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

Oh yeah....this should be teh goodness!

Time Link to 00:46:47

hi great vid by the way. just a quick question when you shove the flop dont you let the villain play perfect? because the spr i so small and you are pott commited if you just check and give the villain oportunity to bluff? thanks

hi great vid by the way. just a quick question when you shove the flop dont you let the villain play perfect? because the spr i so small and you are pott commited if you just check and give the villain oportunity to bluff? thanks

Valid point, in hindsight I think that an under bet of 25-30% pot can work we here. It should keep JJ-TT in for one more street and just might induce something silly.
I commented in the vid that this would be my line against an aggro player but I guess they can't do something stupid unless you give them a chance.

Checking (instead of making a small bet) probably misses $15-$20 value against JJ/TT and even if they fold a 60bb pot is well worth protecting even with 90% equity since I never expect him to bluff that part of his range ever (the under bet being the only real chance we have to induce that actually).

If I were up against players who are observant then I'm shoving because I shove probably 100% of my 4-bet range. I think that players who flat 4-bets 100bb deep then fold or check/fold burn money. It's something I see a lot at ongame though.

good video. the setup made my eyes bleed tho. there were chips and cards and stack sizes and hud stats all over the place!!!! lol.

i love the way you say barrel paddy. it sounds like your saying bawl. so when you say barrelling its like your saying bawling. its funny!

Hope everyone enjoys the video. It's been a lot of fun to get to do these with Paddy. We've known each other for some time.

The next video should end up having plenty of good... well... arguing between us so hopefully there will be good value in that.

threads is the next video on stars?

good video. the setup made my eyes bleed tho. there were chips and cards and stack sizes and hud stats all over the place!!!! lol.

i love the way you say barrel paddy. it sounds like your saying bawl. so when you say barrelling its like your saying bawling. its funny!

Yeah the ongame software takes some getting used to, I have quit and come back to it so many times. It's impossible to multitable but the bonus deals they offer smooth out the variance like no other.

On the accent you got me all paranoid now
Bawling is def +EV at euro sites though since most regs don't like folding pieces of the board on the flop but are smart enough to get away when the pot gets inflated.

Imo it's often the opposite at stars since a some of the regs are so tight preflop then fold a lot on the flop, by the turn their range is already kind of strong so you got to pick your spots I guess.
Just my opinion though as I don't play a huge amount there.

threads is the next video on stars?

Yeah. 4 tables of 200NL.

Imo it's often the opposite at stars since a some of the regs are so tight preflop then fold a lot on the flop, by the turn their range is already kind of strong so you got to pick your spots I guess.
Just my opinion though as I don't play a huge amount there.

There are certainly players that won't get to the turn without a tight range, but I necessarily wouldn't say the majority of players are like that. For the most part you have to be willing to barrel liberally. Fortunately, the players on Stars are often weak-tight at heart so once the bets get big they often don't have the stomach for continuing so they do what they do best... fold. This tends to put a big emphasis on the turn and river streets as they play the flop fairly well for the most part.

Time Link to 00:27:19

Why was the concept of a river checkraise not considered here?

I feel he may bet broken straight draws AJ,KJ,J9 as if the flush had hit. I suppose there is some logic that he would have bet them on the turn when we checked but you also stated in the hand that he may have checked behind a flush draw so you don't feel he's betting all draws(gutters, OESD, FD) on the turn.
I feel he's betting any slow played Qx, JJ for thin value. Would he/should he bet good Tens here?
I also feel that he's never calling with worse than a T here.

I just feel like all hands that are calling are betting and some bluffs will bet to. My thoughts are the river checkraise makes us extremely tricky to play against in the future and villain my avoid going for thin value in spots, especially at NL100.

Your thoughts?

Why was the concept of a river checkraise not considered here?

I feel he may bet broken straight draws AJ,KJ,J9 as if the flush had hit. I suppose there is some logic that he would have bet them on the turn when we checked but you also stated in the hand that he may have checked behind a flush draw so you don't feel he's betting all draws(gutters, OESD, FD) on the turn.
I feel he's betting any slow played Qx, JJ for thin value. Would he/should he bet good Tens here?
I also feel that he's never calling with worse than a T here.

