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

About the J9 hand. Villain raises from SB and we defend BB with J 9x. Flop is K8x with two clubs. DD says the following: "If I raise the only better hands SB will folds are Qx". I agree. But is that really relevant? Since we will peel and fold isn't it better fo us if villain folds 75? I thought the "only folding better hands"-concept applied only when we have showdown-value.

2 things:

In the J9 hands, I like raising a little bit better. I think both options are very close, but what breaks the tie for me is that it will be difficult for Ax to continue when a club rolls off. Also, getting 3 bet isn't a huge deal since when this happens you'll have very few outs pretty often. It also depends on how you play your kings. If you wait for the turn a lot, then peeling this has a lot more merit.

What do you think of checking the flop back with KQ on the 964 flop? I've been considering checking behind a few more flops hu vs tough players, and this one seems like a decent candidate.

Hi Nina,

I like your thoughts on the J9 hand and the point about how we play Kx is a very good one that I hope people consider. Hmmm checking behind the KQ on the flop, well I know you and I started talking about checking behind flops in some 2+2 thread and I basically don't do it heads up. See I think the problem with doing it on this flop is that our hand will look exactly like what it is, but I'm not sure how to use that information - I mean some guys will definitely fire two barrels on the turn/river, others will play very fit or fold expecting to get called down so they won't bluff. I feel like I would have a difficult time making that judgment given the situation rarely comes up and its just not something I'm experienced with given I almost always c-bet. The fact that I would guess everyone would put me on right around the type of hand I actually held is an argument that its a bad idea imo, though I concede it would be possible to check behind a "typical" range and then call down in a "balanced" way or % of the time.

Still, I feel like the board wasn't so bad that I wouldn't just be ok with betting and calling down on some turn/river combinations.

REALLY FANTASTIC VID GENTLEMEN....mike, I am not that familiar with your play or analysis, but it sure seems DD gets a lot of good thoughts out of you.

1) the AJ on 69827. mike seemed to be interested in at least considering folding this river.
I think this idea gives too much credit to villain.
Villain did not choose to raise the turn, either having a good hand or attempting to gain FE vs hero's Ax type hands. Seems a easy call to me.
if villain had raised the turn, are we calling river?

2) the J9 hand. DD likes to c/r a ton.
is there anything wrong with a default rule to RAISE IF YOU CONTINUE....?
raising 100% gives us balance. it gives us a reasonable amount of air (or do we need to add more?)

mike suggests a raise on the flop would be better if WE HAVE LESS EQUITY ?!?!? (no BDFD)
but aren't we then "BLUFFING MORE"?, is this a good idea vs an opponent who has shown to be SD bound?
our equity tells us whether to continue, the flop texture and our read, tell us THE AMOUNT OF AIR to add (thats a question..lol)
all this leads me back to....
if you decide to continue...shouldn't we just default raise?

plan.....raise flop or....raise turn if its a club,T,J or 9??

is there anything wrong with a default rule to RAISE IF YOU CONTINUE....?
raising 100% gives us balance. it gives us a reasonable amount of air (or do we need to add more?)

do you mean raising 100% of flops, ever? i think that would be a very poor idea

even deciding to fold sometimes, and then only raising all the rest, is the same idea with the same flaws, basically

mike suggests a raise on the flop would be better if WE HAVE LESS EQUITY ?!?!? (no BDFD)

cause then it's just a bluff; we know where we're at, we know what we're trying to accomplish with our raise and we dont then need to start calling reraises (or raises on the turn) because we're backing into something real.

sh gets harder then it needs to be when we cant tell ourselves when we're bluffing, semibluffing, or value betting. it's like being in a stud 8 hand and you start out low and then your board starts to look high and you just keep betting, in the end you have no sort of hand and no sort of direction to base your play on. a lot of times in sh lhe we see our unsophisticated opponents making the same sort of mistake. they start out with some weak made hand and it turns into a really random bluff. or they start out bluffing and then start backing into a made hand and by the end theyve missed and spent way too many bets with no real sense of what they were trying to make happen in the pot and with their betting line.

so in short, have a plan for most of your hands.

Another good video.

In the KQo hand early on betting the turn is atrocious if we dont want to call down. Checking the turn if we dont want to call most rivers is terrible as well. Catch my drift?

I like the river bet in the 88 hand on A526K board. But its not for value and I dont consider it a bluff neither.

Oh and the river in the AJ hand early on where DD coldcapped in the BB is imo a very easy cc. Betting is bad and c/f is giving up the best hand vs overcards and hands like QJ/QT. Pot is simply to big to c/f