---

Poker Video: No Limit Hold'Em by KRANTZ (High Stakes)

cool video, good and funny talk --> give me more of that !

@ClickityClack:

Of course he's going to mind because he has to play more 3 street pots. That's the whole point of the adjustment.

Yes I understand that (I'm inclined to think you'd be aware of that if you read my posts a little more carefully), but if leading was so great than you wouldn't start out by checking. In general it's not a bad situation for him at all to play against someone who is leading flops.

Also, it's not even close to as simple as you're saying, because you're giving him an information advantage by leading some % and checking the rest. It's awfully complicated to assess the profitability of such a strategy.

In case it's still unclear what I'm getting at: you basically said (and Krantz agreed) "I should start leading against the_Eend so he can't check back", which I thought was a completely insane statement considering how much stuff that implies about general c-betting strategy, and that it makes such a hugely complex issue sound completely trivial

You're trying to run up an icy hill in rubber slippers

What do you mean by that?

Well if you assume that leading is correct against someone who checks back a lot, then it's really really weird to see that everyone is almost always checking to the preflop raiser, because that means that everyone is expecting everybody else to (incorrectly) c-bet too much. That's what struck me.

A lot of people are c-betting way way too much. Some compensate by bluffing more turns and rivers. But that is not really fix.

"Yes I understand that (I'm inclined to think you'd be aware of that if you read my posts a little more carefully), but if leading was so great than you wouldn't start out by checking. In general it's not a bad situation for him at all to play against someone who is leading flops."

It doesn't sound like you do understand that Even after reading all of your posts. Of course I'd start out by checking because MOST PEOPLE by far cbet too much and more importantly on certain boards. YOU are assuming that I check all the time on all boards and leading is JUST an adjustment here because he's checking back a lot (whether or not you agree bla bla) That's not the case at all. I lead a lot, especially on boards where the average reg or general public have low cbetting tendencies.

"Also, it's not even close to as simple as you're saying, because you're giving him an information advantage by leading some % and checking the rest. It's awfully complicated to assess the profitability of such a strategy."

It is indeeeeeeeeeed forrrr suuuuuurre as simple as I'm saying. I'm not giving him ANY informational advantage until he finds out WHAT I'm leading with. He can make general assumptions but he won't really know. I can always balance what he sees if I'm not balancing already. It's not very complicated at all

"In case it's still unclear what I'm getting at: you basically said (and Krantz agreed) "I should start leading against the_Eend so he can't check back", which I thought was a completely insane statement considering how much stuff that implies about general c-betting strategy, and that it makes such a hugely complex issue sound completely trivial"

It's a pretty easy adjustment. What else can be said?

I believe I'm spent on this topic

JARTS ANYONE!?

Well if you assume that leading is correct against someone who checks back a lot, then it's really really weird to see that everyone is almost always checking to the preflop raiser, because that means that everyone is expecting everybody else to (incorrectly) c-bet too much. That's what struck me.

1) It's not incorrect if the opponents don't adjust to it.
2) People don't play perfectly.
3) EVERYONE cbets a ton. This is actually a striking revelation?

A lot of people are c-betting way way too much. Some compensate by bluffing more turns and rivers. But that is not really fix.

Yeah I guess, it's weird though because everyone is also checking to the preflop raiser a lot, which seems to indicate that they know that their opponents are making the mistake of c-betting too much (otherwise they would be leading), yet most of them keep c-betting too much themselves.

Yeah I guess, it's weird though because everyone is also checking to the preflop raiser a lot, which seems to indicate that they know that their opponents are making the mistake of c-betting too much (otherwise they would be leading), yet most of them keep c-betting too much themselves.

we (nlhe players) haven't figured everything out yet! sounds like a good place to explore an edge.

"Also, it's not even close to as simple as you're saying, because you're giving him an information advantage by leading some % and checking the rest. It's awfully complicated to assess the profitability of such a strategy."

It is indeeeeeeeeeed forrrr suuuuuurre as simple as I'm saying. I'm not giving him ANY informational advantage until he finds out WHAT I'm leading with. He can make general assumptions but he won't really know. I can always balance what he sees if I'm not balancing already. It's not very complicated at all

That is a pretty superficial argument. You are leading some of the time and checking some of the time -- even if he doesn't know what your range for either of them is, or if you're randomizing to an extent, it still gives him an informational advantage. You can try to outlevel him all you want, but unless you take the same action with every hand, a player with position on you will have an informational advantage over you (that's why being in position is an advantage). No, he won't know exactly what your hand is. That doesn't mean that he doesn't have an informational advantage. What this advantage is worth or how it will benefit him in practice is not so easy to say, but denying its existence crazy. You are basically saying that being in position on the flop is not advantageous.

