Poker Video: Limit Hold'Em by Entity (Mid Stakes)

Wow sick intro. Did the alien blow up Rob's ankle / knee / shin / leg?

Also, the vid is mis tagged - it's 2/4 (error also appears in the description line).

Wait does this mean Rob lost the weight loss prop bet?

Time Link to 00:31:00

Awesome hand, awesome discussion.

Seriously, this is one of the best moments in a poker vid I've seen in a long time.

Time Link to 01:06:19

Rob, while I do like where you're coming from here, there are a couple of things here that are potentially confusing or just wrong.
First, getting in a bet as a 92% favorite to win makes you 0.84 bets, not 0.92. Similarily the cost of bet/calling as an underdog isn't quite as expensive. That's only on that bet alone, which leads to the second point, namely that you must not forget the size of the pot and the value of protection (yeah I know it's not much in most HU pots, but it's still there). Check/calling against a 4 outer costs you 8% of the pot, compared to betting and having the other guy fold.

Just thought I would take the time and point this out for the sake of clarifying what is otherwise a very useful discussion.

Time Link to 00:59:14

Left table: is this really a fold? As you mentioned therere gutters and that guy might be peeling light so Selassar might be betting with AT,AJ,AQ. cuz id always call here i think

Rob, while I do like where you're coming from here, there are a couple of things here that are potentially confusing or just wrong.
First, getting in a bet as a 92% favorite to win makes you 0.84 bets, not 0.92. Similarily the cost of bet/calling as an underdog isn't quite as expensive. That's only on that bet alone, which leads to the second point, namely that you must not forget the size of the pot and the value of protection (yeah I know it's not much in most HU pots, but it's still there). Check/calling against a 4 outer costs you 8% of the pot, compared to betting and having the other guy fold.

Just thought I would take the time and point this out for the sake of clarifying what is otherwise a very useful discussion.

Could you please explain why you win .84 bets i dont get it Its like you have 0.92 on the turn so thats the amount you get.
If hes gonna bet anyway his hand you dont need to protect, unless hes gonna fold if you bet having sufficient pot-odds

Could you please explain why you win .84 bets i dont get it Its like you have 0.92 on the turn so thats the amount you get.

Well, 92% of the time you win one bet, 8% of the time you lose one bet. EV of the turn betting: EV = 0.92 * 1 + 0.08 * (-1) = 0.84

If hes gonna bet anyway his hand you dont need to protect, unless hes gonna fold if you bet having sufficient pot-odds

True, but the whole point of the discussion was to do a quantitive analysis of the different lines we could take (at least that's how I understood it). I was just saying that protecting your hand has a certain amount of value, and that has to enter into the equations somewhere if you want to do everything as exactly as possible.

Well, 92% of the time you win one bet, 8% of the time you lose one bet. EV of the turn betting: EV = 0.92 * 1 + 0.08 * (-1) = 0.84

Yeah, right, it would be funny if you bet the river with 50% equity and be making 0.5 bet

True, but the whole point of the discussion was to do a quantitive analysis of the different lines we could take (at least that's how I understood it). I was just saying that protecting your hand has a certain amount of value, and that has to enter into the equations somewhere if you want to do everything as exactly as possible.

I understand you, i just got the impression you were absolutely against playing passively in spots like that.


I really enjoyed this video, like the video review style and hope to see some more, thanks!

Yeah, right, it would be funny if you bet the river with 50% equity and be making 0.5 bet

Exactly

I understand you, i just got the impression you were absolutely against playing passively in spots like that.

Heh, not at all. In fact I do it all the time. Just wanted to get the math str8.

Description is fixed, tag is still wrong.

Time Link to 00:58:58

If SB had lead this turn and UTG had folded do you think there would be any merit to raising and planning to fold to a 3-Bet (and checking behind most rivers when called?) I'm just kind of brainstorming here but if we are planning on calling down on a lot of rivers anyway, the same amount of bets will likely go in regardless of whether we are ahead or behind since I certainly wouldn't expect most opponents to B3B 88 on this turn to charge any flush draws that we might be semi-bluffing with so I don't think I have to worry about folding the best hand here very often at all. I'm wondering if we might not get a fold out of hands like TT or JJ every once in a while. What if the turn was the 2 of spades instead of clubs, which would make a raise look even stronger?

awesome vid for playing against the stellar opposition out there. limped pots are really interesting imo.

games R gud

Rob, while I do like where you're coming from here, there are a couple of things here that are potentially confusing or just wrong.
First, getting in a bet as a 92% favorite to win makes you 0.84 bets, not 0.92. Similarily the cost of bet/calling as an underdog isn't quite as expensive. That's only on that bet alone, which leads to the second point, namely that you must not forget the size of the pot and the value of protection (yeah I know it's not much in most HU pots, but it's still there). Check/calling against a 4 outer costs you 8% of the pot, compared to betting and having the other guy fold.

Just thought I would take the time and point this out for the sake of clarifying what is otherwise a very useful discussion.

Thanks Mauritz. Good analysis. I'll post a bit more once I'm back from Aussieland in a few days, the internet here sucks balls so I can't really load the videos easily to see what spots we're talking about.

Rob

can somebody tell me how can i get this pokerstars mod / HUD style?