---

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

i feel stupid now for thinking that this live series would be filmed live... but was i the only one thinking that? obviously it makes no sense and wouldn't work technically. oh well

Actually, it is in the plans to have one or two episodes come from nights where I play on Live at the Bike.

Actually, it is in the plans to have one or two episodes come from nights where I play on Live at the Bike.

That will be quite good.

Cheers for the reply btw.

Really , really entertaining, even for an online PLO player.
Why don't you bring in limon for an episode or two?
He's always fun too and judging from your collective podcasts , you two make a good team...

Great video.
I am a live 5/10 player as well, but not in LA .

In the first hand, the over limp with the 22, is interesting. If 22 is a limp, what hands would you be raising in that spot? Would you open raise 22?

Although I agree that raising in that spot purely to isolate is probably a mistake, we have other reasons to raise other than just purely for isolation. If the two shorter stacks were closer to the 50bb range would you then be leaning a bit more towards a raise?

I wonder how we could calculate the benefits of isolating and c-betting the flop versus the implied odds of hitting a set and winning a big pot.

What would you say your default VPiP PFR and 3B (i.e. when you first sit down in a game)?

Also, if you have an Android phone, you could use the application I'm working on to help you track hands. Although I don't have a feature built in yet to export the hands in a universal format you can record the basic action of the hands and view them in an HTML format. Plus a bunch of other stuff.
Check it out at
http://nuancesys.trickel.com

It's currently in beta and free, but it will cost money in the future.

Looking forward to the rest of the series.

Why don't you bring in limon for an episode or two?
He's always fun too and judging from your collective podcasts , you two make a good team...

+1
Although the first video is excellent as it stands.

Great first video Bart. I second the Limon suggestion. In one hand you mentioned he was at the table and I also saw citizen James. I instantly thought that a commentary on a hand that you were involved in with those players (either multiway or heads up) might actually be pretty interesting from multiple view points given your different approaches to live poker and how well you interact with them on the podcast... for entertainment value maybe even the sober and drunk version

Seriously though I did have a question about your set mining requirements.

In Professional No Limit Holdem they suggest that you should be able to win at least 12X the raise when purely set mining. Which implies not only the villains stack size but also their range and their willingness to stack off in various situations. Harrington in HOC suggests a huge 25X for set mining. Frequently in Low Stakes 100bb or 150bb capped games where standard opens are 6-8bbs or more you often cannot get 25X and many times barely 12x which means you either would be dumping a lot of PPs or must play them other than for set value which can be difficult in the "no-foldem" low stakes games.

I had seen an extensive analysis of online data that suggested somewhere in the range between 11 and 12. You frequently cite 10X which is much more achievable than Harrington and often right on the margins in these lowstakes games. But is this really enough to make pure set mining profitable?

There has been some raging debate in the LLSNL forums at 2+2 about this subject and I would like to hear your views a bit further.

Thanks again and looking forward to the next video.

Are you seriously going to be able to get 200bbs+ with a set vs a competent player?

Obviously rules like this will vary depending on player type, if it's multiway or not, if you're in position or not, how likely villain is to fold on certain board textures where you can rep and turn your hand into a bluff, etc etc.

I use a very simple ratio of bbsize call per 100bb stack depth (which effectively is an SPR type ratio), but even this doesn't really capture all the variables; it's just a guideline to be aware of when deciding.

Oh and Bart... Excellent video. Two words for it: I came

Bart this is the best full ring video I've seen since Nolan, and I play both online and live.

Next video can you please address some more barreling opportunities on wetter boards (more two tone) in both limped and raised pots, and value barreling bluffing opponents you put on draws? I find the J 2 is a tougher sell in those limped pots on two diamond flops.

Edit Don't forget the extra colon kids. Otherwise the diamond makes a smiley face.

Quote: I had seen an extensive analysis of online data that suggested somewhere in the range between 11 and 12. You frequently cite 10X which is much more achievable than Harrington and often right on the margins in these lowstakes games. But is this really enough to make pure set mining profitable?

There has been some raging debate in the LLSNL forums at 2+2 about this subject and I would like to hear your views a bit further.

Thanks again and looking forward to the next video.

10x is fine. Sometimes I go as low as 7x just to crush a short stack's soul.

Hey Bart, just thought of some more material for your series, and some stuff not frequently covered in those twoplustwo live forums. I think you could make a whole episode just on c-betting, and various flop textures and barrels. For example, it can get tricky with A23 rainbow against some opponents peeling with 7's, when we're not sure if they have an Ace, and whether we should triple barrel, or make a delayed c-bet. Would like to see your c-bets, sizing, barrels, delayed c-bets, and other stuff
Awesome first episode by the way!