I just feel like all hands that are calling are betting and some bluffs will bet to. My thoughts are the river checkraise makes us extremely tricky to play against in the future and villain my avoid going for thin value in spots, especially at NL100.

Your thoughts?

I assume you mean with the 66 hand?

We definitely consider it and I do agree that a big crux of it is what will he do with busted draws and his marginal showdown-able hands.

If he were going to bluff a busted draw, he is probably much more likely to do it on the turn. So, I think at this point busted draws are not a huge portion of his range. The other side of the token is that he won't often value bet thinly (I just think most TAGs aren't very good at this concept at these limits) so I expect him to check back JJ and similar hands. With the flush coming in he would certainly be less likely to bet for value. However, I think those marginal showdown-able hands certainly call and you might even get him to raise a flush some non-zero percentage of the time.

Bottom line is that I think he is somewhat passive and unlikely to bet here, but somewhat likely to call. The river c/r is totally a fine line, and I wouldn't fault anyone for taking it here, but I think betting out is a slightly better play.

I do agree that against more aggressive opponents that the merits of balancing, and the overall value of a c/r in a vacuum, go up with monsters and with other hands as well.

Time Link to 00:22:32

I posted a hand a while back I had small PP an some overs on the flop and I checked it back but you guys said to bet them for FE. The problem was I was checking to induce but he can vbet me to much that it wasn't a good idea to check it back. Is this only against a fish or MW that we would rather cbet our BD draw hands rather than our small PP. Also Do we continue to barrel when we hit out BD draws only or regardless?

I posted a hand a while back I had small PP an some overs on the flop and I checked it back but you guys said to bet them for FE. The problem was I was checking to induce but he can vbet me to much that it wasn't a good idea to check it back. Is this only against a fish or MW that we would rather cbet our BD draw hands rather than our small PP. Also Do we continue to barrel when we hit out BD draws only or regardless?

Good question.

The first thing to note is this definitely isn't that great of a flop to c-bet. You don't have a huge amount of FE as it is just going to hit villains' ranges pretty well. Also, when called you don't have a huge amount of pot equity. IMO, it is often a spot where you don't have enough combined equity to make betting better than checking. Sure, there are times that I will go ahead and bet for protection there, but it's mostly going to be against a player that is very passive and barrel-able, or folds to a ton of flop c-bets(as in the video).

With a small PP on flops like this when called you have very little pot equity so you have to be able to mitigate that with a lot of steal equity(a lot of fold equity on the flop or a later street) in one way or another in order for the overall value of betting to be better just than checking and getting to showdown (or potentially using a delayed c-bet). If you don't have that you just are building pots without a lot of pot equity and that isn't going to be a very high EV way to play your range. You are essentially just playing into your opponents' strategy. You are building pots for them where they will be an equity favorite and then just handing it over to them by giving up a ton, or shoveling money in with little overall equity. (Doing this is never good, but it's particularly bad if you do it OOP.) By betting with equity we are going to have more equity with our entire range when called(our betting range will be stronger) so the bet will bet more profitable for our strategy as a whole. We will have more equity in the bigger pots.

Against a loose-passive player it's pretty much the same story. Their range expands, sure, but I'd say it expands in such a way that they continue to hit this flop a similar percentage of the time(they pick up more and more broadway cards in their range as their range expands). However, with a higher pair I we should be much more apt to value bet as a loose-passive will call with worse pairs.

I am less likely to bet in a multi-way pot simply because my fold equity decreases. My pot equity when called also likely decreases as well since they will probably call with slightly stronger hands.

Whether or not we barrel when we brick a BD draw is going to be very opponent dependent. We certainly should be much more likely to barrel if we pick up the BD draw and on boards like this I wouldn't be too crazy about barreling without it. They just aren't great boards to barrel. If our opponent is really weak then we can get away with it, but if you aren't willing to pull that 3-barrel trigger then definitely just check it when you brick your BD draw. To make a distinction, if I had flopped a GS or better I would certainly be barreling good cards.

Just wanted to add I liked the video a lot.
I personally like the 6 table format in FR videos as you get plenty of action. 4 seems a little slow unless you get a run of interesting spots.

If things get slow its good to talk about alternate situations with the same hand/player.

i e if the flop is T 9 7 rather than 2 2 8

I think its interesting to hear your thoughts in various situations.

keep it up, great stuff.