---

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

Sweet. I'll watch just after my next session

Like you two together and some good content. Anything apart from FTP or Stars is painful on the eyes IMO

Love the intro. Makes me feel funny inside.

Looking forward to the rest of the series.

Time Link to 00:27:32

Regarding the ATo fold vs the minraise, doesn't the presence of the fish cold caller make it hugely plus EV to call? Even if we play super nitty against the UTG opener and don't give him action, when we flop a pair we can value bet the crap out of the 44 VPIP fish. I also think 14% isn't a particularly tight UTG opening range.

Hey Blah,

Great vid, really awesome to see you on a DC vid, coming from the member videos forum. I still appreciate you reviewing my video and it just inspires me and I'm sure the other member video players to continue working hard.

Anyways, ansky asked at the end for any suggestions on the series. He mentioned going through your database, I thought what about spending a video or a portion of the video on reviewing your database for potential leaks and then going to a sweat session and targeting those spot. I would also be interested to know how you guys study your own play in between sessions, for example do you guys just look at the big pots or do you narrow your database for specific situations (for example: 3bet pots, vs. ck raise after you cbet, etc.). Also, do you guys ever study your villains, go over your notes, and then condense your notes afterwards from reads to exploitable plays. I find myself having a list of reads, but at the table I don't have time to synthesize these reads for profitable plays. Just some thoughts.

I look forward to the next one!

Randy

Thanks again Blah, your story is inspirational!

other than dani missed the action in every hand nan was talking about, it was a great video
)

I agree.
Hope he pays attention to the action more, got a bit frustrating. Blah was repeating himself a lot.

Also, do you guys ever study your villains, go over your notes, and then condense your notes afterwards from reads to exploitable plays.

Yeah I too am curious as to what kind of things Dani looks for in the other regs' play and his approach to gathering and incorporating reads.

good first video btw

You get same value from his betting for protection hands when you lead and you make him fold junk which he isn't going to bluff anyways. When sonmeone has 10% equity and he never bluffs why do you want to give him a free card so he can suck out 10% of the time? If you have a read someone delayed two barrels alot then this is a clear check but I don't have that read and will just assume when people check their range contains stuff they are giving up and stuff they are bluff catching with vs that range I think betting is the most +EV play.

Checking is higher EV only if villain is bluffing the turn with a high frequency. Most 6 max players with the exception of the really good ones do not have balanced aggression on each street. Their aggression frequency goes down each street which is an indication they are less likely to bluff later on in the hand. Vs their thin value bets you can ignore that part of their range because its the same EV betting or checking vs that part.

Glad to see that this got some good discussion going for a hand that was glossed over in the video itself. What hands have 10% equity vs us on this turn? What is the chance that those hands check the flop? How is it that you think people never bluff the ace? Maybe we play in different games. Oh wait, we don't Any ideas on the metagame implications of betting vs checking this turn? How do players react to getting checkraised if they do have Ax?

I am also interested in your thoughts on street by street aggression and that the good players have this balanced across all streets. I have not seen that to be the case but then again I could be guilty of not being able to identify a good player.

Glad to see that this got some good discussion going for a hand that was glossed over in the video itself. What hands have 10% equity vs us on this turn? What is the chance that those hands check the flop? How is it that you think people never bluff the ace? Maybe we play in different games. Oh wait, we don't Any ideas on the metagame implications of betting vs checking this turn? How do players react to getting checkraised if they do have Ax?

I am also interested in your thoughts on street by street aggression and that the good players have this balanced across all streets. I have not seen that to be the case but then again I could be guilty of not being able to identify a good player.

I think I talked enough about the AT hand already but I will answer your other questions

Good players have balanced aggression on each street for 2 reasons that I can think of.

1. They're adjusting to villains tendencies. For example if someone auto bets when check to then I will check my whole range on the flop and almost never cbet thus my aggression on the flop goes way down vs that villain. Good players understand that being aggressive is not the only way to extract value from every villain.