31:30 do u think there is value in checking the flop?

55:00 what do you do if he bets the turn? do u bluff-raise or just fold?

55:00 what do you do if he bets the turn? do u bluff-raise or just fold?

Please leave a linked time-stamp, watch this short video, to leave a time link!

That will be much easier for the coaches to find the hand and answer your questions, thanks.

Why would Asian lady of made a preflop mistake if she had a 7?

Surely as she has a raise and 2 callers in-front of her and she has a suited connector they go way up in value. Even given her short-ish stack size.

I dont think it is a mistake for her to show up with a suited connector or A7s.

You also said that they are likely to be playing less than 20% of hands and mainly have pocket pairs and big suited cards. They will also show up with suited connectors a good % of the time. Making it a mistake for you to discount the 7x hands she has in her range.

I'd like to discuss this further. Here's my thoughts on it:

I see players make calls crying "pot odds" all the time with suited connectors. Problem is, they don't flop good that often, and pre-flop pot odds aren't as important when the stacks are deep. What's more important is post-flop play. When you have a short stack like villain in this hand, and a lot of money goes in pre-flop (read: raised multiway pots) the SPR gets really low. Take this example, her SPR is a little over 1. Any c-bet she faces will probably be at least 1/3 of her stack, giving her 4:1 stack odds. It becomes unprofitable to draw (although there's enough money in the pot to shove), but now we are calling pre to get into a lot of spots where we are 30-40% equity AI for our stack, which is actually REVERSE implied odds.

The only way implied odds go up here is for the flopping two-pair+ portion of her range. SCs only do this ~3% of the time. So, you would need about 33:1 implied odds to make this call if that were your only profit source. Your stack odds are ~20:1. So, they aren't profitable in that right.

Other than that they flop a lot of draws. The drawing ability of the hand is kind of worthless when the SPR gets so low as you won't be able to draw profitably since bets will now be bigger, and thus cut your implied odds. We should devolve into a shove and pray situation which doesn't seem to be extremely +EV.

The other way we might make money is stealing, but that's going to be pretty rough with an SPR of 1 and a 4-way pot, vs a good players EP raise.

Time Link to 00:09:58

This is pretty interesting. I definitely agree and see where you're coming from with this limp giving table dynamics. I'm just curious to what you think about how the different variables affect these sort of decisions.

The games I've been playing in have a max BI of 100bb. What would be the bottom of your over-limping range 100bb deep in the same sort of situation? What about MP? Along the same lines, what would be the bottom of your raising range?

I assume we prefer stuff like big suited cards before SCs because they have the ability to flop, and stack, bigger flushes?

I find myself in these spots a lot (every hand?) and it's something that just hasn't came up online, obviously. I can totally get behind over-limping a lot of hands in LP, but I have trouble seeing the profit source by limping SCs and stuff in EP/MP, unless the limper is really bad. I could totally be wrong though and would love to hear your thoughts.

Threads on the subject of bigger flushes, I'm sure Bart will elaborate on it later in this series, but a lot of good live regs like limping ace rag suited hands unless they're getting punished for limping, because it keeps J 7 suited and 7 3 suited to limp in the hand as well, and the morons only play those hands for making a flush (not aggro with draw) value. They almost never fold postflop when they hit.

Hey Bart,

As an online (sng/mtt) pro who was forced to play live poker after Black Friday I really appreciate this series. I like the concept of the series and this first video was done very well. I wish this had come out sooner as I already cost myself a bit of equity learning some of the things you talk about in this video.
Looking forward to the others. Can't wait.

Threads on the subject of bigger flushes, I'm sure Bart will elaborate on it later in this series, but a lot of good live regs like limping ace rag suited hands unless they're getting punished for limping, because it keeps J 7 suited and 7 3 suited to limp in the hand as well, and the morons only play those hands for making a flush (not aggro with draw) value. They almost never fold postflop when they hit.

Right, that's what I've been doing that seemed to make sense in those lower limit live games

Time Link to 00:05:10

hand 1, 22 set on the flop, I think this bet should be full pot, for the same reasons you bet ~pot on the turn. Pretend he has K5s and is gonna c/c 3 times and we pot on every street compared to betting $35 and then potting turn/river... We put in $15 more, he calls $15 more, so the pot is $30 larger on the turn. We bet $30 more there as a result, which he calls too, so the pot is $90 larger. The same thing goes for the river and the pot you win ends up being $270 larger, $145 of which was his.

