---

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

Time Link to 00:04:40

Do you guys think he folds some of his PP combos on the turn? If so, then going for 3barrels get a lot more questionable.

Time Link to 00:08:23

if we had like JT/KJ here and expect his to fold his 77-99 to a river bet a lot, then shouldn't we check back turn and bluff the river? Earlier FWF said we'd be bluffing turn and river with those, but given that he's always calling turn and river with his Ax hands and sometimes with his Qx hands and folding his PP's on the turn a lot, bluffing turn and river seems bad, especially since we can get the same hands (77-99) to fold a lot by checking back turn and betting river, and we risk less/don't waste money vs the part of his range that isn't folding.

I guess we also get some air to fold by betting the turn so we prevent him from bluffing us on the river with that part of his range, but betting twice seems like wasting money.

Time Link to 00:31:14

I think the river is a c/f.

the important key to this hand iMo is the turn. we are betting 400 which we wouldn't do with 2p. it's more likely we have 98s/K9s/FDs+SD(/TT [TT unlikely but possible for some %]). so what does that mean for our options on the river:

shove
I think he might click call, but tbh I think a lot of people are capable of folding QQ on that river. Everything got there and we are only hoping he calls us with a set (I think 2p snapfolds), and given BTNs action, I think that's to optimistic

c/c
it is somewhat funny, because if we check we like always have 98s. that said I don't think a lot of regs will bluff now, because I think they expect us to call with it (close to the same logic why we should b/f AK in that hand before, because people don't bluff with good SD value)

c/f
so overall I think it becomes a c/f.

but pretty interesting spot which depends a lot on the player we are playing against. against the "normal" reg I would c/f, against a weaker reg I would shove (calls with worse hands) and against a good reg I want to call (might turn worse hands into a bluff).

"Yeah, this is a full ring table."
"Oh sweet Jesus."

priceless

great vids btw, keep it up guys

Do you guys think he folds some of his PP combos on the turn? If so, then going for 3barrels get a lot more questionable.

this depends on the turn card of course but the thing is the flop cbet will certainly be -EV if you don't barrel the turn.

if we had like JT/KJ here and expect his to fold his 77-99 to a river bet a lot, then shouldn't we check back turn and bluff the river? Earlier FWF said we'd be bluffing turn and river with those, but given that he's always calling turn and river with his Ax hands and sometimes with his Qx hands and folding his PP's on the turn a lot, bluffing turn and river seems bad, especially since we can get the same hands (77-99) to fold a lot by checking back turn and betting river, and we risk less/don't waste money vs the part of his range that isn't folding.

I guess we also get some air to fold by betting the turn so we prevent him from bluffing us on the river with that part of his range, but betting twice seems like wasting money.

I think betting twice is really standard once that A came on the turn. villain may not always fold a pp to 1 bet and we can get him off some Qx hands now too. Bet once on the turn and c/f is lighting money on fire when villain is repping an obv bluff catcher after he checks turn again.

this depends on the turn card of course but the thing is the flop cbet will certainly be -EV if you don't barrel the turn.

well say on a brick

I think betting twice is really standard once that A came on the turn. villain may not always fold a pp to 1 bet and we can get him off some Qx hands now too. Bet once on the turn and c/f is lighting money on fire when villain is repping an obv bluff catcher after he checks turn again.

I was talking about checking back turn and betting river when we have like KJ/JT instead of betting twice, not betting once on the turn

I was talking about checking back turn and betting river when we have like KJ/JT instead of betting twice, not betting once on the turn

This is an option. Problem with this is that villain can lead river to bluff us with his air (air should still be around 25% of his range) and his bluff catcher gets to see showdown cheaply so he may not fold. Good villain should turn anything he doesn't want to call a river bet with into a bluff by leading the river since they're no different than air. Weaker bluff catchers will lose to our range for checking it down as well.

Pro for checking turn and betting river is that we don't rep a bluff so villain should not bluff catch if he didn't turn his weaker bluff catchers into a bluff.

well say on a brick

on a brick turn under T if you bet I'm sure he doesn't fold most of his pp, especially if a BDFD came in or something.

(air should still be around 25% of his range)

if he has that much air then shouldn't a half pot cbet flop and give up be ok given our equity?

Good villain should turn anything he doesn't want to call a river bet with into a bluff by leading the river since they're no different than air.

not sure I agree with this. If he has 77 and doesn't want to call a river bet, but also thinks we have mostly SD value that will call river if he bets, then he shouldn't turn that into a bluff, he should x/f.

on a brick turn under T if you bet I'm sure he doesn't fold most of his pp, especially if a BDFD came in or something.

guess my point was that even if he doesn't fold "most" of his pp's and just folds like 40% of them on the turn, a river bet is -EV. QTs-QJs, KQ/AQ are 24 combos and he has around the same number of PP combos. If he folds 40% of them on the turn, then his river range is 14 combos of pp's and 24 Qx combos. Our river shove would be like 560 into 880 so would have to work like 38% but only works 36%. Rake also affects the EV.

if he has that much air then shouldn't a half pot cbet flop and give up be ok given our equity?

no villain will not fold 100% of his air. His stronger air might float OOP, for example things that are 3 to a straight like KJ, since it's a dry board and he should expect us to cbet alot. Especially if he expects us to cbet decent amounts of air here with the intention to fire multiple barrels on none bricks.

not sure I agree with this. If he has 77 and doesn't want to call a river bet, but also thinks we have mostly SD value that will call river if he bets, then he shouldn't turn that into a bluff, he should x/f.

leveling spot, when he leads river he doesn't rep bluffs either so we shouldn't call with like TT. IMO leading 77 is better than checking it down and losing almost always or get bluffed on the river vs someone who knows about range construction.

guess my point was that even if he doesn't fold "most" of his pp's and just folds like 40% of them on the turn, a river bet is -EV. QTs-QJs, KQ/AQ are 24 combos and he has around the same number of PP combos. If he folds 40% of them on the turn, then his river range is 14 combos of pp's and 24 Qx combos. Our river shove would be like 560 into 880 so would have to work like 38% but only works 36%. Rake also affects the EV.

Didn't I say in the video the reason I don't bet the flop is because I think it will take 3 barrels to make people fold anything decent pending turn and river cards also that 3 barreling is probably not going to be super +EV which is why I like checking flop better? BTW I don't expect people to fold even 20% of their pp on a brick turn under T so cbetting flop and hope to god turn is not a brick should be -EV also.

Didn't I say in the video the reason I don't bet the flop is because I think it will take 3 barrels to make people fold anything decent pending turn and river cards also that 3 barreling is probably not going to be super +EV which is why I like checking flop better? BTW I don't expect people to fold even 20% of their pp on a brick turn under T.

ya guess I was mainly asking for FWF's opinion on what ppl will do with their pp's on the turn and how that affects our 3barrel decision since he was the one advocating it most.

Time Link to 00:28:44

Great series guys! On the river here I would just jam and hope for the best like Blah did. I think FWF is correct that seansean shouldn't have many Kx's in his range at all - he just happened to have one of the few combos that did. still I think it is more likely that sean decides to call with ridiculous pot odds with a set or 2p than to thin value shove the river when checked to.

I think sometimes in HH review we overestimate our ability, and our opponent's ability to have super deep thought processes and hand read thoroughly. Many of these regs are on a bunch of tables, and when they get checked to on the river here with a set or 2p, they just think 'bleh that got ugly - 4 straight and flush got there, values real thin, cant make better fold, meh i check'