---

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

Time Link to 00:36:17

from a mtt background, early on ive folded pps like 77 88 in pos to 3bs even when stacks are like this (120bb effective) because to me it seems like its more of a reverse implied odds situation. could your reasoning be comparable to mtts? i know a lot is player read based but just curious to the differences in mtt vs cash play

ps a mtt vid of the 1k MET would be absurdly good to watch

Time Link to 00:44:26

the other game theory reason to c/f K5ss here is that if a cbet fails and it gets to SD it appears you are cb 100% here and way too often with zero equity. it's valuable to convey that you can c/f in spots and it's valuable to avoid giving the impression you bluff in terrible spots.

the other game theory reason to c/f K5ss here is that if a cbet fails and it gets to SD it appears you are cb 100% here and way too often with zero equity. it's valuable to convey that you can c/f in spots and it's valuable to avoid giving the impression you bluff in terrible spots.

It can be desirable to give the impression you bluff in terrible spots too. As long as your image causes your opponent to make mistakes against what you'll be doing from there on, any image is good. Being perceived as balanced is the worst imo.

I am glad to see that DC heard the community and made this vid series. Sincerely thanks for that. The format, content and hosts discussion is interesting so far imo. Thats just a shame that you guys are both often talking at the same time.

It can be desirable to give the impression you bluff in terrible spots too. As long as your image causes your opponent to make mistakes against what you'll be doing from there on, any image is good. Being perceived as balanced is the worst imo.

absolutely. i would say that versus most, though, i would rather avoid this image. more often than not we are going to have weaker holdings/air that we want to win pots w/o SD, so i'd prefer not to encourage my opponents never to fold versus me.

as far as being perceived as balanced - what's wrong with this? it certainly means we won't have to think about being exploited by those who see us this way.

Third, these days people are doing all sorts of crazy stuff like min 4bs and shit, so I'd like to have more suited hands for that, and just leave the big offsuit cards for flatting. I'd also prefer to be 3b the suited ones more when we are deep.

Would you prefer to have more suited hands vs a player who min-4bets so you have more equity with a 5bet, or so you have a stronger hand to call the min 4b with?

absolutely. i would say that versus most, though, i would rather avoid this image. more often than not we are going to have weaker holdings/air that we want to win pots w/o SD, so i'd prefer not to encourage my opponents never to fold versus me.

as far as being perceived as balanced - what's wrong with this? it certainly means we won't have to think about being exploited by those who see us this way.

True.

That's only useful when our opponent is better than us. On average he shouldn't.

Time Link to 00:20:34

I haven't done the analysis myself, but I'm guessing a little combinatorics might suggest his is a c/f spot. I think he has to be hero calling a very wide range on the river for our hand to be ahead of his river calling range.

A bit more dry of a discussion, but still think HH replayer leads to more involved discussion. The unsuccessful bluffs were certainly worth tuning in for, since I just don't see them discussed all that frequently from Hero's perspective.

Read the comments, good stuff. Just a little too drunk right now to respond, but I promise a thoughtful response is coming.

There's no point in wasting some one else's time by asking questions you can solve yourself with pokerstove, standard(ish) 6max UTG range 22+,A2s+,KTs+,QTs+,JTs,AJo+,KQo vs ATs = 47.817% and CO range 22+,A2s+,KTs+,QTs+,J9s+,T8s+,98s,ATo+,KJo+,QJo vs ATo = 47.941%. Flopping small sets in 3bet pots is good, Cbetting 2 outers in 3bet pots vs a range of over pairs and suited over cards is bad = 3betting small PPs is fine as long as you realize you're set mining vs top pairs at an SPR where they're more likely to stack off and balancing your check/fold flop range at an SPR where they're more likely to check behind to reach showdown and give you an additional street of equity. Furthermore, 3betting small PPs is often more of a function of the BB who either A) isn't over calling and giving value or B) squeezing and not letting you see a flop therefore 22 is effectively the top of your folding range and the bottom of your 3betting range based on table dynamics where 22 is a call 100% of the time by comparison in the BB.

@Ansky

In a hypothetical situation where you're in the SB between Sauce123 on the button and AEJones in the big blind, do you think 3bet merging your range vs Sauce123 (i.e. 3bet or fold in the SB) or calling your top polar value range (AK, QQ+ etc.) and unbalancing your 3bet range in order to exploit AEJones is the preferable adjustment? If you think calling the top polar value range is preferable, and considering they know calling the top polar value range is the standard adjustment in their eyes, do you think your perceived check/raising range vs the button is stronger in their eyes as well if you continue to call with a squeezer behind presumably with a wider value range? Do you think 3bet merging as a standard in that line up is advisable, or in general advisable, based on the exploitability of your calling range in that position and inability to balance your calling range for HU without playing a wider range of hands that either makes your calling range more exploitable to squeezing pre-flop and are likely -EV other than for the sake of said balance?

In a second hypothetical situation, where you're on the button, Luckychewy is raising 30% of hands in the CO and Sauce123 and AEJones are in the blinds (i.e. LAGG regular in the CO, squeezers in the blinds) do you think 75s is a profitable call in position or a necessary call in position for balance? Considering some regulars will call here with 75s and some regulars wont, and considering these hands rarely, if ever, go to showdown without either coin flipping on the flop, filling up or turning into a bluff on the river do you think we can still realistically represent them in our perceived range even when we're not necessarily playing with them?

In general, do you bother to increase your calling range vs. UTG raisers when you're in the CO or BB as opposed to MP or SB respectively considering your absolute or relative position improves against the UTG raiser (assume Lucky Chewy, Sauce123 and AEJones are behind your CO for the sake of argument)? What tweener hands or equity categories do you think become playable here if any, does the EV of set mining significantly increase from the SB to the BB for you etc.?

Thanks for answering any of that.

First of all, wow.

Secondly, against the 4b happy buttons l'd typically just 3b hands like ATs and 77 so that I could 5b jam them. So I wouldn't be calling too much from the sb if I;m not even calling those. Sauce basically never folds pre, so I'd adjust by 3b big cards a lot, and I'd probably stay away from stuff like 54s.

Regarding the 2nd example, calling vs chewy there would be a disaster with the other 2 in the blinds. Aaron isn't so squeeze happy, but sauce is, and all involved are very good post so I can;t expect to crush postflop with such a crappy hand.

Blah,

Please stop interrupting Dani.

I don't think he interrupts me at ant inappropriate times.

Blah,

Please stop interrupting Dani.

I made a conscious efford to not interrupt Dani on new episode coming out, hope it will be better.

First of all, wow.

Secondly, against the 4b happy buttons l'd typically just 3b hands like ATs and 77 so that I could 5b jam them. So I wouldn't be calling too much from the sb if I;m not even calling those. Sauce basically never folds pre, so I'd adjust by 3b big cards a lot, and I'd probably stay away from stuff like 54s.

Regarding the 2nd example, calling vs chewy there would be a disaster with the other 2 in the blinds. Aaron isn't so squeeze happy, but sauce is, and all involved are very good post so I can;t expect to crush postflop with such a crappy hand.

lol, sorry for the wall of text, but thanks for the answers.

I also think it is Dani. (pronounced how you spelt it) He shall be mad!

my bad