Poker Video: No Limit Hold'Em by bosoxx34 (Micro/Small Stakes)

Finally!

on that A4 hand where you $15 the turn why do you ship the river? consider the guys clearly lvl 1 and you're @ NL100 so you don't need to balance where you were shipping bluffs there, but it doesn't compute that you were gonna bet $15 jam expecting a fold, then you bink bigtime and take the same line....?

surely tailoring a betsize for value is way better

on that A4 hand where you $15 the turn why do you ship the river? consider the guys clearly lvl 1 and you're @ NL100 so you don't need to balance where you were shipping bluffs there, but it doesn't compute that you were gonna bet $15 jam expecting a fold, then you bink bigtime and take the same line....?

surely tailoring a betsize for value is way better

I'm going to disagree just because of the stack to pot ratio at the time. Sure we could've gone for value with like a half pot sized bet but we had < PSB left and I figured jamming was the highest EV play.

However it is something interesting that I think I need to try because while it seems like the most +EV play it seems like I get way too many folds in spots like this. I'm curious if he's folding an 8 here to a jam and calling a value bet. If that's the case I'm obviously wrong.

FWIW I asked ugotabanana about it and he said this

"the thing is when your playing people like the guy we were playing, you're never gonna know if what you did was right until after the fact. Whereas playing good regs at mid to higher stakes you can pretty much know why you did one thing or the other. so tbh he could be right but like the reason you did what u did was pretty informed at the time. if u think it should've been diff just note it and in a similar spot in the future try and remember that hand."

If you have trouble with those fish that are playing like 70% out of big blind, maybe you should consider some hand selection instead of 2x opens with every hand. If you 3x like 60% of hands on button and they call you OOP 70%, shouldn't it make playing pretty easy?
I play very little heads up, but that's what I would do..

It's pretty cool seeing you play some of the more common, fishier villain types than are typically seen in DC HUNL videos, and it's nice to hear players like Krantz and Ugotabanana's thoughts as well. I'm not going to say that you shouldn't play a reg for next week's video, but right now your videos do serve an underfilled niche in DC's HU library, imo.

With the A4 hand it does seem backwards to ship for value when you bink after planning on shipping non-bink rivers and getting a lot of folds from his "call once/can't fold to turn betsize" range, but I pretty much play it the same if I formulate a similar gameplan on the turn (fwiw I do seem to get more folds than I should as well). I'm just not sure what the flaw is when we take the same line for value that we planned on taking for a bluff, and Ugotabanana's response seems appropriate, that regardless of result it may just not be a spot we can know the answer to ahead of time. For some reason, though, saying so feels like surrender

If you have trouble with those fish that are playing like 70% out of big blind, maybe you should consider some hand selection instead of 2x opens with every hand. If you 3x like 60% of hands on button and they call you OOP 70%, shouldn't it make playing pretty easy?
I play very little heads up, but that's what I would do..

Yeah it seems to be a matter of preference. FWIW when I was playing 50nl, I played a style of where I only opened about 65% of buttons and was only min-raising as well. That was very effective for me and it's sort of evolved into the style I play against fish right now.

Right now I'm pretty comfortable as I have more experience playing against these types of fish with opening about 80% of buttons. The n guy on pokerstars was an extreme example since he was playing super straight forward postflop. The last guy I played I definitely should've been opening less buttons.

It's pretty cool seeing you play some of the more common, fishier villain types than are typically seen in DC HUNL videos, and it's nice to hear players like Krantz and Ugotabanana's thoughts as well. I'm not going to say that you shouldn't play a reg for next week's video, but right now your videos do serve an underfilled niche in DC's HU library, imo.

With the A4 hand it does seem backwards to ship for value when you bink after planning on shipping non-bink rivers and getting a lot of folds from his "call once/can't fold to turn betsize" range, but I pretty much play it the same if I formulate a similar gameplan on the turn (fwiw I do seem to get more folds than I should as well). I'm just not sure what the flaw is when we take the same line for value that we planned on taking for a bluff, and Ugotabanana's response seems appropriate, that regardless of result it may just not be a spot we can know the answer to ahead of time. For some reason, though, saying so feels like surrender

Thanks, I'll keep that in mind. Also, looking back on it in HEM it seems like a lot of those pot sized shoves or slightly less than PS shoves get folds on the river. Obviously we don't know our opponents hands but I'm curious as to whether they're folding mid-pair or just random draws that bricked. I'm definitely going to start trying that halfpot-3/4ths pot bet to see if I get any better results.

I'm definitely going to start trying that halfpot-3/4ths pot bet to see if I get any better results.

If they are always folding, it will be difficult to get worse results! Even if you bet 1/4 pot and get called 50%, that's better than 0%!

Time Link to 00:32:10

I thought during watching the video that when you almost made the K hi call against the last opponent was that perhaps shoving was a somewhat reasonable play, since in addition to bluffs he may blockbet like this with mediocre pairs, but neither you nor Ugotabanana seemed to consider it. How dumb am I?

I thought during watching the video that when you almost made the K hi call against the last opponent was that perhaps shoving was a somewhat reasonable play, since in addition to bluffs he may blockbet like this with mediocre pairs, but neither you nor Ugotabanana seemed to consider it. How dumb am I?

Not dumb, just we had K high so pretty good SD value. We're not expecting someone like this to be able to value bet a jack. If we had less than Q high shoving would obviously be the play if we thought he was bluffing.

Enjoyed the video! Talking with Harry was cool. Disappointing finish though, because we were supposed to hear the roulette story.

Enjoyed the video! Talking with Harry was cool. Disappointing finish though, because we were supposed to hear the roulette story.

Yeah he sort of said it, he put $500 on a number in roulette and hit. I think odds in roulette are 35-1 which is a $17,500 payout. They didn't have enough chips at the table to pay him so they had to reload, which is just awesome.

Not dumb, just we had K high so pretty good SD value. We're not expecting someone like this to be able to value bet a jack. If we had less than Q high shoving would obviously be the play if we thought he was bluffing.

My fault here I meant J high.

I noticed that you cbet a lot of bottom pairs and low pocket pairs.. Is this because you played these guys with large oop ranges or is it your standard? Doesn't that open you up to be checkraised a lot ?