And another reason for betting larger on the earlier street is because fish might look at the bets absolute value rather than relative.

Time Link to 00:11:59

I understand that we have good equity with the K5s, but you've pegged the initial bettor as a "passive" type -- therefore I'd expect him to have a hand with some kind of strength. Sure, you're essentially coin flipping with sets and two-pair type hands.

However, is there another reason for the flop raise? Does flat-calling give away your hand as a draw? Is it because your stacks are so deep that you need raise just to build a much bigger pot?

You hit the turn obv, but would you bet unimproved on the turn to try to knock him off a medium pair?

Great video.
I am a live 5/10 player as well, but not in LA .

In the first hand, the over limp with the 22, is interesting. If 22 is a limp, what hands would you be raising in that spot? Would you open raise 22?

Although I agree that raising in that spot purely to isolate is probably a mistake, we have other reasons to raise other than just purely for isolation. If the two shorter stacks were closer to the 50bb range would you then be leaning a bit more towards a raise?

I wonder how we could calculate the benefits of isolating and c-betting the flop versus the implied odds of hitting a set and winning a big pot.

What would you say your default VPiP PFR and 3B (i.e. when you first sit down in a game)?

Also, if you have an Android phone, you could use the application I'm working on to help you track hands. Although I don't have a feature built in yet to export the hands in a universal format you can record the basic action of the hands and view them in an HTML format. Plus a bunch of other stuff.
Check it out at
http://nuancesys.trickel.com

It's currently in beta and free, but it will cost money in the future.

Looking forward to the rest of the series.

I really lean towards not iso raising with small pocket pairs. I understand that if they limp call and miss we can make a profit--but really I have no problem building a pot up post flop and I steal a lot of limp pots or fire multiple barrels when checked to me.

In terms of my stats--I play a lot of hands. I'm probably 28/20/5

Great first video Bart. I second the Limon suggestion. In one hand you mentioned he was at the table and I also saw citizen James. I instantly thought that a commentary on a hand that you were involved in with those players (either multiway or heads up) might actually be pretty interesting from multiple view points given your different approaches to live poker and how well you interact with them on the podcast... for entertainment value maybe even the sober and drunk version

Seriously though I did have a question about your set mining requirements.

In Professional No Limit Holdem they suggest that you should be able to win at least 12X the raise when purely set mining. Which implies not only the villains stack size but also their range and their willingness to stack off in various situations. Harrington in HOC suggests a huge 25X for set mining. Frequently in Low Stakes 100bb or 150bb capped games where standard opens are 6-8bbs or more you often cannot get 25X and many times barely 12x which means you either would be dumping a lot of PPs or must play them other than for set value which can be difficult in the "no-foldem" low stakes games.

I had seen an extensive analysis of online data that suggested somewhere in the range between 11 and 12. You frequently cite 10X which is much more achievable than Harrington and often right on the margins in these lowstakes games. But is this really enough to make pure set mining profitable?

There has been some raging debate in the LLSNL forums at 2+2 about this subject and I would like to hear your views a bit further.

Thanks again and looking forward to the next video.

It may be slightly higher than ten times I just find that that that is a really easy number for people to evaluate versus raise size. I think an equally important number is 20x for suited connectors, 25x for gap suited connectors and like 30 for 2 gap suited connectors.

Hey Bart, just thought of some more material for your series, and some stuff not frequently covered in those twoplustwo live forums. I think you could make a whole episode just on c-betting, and various flop textures and barrels. For example, it can get tricky with A23 rainbow against some opponents peeling with 7's, when we're not sure if they have an Ace, and whether we should triple barrel, or make a delayed c-bet. Would like to see your c-bets, sizing, barrels, delayed c-bets, and other stuff
Awesome first episode by the way!

Good idea. I'll definitely incorporate some cbet texture and delayed cbet/multiple barrel situations in a future video.

31:30 do u think there is value in checking the flop?

AA on 772 4 ways---I think that there is too much value in checking through here especially with my laggy image. I want to start building a bit of a pot now so scare cards won't come on later streets and opponents won't feel that the pot is too small to fight for.

55:00 what do you do if he bets the turn? do u bluff-raise or just fold?

I would never bluff raise after get led into here on the turn. This bet would almost always represent a big pocket pair with a heart and once that amount of money is committed by villain I think he is never folding to a raise.