---

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

giving up free cards to draws (when you don't really have too much reason to necessarily believe your opponent even has a draw) isn't as big a concern as not getting in a ton of money drawing dead; if he bet/calls he's got a 6 so exercising some pot control is called for. jamming in money when you're not folding out better or getting called by worse just isn't a good idea. as for what do we do if a spade peels? i don't know; probably call because people rep either flush draw that hits often enough so even if he could have spades he could also have busted clubs

i don't think we should have a jamming range here other than the nuts because you only get bet/called by a 6 and it's good to balance with your 6x hands so that your hand isn't face up as Ax when you check/call the turn

Thank you for the explanation.

I think an important detail is the assumption that "you only get called by a 6". In the games I play (1/10 stakes or less) that is not true and you do get called by other hands.

The importance comparison (giving free cards to flush draws) <<< (getting all in with 0 equity) sounds, for me, difficult to digest at first. If you always call when the flush draw hits, aren't you calling the rest ~1500 with zero equity just as well? I guess the key is the ranges - when he bets and a flush gets there, his range is also bluffs, not only those flush draws. So if he has 70% of flush draws that sucked out, you can think you are calling a river bet of 1050 with zero equity and a river bet of 450 with 100% equity which brings the total to -600 and

600 <<< 1500 which proves that avoiding turn mistakes is much more important than avoiding the river mistakes, no?

Somehow you should also take into account the cases when river is a blank and / or goes check-check, check-fold or check-call, but it gets a bit too complex for me. Guess you should use eg. pokerazor to "prove" the right line.

On the 54s hand at ~33:40 where you get c/r on the flop in a 3b pot and 3 barreled, can you explain why he can't have Kx here at least some percentage of the time?

Unless you have a rock solid read on that guy, surely he would be doing this with KQ/AK at least some of the time for thin value/to mix things up, right?


great video btw, really love hearing you two talk about poker.

I mean, he COULD, but it's highly unlikely; most people let you barrel and don't expect to get a lot of money in good with KQ (and they tend to 4bet AK out of position)

Thank you for the explanation.

I think an important detail is the assumption that "you only get called by a 6". In the games I play (1/10 stakes or less) that is not true and you do get called by other hands.

The importance comparison (giving free cards to flush draws) <<< (getting all in with 0 equity) sounds, for me, difficult to digest at first. If you always call when the flush draw hits, aren't you calling the rest ~1500 with zero equity just as well? I guess the key is the ranges - when he bets and a flush gets there, his range is also bluffs, not only those flush draws. So if he has 70% of flush draws that sucked out, you can think you are calling a river bet of 1050 with zero equity and a river bet of 450 with 100% equity which brings the total to -600 and

600 <<< 1500 which proves that avoiding turn mistakes is much more important than avoiding the river mistakes, no?

Somehow you should also take into account the cases when river is a blank and / or goes check-check, check-fold or check-call, but it gets a bit too complex for me. Guess you should use eg. pokerazor to "prove" the right line.

You're definitely right that the important thing is the ranges for calling the river and that you shouldn't do it if he only has flushes, but I'm not sure what you're doing with your 70% assumption

Why did you click run it twice before getting all in with the draw? What do you think you're gaining by reducing your variance in this particular spot but not by doing it overall?

Well, I've never played w/ jcmoussa before, but I assumed he's a solid player that isn't prone to go on tilt from losing one pot at 40/80.

I def wouldn't be running it twice vs ebk since it's prob safe to assume that losing 8k in one hand is going to mess w/ his head and is pretty likely to cause him to play worse. The same could apply to some of the other guys at the table, although it tends to take a lot more to tilt one of them than an unknown. But say if suicideking had lost a couple coolers in a row or something, I might be inclined to only run it once against him in hopes that it causes him to lose his cool.

On the 54s hand at ~33:40 where you get c/r on the flop in a 3b pot and 3 barreled, can you explain why he can't have Kx here at least some percentage of the time?

Unless you have a rock solid read on that guy, surely he would be doing this with KQ/AK at least some of the time for thin value/to mix things up, right?

