Poker Video: No Limit Hold'Em by threads13 (Mid Stakes)

Wow. Yeah... I didn't look at the sample size when responding to the question and I agree that the sample size could totally be an issue.

Also, I just noticed that I made a few mistake in the math above and we actually have 41% equity versus a calling range of TT+/AK(not 47% as I said). Also, a range of TT+/AK is a 3.5% range, not 2%. (I'm not sure how I made all those mistakes... my only excuse is lack of caffeine when trying to do math first thing in the morning ).

This actually changes the math pretty drastically. This means we are LAYING about 3.4-to-2(1.7-to-1) on our play instead of getting laid 2-to-1. We then need about 63% FE(instead of 33%) for the play to be good versus this calling range of 3.5%. This works out to him needing to open about 10% from EP which is certainly too wide to expect most of these types of players to be opening, imo.

Honestly I'm actually a little bit surprised now that I look at these numbers. Even if we constrict his calling range to JJ+/AK we are still needing him to be opening too wide of a range for us to just be shoving AK here. If we constrict it to QQ+/AK then we actually start getting it close, but even then it's only cose.

This is really fairly interesting to me so I'm going to take some time to let it stew.

I pretty much agree with everything you wrote.

I do agree with Nolan when he snap ship/calls a CO/BTN raise from a SS when you have something like ATo/AJo

Against a pro-SS they are never normally opening over 6% form UTG.

This guy isn't a pro-SS in my opinion but he also isn't a complete spaz fish either so it's no surprise to see him turn up with JJ

With any luck in April the whole SS problem may go away at Stars as it has at FTP.

nolans deep hate for ratholers is amazing

Wow. Yeah... I didn't look at the sample size when responding to the question and I agree that the sample size could totally be an issue.

Also, I just noticed that I made a few mistake in the math above and we actually have 41% equity versus a calling range of TT+/AK(not 47% as I said). Also, a range of TT+/AK is a 3.5% range, not 2%. (I'm not sure how I made all those mistakes... my only excuse is lack of caffeine when trying to do math first thing in the morning ).

This actually changes the math pretty drastically. This means we are LAYING about 3.4-to-2(1.7-to-1) on our play instead of getting laid 2-to-1. We then need about 63% FE(instead of 33%) for the play to be good versus this calling range of 3.5%. This works out to him needing to open about 10% from EP which is certainly too wide to expect most of these types of players to be opening, imo.

Honestly I'm actually a little bit surprised now that I look at these numbers. Even if we constrict his calling range to JJ+/AK we are still needing him to be opening too wide of a range for us to just be shoving AK here. If we constrict it to QQ+/AK then we actually start getting it close, but even then it's only cose.

This is really fairly interesting to me so I'm going to take some time to let it stew.

yeah with AKo it's a pretty easy fold for me so i was surprised when you guys decided to just fistpump shove AKs.

A lot of ratholers don't widen their range the same way a full stacked player would positionally...

most decent shortstackers that i've encounted on Stars, like thomas41on1, pimpmyspeed etc. have absurdly tight ranges in EP and have insane steal numbers so based on my experience i tend to disagree and would be curious to see this statement backed with numbers or facts or whatnot.

nolans deep hate for ratholers is amazing

you a rat or something?

you a rat or something?

LOL no. 100bbs for me

nolans deep hate for ratholers is amazing

It's the only thing keeping me from ratholing myself. I just know Nolan will find out somehow and eat my soul.

Uuuh..anyway...great vid and some great entertainment value as well

Nolan cracks me up. Some decent info in the vid as well.

Time Link to 00:36:28

Just want to say this was really great, I never would of thought to play it this way. Call with worse and possibly fold better, sick.

great video, i have a general question: are these average 2/4 tables or were they specially bad? I mean tons of shortstackers and a lot of solid-tough regs + one bad player at the table.

I guess this is standard, so can you give your idea of a general game plan (besides trying to stack the fish): Do you try to focus on the weaker regs (maybe by analyzing their stats/hand in HEM and find out where they have leaks) and try to avoid the better ones?

great video, i have a general question: are these average 2/4 tables or were they specially bad? I mean tons of shortstackers and a lot of solid-tough regs + one bad player at the table.

I guess this is standard, so can you give your idea of a general game plan (besides trying to stack the fish): Do you try to focus on the weaker regs (maybe by analyzing their stats/hand in HEM and find out where they have leaks) and try to avoid the better ones?

I recall them being somewhat typical. Having said that, a lot of these tables I wouldn't sit at normally. I just stayed at them because I'm recording a video. Having a little bit more difficult tables can be more educational.

I do tend to try to take an edge on the weaker regs. A lot of my game is geared to that in the first place. Aside from that I try to table select to make sure the real pains aren't sitting in the two seats to my left. That makes blind stealing (and opening from the CO and HJ... the other two money making positions) less profitable. Essentially, I want to be able to use the fact that I play position well to it's fullest advantage and I can't do that if I have guys who will use their position on me more often. This just puts me OOP more.

I will go through HEM and try to pick up reads on players I play often.

On that note... I find that many intermediate TAGs overestimate their edge versus other TAGs. It's pretty small in most cases. If you are sitting at a table like this your best bet is to leave the table. There are often better tables.