2. They're using position well. Blindly barrel away from flop to river just makes your early street ranges way too air heavy and easy to play back against. Good plays understand this so they will distribute some air into their turn and river betting range which allows them to have more balanced range that can both bet for thin value and as bluff on very street. This allows them to take many different lines and more creative postflop play.

Ansky: At the end of the video with A9s. You said u would flat or squeeze here as a standard which is fine since we are getting good odds to flat and its a spot to squeeze. But say if the button didnt cold call the PFR, what is your standard here? Would it still be the same or a fold mostly?

I don't know they never bluff the A, I just think it's unlikely for someone to try and rep an A. I think our definition of polarized range is different. My defintion of polarized range is when that range contains nuts or air only and nothing in between. When someone checks flop and bets turn their range is nothing polarized but contains many thin value bets/protection hands.

At lower stakes regs might be trying to rep an overcards on the turn but that play doesn't work at all at midstakes. People are more likely to call on overcards because apparently its a good barrel card and its just so hard to spike a 3 outter compared to all your other bluffs and thin value bets. Repping an overcard on the turn is just not a credible bluffs in aggressive games because it reps a very narrow value range. Think about how often someone actually checks flop then hits an A on the turn when they got a wide range preflop and 70+% cbet frequency compared to some random bluff or thin value bet.

As far as polarization, I mean their Cbet flop range is either polarized or depolarized, where a polarized cbet range checks-back all hands that have SD value but can't value bet i.e. bottom pair, Ace high etc. and all high potential hands that can't withstand a check-raise like a gut shot with a back door flush draw or two overs with a back door flush draw etc. When you consider their range for checking-back the flop, that range contains both A high and bottom pair, Ace kicker to make top pair and two pair hands on the turn that'll value bet so check flop with Ace, turn Ace, bet Ace is a delayed Cbetting strategy that's consistent with our polarized Cbetting strategy. I don't think you can actually compare the Ace to the other over cards here, because the other over cards aren't consistent with our polarized Cbetting strategy and there are more combinatorics of Aces in a 6max players range than any other overcard from pre-flop as well.

Altho' I agree the villain's turn range is a weak, depolarized range consisting of Ax, bottom pair and turned draws as a product of his flop range being a polarized range, which is why checking here is good IMO because we can check/raise the shit out of his range for either value or as a bluff depending on how he continues with his bluff catchers (or over bet lead if that's your thing). My point is tho', I think players reflexively bluff that Ace when checked with some frequency and that includes MSNL - it's a spot I really think you should reconsider and see for yourself because I've had the exact opposite impression.

I actually agree that the AT might be a check/raise

I like the idea of increasing the pot size versus Ax hands, which call twice but don't ever raise, if we c/r on the turn we can get a lot of money in. It doesn't have to be work that often for it to be the correct play.

Blah I don't think it is worth much to consider how best to play vs his 2 out hands (very hard for him to have 10% equity...) You are likely making no extra money versus those no matter what you do, unless he decides to bluff with them (which he likely only does if you check). It's also a sweet spot to have a bunch of bluffs and value c/r hands, because it is a spot where you can be very strong but he cannot, and any braindead reg would know that. Meta wise it's good to have lots of c/r hands here.

I agree.
Hope he pays attention to the action more, got a bit frustrating. Blah was repeating himself a lot.

my bad

Ansky: At the end of the video with A9s. You said u would flat or squeeze here as a standard which is fine since we are getting good odds to flat and its a spot to squeeze. But say if the button didnt cold call the PFR, what is your standard here? Would it still be the same or a fold mostly?

That might sway it more towards a 3b or fold.

It'd be better if Blah played the video at 2x speed and pausing for discussion during interesting spots instead of letting it run like you do now. Discussing hands in replayer might be more interesting than video review of Blah's play.

Blah is carbon your main site?