---

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

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.

check flop and then c/r the turn is something I don't do very often maybe I should add it to my arsonal and the reasons you gave make alot of sense. The reason why I don't use this play often is that when villain is bluffing turn they are usually bluffing river as well because when someone checks twice their perceived range is much weaker so villain is more likely to fire twice. If I checked this turn I'd c/c then c/r any river to get max value from people's bluffs since villain's range is top capped in this spot.

But we're checking regardless of whether or not we check/raise or check/call, yay I feel validated today. As an aside, I don't think it's horrible to lead here as long as you do it for more than pot or less than half pot, either for value or semi-bluff or as a false blocking bet inducing a raise from their air (2/5 PSB usually induces). Just leading for the standard 1/2 to 2/3 PSB lets them play perfectly, which is why I hate it.

Sigh I just made a lengthy post and everything got deleted except for the first line. Will try again.
"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. " - blah

I think that is why surf+dire disagree with blah. I think it's a pretty standard play for most stars/ft mid-high stakes players to be checking a DEpolarized (ace high as sd) range and delay cbetting a turned ace or turned 5 outer w/o reads. Whereas it doesn't seem like a standard to be that aggressive on carbon poker according to blah. (not to say 1 way is always better/more advanced or whatever)

In spite of the small sample size, I feel like carbon poker doesn't feel as tough as stars/ft 5/10. I'm basing these assumptions off of some of the things that blah mentioned as tendencies for the players he's facing. Such as not needing to put in some marginal hands in his 4-5bet range b/c there's no point when his opponents won't fold so might as well just play the top-top vs them. That sounds like a luxury that I haven't seen at that limit on stars/ft.

With that said, all the logic/thought processes are well explained and are based on sound justifications imo. Just seems like the exploitation of the player pools are different so far.

fwiw I immediately thought leading that turn card was weird and that a check was standard for hero so that he might possibly be able to get 2 streets of betting in on the turn + if villain will bluff that turn card a lot then hero can rebluff too and ofc get value when hero has it.

Time Link to 00:00:25

what is the idea behind this strange intro?

Time Link to 00:36:47

Why not call 3bet with hands like K9s or even K5s instead of 98s? In general top pair matters more in 3bet pots than a possibility of making a straight with 98s.

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.....

+1

Please pause the video when you guys are talking at length about a hand. Rewind/Fast Forward. I really enjoy listening to both of your thinking (taking notes). The thing for me is that, by the time you guys are done talking about a hand, we are 5-10min further into the video. A bit distracting. (What was the board texture again that they are talking about?)

I like the video (over replayer) as it shows the timing on villain's reactions. It was also interesting to see Carbon Poker.

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

Would like to know this too Ansky.

Time Link to 00:24:30

How do we play on turn when we c/c here (89 Q69r) and he keeps betting

1) On: Total Rag
2) Card that hits in the vid
3) T-J
4) Qx
5) A, K

Do you ever call 3 streets against standard betsizing?

Thanks in advance for reply cbet too much oop I think and would be lost here

Time Link to 00:59:13

can you play on Merge too Dani plz plz ?

Great video overall, I hope this is not just an 8 part series but something more longterm...Like real life NL grinder, just ending playing 500/1k HU v Ivey instead of NL200.

Also, please keep playing on the site instead of pulling replayer, it shows much better how the games have played so far as you could see in that spot when Ansky was influenced by the hand we played. Blah doesn't seem to make many notes and we would miss all that

Would like to know this too Ansky.

Can you rephrase this? I am not sure exactly what you are asking.

blah : "And what if he raises"
Ansky "Well if he raises then umm...you shoot yourself"

haha made me laugh so much

Great video, not too many interesting spots thou but I'll guess they will come!

Can you rephrase this? I am not sure exactly what you are asking.

Just curious as to what kind of things you tend to look for in the other regs' play at these stakes. A few examples of some things you see a good amount would be great!

Just curious as to what kind of things you tend to look for in the other regs' play at these stakes. A few examples of some things you see a good amount would be great!

I think your question is far too vague, I could write half a book about how to make reads on players.

I tend to classify people by how thin they valuebet, how much they value absolute hand strength, how much heart/ balls/ craziness they have, how many tables they play, things like that. Beyond that you'll have to be more specific about what you are trying to ask me.

I have'nt read all the replies so I'm not quite sure whether this point has been stated or not. Anyways, I definitely like the combination of the two of you. What I think would really help though, is to give the whole discussion a little more structure. e.g., the standard way in which a certain hand/spot should be handled should be more like: blah234 commentates on his own play, gives his reads on opponents and after that let dani explain his thoughtprocess with the information given to him. I think in this particular video, it's a little too much like ,,well i thought like this" and then ansky would say like ,,well i would do this" and then again blah234 would say like ,,oh yes but he is opening like x%" ... thats just a little too much waste of time in my eyes, since there's plenty of things to talk about, why not try and make it as effective as possible?

I do like the video a lot. Might not sound like I did, but actually I do. Thanks for doing it!

Time Link to 00:58:18

Just made it through the rest of this. Nice stuff guys. Just a little advice. I think there is a tendency for you both to talk at the same time. This happened to me when I was making the hudless videos with Mike and it can be a bit distracting. Blah, you are correct to try and verbalize your thoughts, but be careful to let Dani speak and realize that most of the viewers are tuning in for precisely that reason.

Also, just curious if the 55 is an auto fold slightly deep vs a pretty tight range. I definitely don't click the autofold as I am never folding closing the action if there is a colcaller. I am not sure if I would fold even if it is HU but it is certainly close.