bluffing, I'd bet smaller, and if I actually had something, I'd bet full pot, so I just felt like betting full pot told a more convincing story given our dynamic. If that's still unclear just let me know and I'll try to clarify as much as possible. I know it sounds pretty confusing, lol.

So, basically when I'm betting full pot, I have TJ or complete nothing, since a set doesn't fit into my line really at all. I figured he would think that if I was bluffing, I'd bet smaller, and if I actually had something, I'd bet full pot, so I just felt like betting full pot told a more convincing story given our dynamic. If that's still unclear just let me know and I'll try to clarify as much as possible. I know it sounds pretty confusing, lol.

No that makes sense. I rewatched the hand a little while ago and I think you succeeded in polarizing your range. Unfortunately, I can't really see how JT fits in with your line either. I think calling the flop and raising the turn would make sense with bottom set or middle set, but he can take that our of your range since he flopped bottom two. Top set you would have raised on the flop, so he can discount that. The question becomes what are you raising on the turn then? Middling wrap cards make sense I guess, but I feel like have you turned a better straight draw you would have been inclined to call again, letting him bluff the river when you hit. Perhaps the lesson I should learn here is don't play good players heads up?

No that makes sense. I rewatched the hand a little while ago and I think you succeeded in polarizing your range. Unfortunately, I can't really see how JT fits in with your line either. I think calling the flop and raising the turn would make sense with bottom set or middle set, but he can take that our of your range since he flopped bottom two. Top set you would have raised on the flop, so he can discount that. The question becomes what are you raising on the turn then? Middling wrap cards make sense I guess, but I feel like have you turned a better straight draw you would have been inclined to call again, letting him bluff the river when you hit. Perhaps the lesson I should learn here is don't play good players heads up?

Ya, I don't like my line either, and truthfully it's not because I never have TJ** here (sometimes I do; I would definitely take a similar line if I felt he was barreling light and the turn gave me some equity), but the main issue isn't that I NEVER have TJ, it's mainly that it's such a small part of my range. That's why he's able to call down so light. Which is basically the problem with polarizing your range in the first place. In his seat, 73 is the same as QK here; I either have complete nothing or JT**, and since i barely ever have TJ it's an easy call for him.

In the hand around 26-27:00 on the left table where we have KQ on K77hh-Q-5h, the whole analysis of the hand gets messed up because you guys forgot that Hero had min-4bet preflop. So this changes his range completely, most notably (a) he had the opportunity to 5-bet and did not (although given how deep we are this does not eliminate aces), and (b) he did not check as the preflop aggressor but instead simply did not donk into us.

So on the river, instead of thinking about whether we think he could have AA, we should think about whether he thinks we have AA and whether he would be bluffing or value betting in this spot. Nevertheless, the river decision is still interesting and difficult.

Ya, I don't like my line either, and truthfully it's not because I never have TJ** here (sometimes I do; I would definitely take a similar line if I felt he was barreling light and the turn gave me some equity), but the main issue isn't that I NEVER have TJ, it's mainly that it's such a small part of my range. That's why he's able to call down so light. Which is basically the problem with polarizing your range in the first place. In his seat, 73 is the same as QK here; I either have complete nothing or JT**, and since i barely ever have TJ it's an easy call for him.

What I don't really understand is why you want to rep JT in the first place, besides the fact that it is the nuts. I mean, you raised the turn...so basically, you are trying to rep that you were semibluffing on the turn and got there on the river. It'd make more sense to me to rep a set, since you would still value bet that on the river, and then your whole line is consistent. This is of course related to the sizing issue.