Maaaybe he shows up with AK once in a while, but it's really heavily discounted. I 3bet so much that he's very likely to just 4bet AK pf. Then he also has to assume that I'm going to be bet/calling this flop with QQ or floating really often to make c/ring better than just c/cing hoping that I barrel off. And I think if he does get to the river w/ AK, he's pretty likely to just c/f since there's no way I'm ever calling w/ worse. And getting me to fold better is crazy since he'd basically be trying to get me off of a set which is a very lofty goal.

great video btw, really love hearing you two talk about poker.

thanks beztro, glad you enjoyed it.

Thank you for the explanation.

I think an important detail is the assumption that "you only get called by a 6". In the games I play (1/10 stakes or less) that is not true and you do get called by other hands.

The importance comparison (giving free cards to flush draws) <<< (getting all in with 0 equity) sounds, for me, difficult to digest at first. If you always call when the flush draw hits, aren't you calling the rest ~1500 with zero equity just as well? I guess the key is the ranges - when he bets and a flush gets there, his range is also bluffs, not only those flush draws. So if he has 70% of flush draws that sucked out, you can think you are calling a river bet of 1050 with zero equity and a river bet of 450 with 100% equity which brings the total to -600 and

600 <<< 1500 which proves that avoiding turn mistakes is much more important than avoiding the river mistakes, no?

Somehow you should also take into account the cases when river is a blank and / or goes check-check, check-fold or check-call, but it gets a bit too complex for me. Guess you should use eg. pokerazor to "prove" the right line.

Yeah, I agree w/ FWF.

Another argument for calling is the fact that derek may bluff jam the river some of the time if we just c/c the turn. I think we're bound to be a little biased since we saw him showdown a hand that had equity against us and then chose not to bluff the river. But I dunno, maybe he bluffs the river unimproved like 10% of the time or something, which makes us like $150 on average.

Yeah, I agree w/ FWF.

Another argument for calling is the fact that derek may bluff jam the river some of the time if we just c/c the turn. I think we're bound to be a little biased since we saw him showdown a hand that had equity against us and then chose not to bluff the river. But I dunno, maybe he bluffs the river unimproved like 10% of the time or something, which makes us like $150 on average.

I haven't heard you guys say what the plan is if he jams a river brick. Now that we have played our hand in a way to gain max value from his bluffs I assume we are just calling it off?

Time Link to 00:43:44

Hi guys. Great stuff.

Quick question about this AA hand super deep. What is our plan for the hand if we get checkraised on this flop. I know this is an uncommon spot but curious as to what your line would be.

You're definitely right that the important thing is the ranges for calling the river and that you shouldn't do it if he only has flushes, but I'm not sure what you're doing with your 70% assumption

I am using the 70% assumption to make some coarse grained quantitative comparison between how big a mistake it is to a) get all in on turn drawing dead and b) call river bet when a flush gets there and he bets some ratio of flushes / bluffs.

Using the simple math I calculated that a) is a 1500$ mistake and b) is a 600$ mistake and from this I can reason that it is more important to avoid the a) mistake.

I am not sure if the 70% flushes / 30% bluffs ratio assumption when betting is realistic.

Did you think the 70% number was not realistic, or that the whole approach is flaved? I know it simplifies things a lot and omits many things, but I would like to be able to "prove" this concept to myself somehow more concretely and mathematically. For me it's hard to assimilate concept "you should do A instead of B, because of reason X, even though reason Y exists and proposes action B" when there's no concrete measure for the comparative importance of X and Y.

I haven't heard you guys say what the plan is if he jams a river brick. Now that we have played our hand in a way to gain max value from his bluffs I assume we are just calling it off?

yeah, we're calling it off if he jams river. like I said before, his river bluffing frequency is going to be pretty low, but I really don't think we can find a fold. his range is just so air heavy after he raises the flop and barrels the turn because he's def checking back sets on the turn, and is prob checking back Ax as well assuming there's no value. so his range is basically gonna be 6x that he raised the flop with, and air.

so his 6x hands are 65s(3), 66(6), 76s(4), A6s(2), and he 3bets the SCs sometimes pre, so we'll take out like 2 out of the 7 of those. that leaves us with 13 combos, and maybe he raises the flop w/ these 1/3 of the time or something. so he's only got 4ish combos of value hands, so we only need to find like 2.5 combos of air to be able to call a river shove.

Hi guys. Great stuff.

Quick question about this AA hand super deep. What is our plan for the hand if we get checkraised on this flop. I know this is an uncommon spot but curious as to what your line would be.