[quote] 1) It's not incorrect if the opponents don't adjust to it. [/quote]

This is definitely not true in general -- why do you think it's true in this specific case? (I'm not arguing with you, I'd just like you to elaborate)[/quote]

[quote] 3) EVERYONE cbets a ton. This is actually a striking revelation? [/quote]

No, but thinking it is bad but still expecting a good player to make such a considerable strategic mistake seemed odd.

This is definitely not true in general -- why do you think it's true in this specific case? (I'm not arguing with you, I'd just like you to elaborate)

Again this is semantics (ie your definition of incorrect) - my point is that we shouldn't stop c-betting a lot if our opponents aren't doing anything to counter it.

No, but thinking it is bad but still expecting a good player to make such a considerable strategic mistake seemed odd.

It's not necessarily a considerable strategic mistake.

Again this is semantics (ie your definition of incorrect) - my point is that we shouldn't stop c-betting a lot if our opponents aren't doing anything to counter it.

Ok, but it might not be the most profitable strategy even if our opponents are not necessarily trying to counter it (calling an utg raise with 72o or 63o is bad whether our opponents change their strategy or not). Why do you think people generally play badly against the strategy of c-betting a lot?

It's not necessarily a considerable strategic mistake.

No, but if you say that leading against people who check back a lot is good, then you are implying that not checking back a lot is a strategic mistake against you (since you only start leading if checking is less profitable)

is this ClicktyClick guy forreal?



Note to Krantz/Fend: why not put this series on weekly how it was last season? It is definitely by far my most looked forward to series on the site, and you have been progressing amazingly well. I def vote for putting it back on weekly and NEVER ending either, just keep going and going and going... hell, at 13 episodes this is already the longest running series on DC is it not? it may be not, but either way, LETS SET RECORDS!

gl fend

Time Link to 01:14:40

On table 4 on the 962ss flop, why should we either fold or get it in now if we get checkraised? If we decide to go with the hand, do we just shove or 3bet smaller?

Man...I was starting to go through withdrawals and twitching from no NTMTO videos. Thanks for this

Note to Krantz/Fend: why not put this series on weekly how it was last season? It is definitely by far my most looked forward to series on the site, and you have been progressing amazingly well. I def vote for putting it back on weekly and NEVER ending either, just keep going and going and going... hell, at 13 episodes this is already the longest running series on DC is it not? it may be not, but either way, LETS SET RECORDS!

gl fend

I have so much going on that I just don't have time right now to do 1 vid/week... :-/

Good job

very nice vid guys

Do you have to have table scanner for the multitabling stat to work properly?

Time Link to 00:24:41

Did you say Australians? I think you mean Italians. Ale3fg is Italian, as are all the 5/10 guys on FTP who play exactly as you described: belvolo, giongler, jackbhoff, etc.

def mean australians. there may be a crew of italians that do the same thing but there's def a group of aussies doing it as well (no names atm b/c I'm on a busto comp). who knows maybe it's the same people multi-countrying! lolol. ale is italian!? swear I thought he was aus.

Do you have to have table scanner for the multitabling stat to work properly?

yep. money grabs ftw lol.

lets seee this you guys crush this 5/10 game

nice

Ale is def Italian (or at least, his location says Italy). And the guys who play just like him (limp-reraising small blind, 3betting tiny, cbetting 1/3 pot) are all Italians too.

Bizarrely there a couple of New Zealanders who play similarly in the 5/10 games but I can't think of any Aussies...would be interested to see names.

Great vid btw!

hi

i have a guestion about taht KQ hand @ around 40:00 where fender opend pre cbet KT3 bet an offsuit 8 on the turn and bet 300 into 422 von the river with the second nuts... so my question is IRockhoes jams all in we have to call 490 more... but are we even callen that? it seems to me that i find myself often in those spots where i know i have to bet but i just have no idea what to do if i get raised

any thoughts on that mr. krantz?^^

edit: also why do you muck ATs pre @ 55:45? i think im almost never folding there... can your explain?