I'd just be calling if we get c/red on the flop. we allow him to continue bluffing the times he does have air, and we also don't lose our ass when he shows up w/ quads, which he'll actually have a decent amount of the time when he c/rs the flop.

I'd just be calling if we get c/red on the flop. we allow him to continue bluffing the times he does have air, and we also don't lose our ass when he shows up w/ quads, which he'll actually have a decent amount of the time when he c/rs the flop.

I guess I should have been more specific. I don't think 3 betting the flop is even a consideration when we have a hand that is obviously WA/WB. I guess I was wondering if we find a river fold if he CR's the flop big, bombs the turn, and bombs or jams the river?

I guess I should have been more specific. I don't think 3 betting the flop is even a consideration when we have a hand that is obviously WA/WB. I guess I was wondering if we find a river fold if he CR's the flop big, bombs the turn, and bombs or jams the river?

I'd advise using caution when trying to justify a play by simply saying we're WA/WB because that doesn't always fly. Let's say he's c/ring the flop w/ all of his pocket pairs (22-TT) and quads, and he's always calling a flop 3bet w/ the pp's (not saying this is the case, it's just a hypothetical). In this case we're either WA/WB, but we should be 3betting the flop because we're way ahead of his calling range.

So if he c/r from 324 to like 1500, that'd make the pot $3400 going into the turn, say he pots turn, now there's like 10k in there and I have 22k behind. So yeah, since shoving would be a huge overbet, I'd def just fold. I think it's a pretty gross spot if he takes this line and then pots the river. Let's do a little analysis and see what it looks like.

We're going to assume the board bricked off..like two cards under a 9. We'll give him K4s-K9s(6), KTo-KQo(12), and maybe like 1 combo of K9o, so 19 combinations of quads. Then 99/TT is 12 combos and maybe he takes this line 35% of the time, so 4.5 combos of those. Then maybe he flats JJ pre 1/3 of the time and QQ 1/4 of the time, so 3.5 combos of JJ/QQ. It's really hard to assign him a bluffing range in this spot, but I think we can throw in 1 combo of random air from the times he c/r the flop with QJo or w/e and desperation bluffs w/ it. So that's 9 combos of hands we beat and 19 that beat us. So we're ahead 9/28 of the time or 32%.

So it's ridic close, and looks like a fold in a vacuum against an unknown. But I'd prob just click call in game since we have like, the nuts . I'd be interested to hear what FWF has to say about this.

giving up free cards to draws (when you don't really have too much reason to necessarily believe your opponent even has a draw) isn't as big a concern as not getting in a ton of money drawing dead; if he bet/calls he's got a 6 so exercising some pot control is called for. jamming in money when you're not folding out better or getting called by worse just isn't a good idea. as for what do we do if a spade peels? i don't know; probably call because people rep either flush draw that hits often enough so even if he could have spades he could also have busted clubs

i don't think we should have a jamming range here other than the nuts because you only get bet/called by a 6 and it's good to balance with your 6x hands so that your hand isn't face up as Ax when you check/call the turn

His hand (or any flush draw he would have) K9 had 9 outs on us for the flush and 6 outs to chop (A and 6 both put a straight on the board). So thats 12 outs out of 44 cards or 27% equity. Our shove would force him to call 1669 to win a 5111 pot, and he needs 32.6% equity to call. With only 27% equity he is forced to fold and only saves 5.6% of his equity, which isnt very much. So its very close and we're actually folding out a large part of his equity share when we shove and he folds to our shove. A set has one more out against us, so this even more true if he was betting a set on the turn. Plus, with two flush draws possible on the turn and us not knowing which one he has, we are very likely to get outplayed on the river should we decide to c/c.

Of course if he has a 6 (a small part of his range imo), we are likely to get stacked anyways since I think we were planning to call a shove on the river. But this way we get close to maximum value from all the other hands in his range as well (Ax by bluffing it out sometimes, a set, or either flush draw)

So I think that makes this a clear shove to protect our hand, outweighing the fact we fold out worse and only get called by better.

Hi,

re the AA hand on the 542cc (~28:00) board. I was surprised that you said 3betting the flop is bad. Of course I play lower (NL200) but if you 3bet here ppl will jam w/ flushdraws, worse pairs and even w straight draws which is obv. great for us. Are the dynamics that different on 10/20?

Thanks in advance