---

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

With ATo vs TT+ AQo with blockers is 3.6% value range

73.7% vs 26.3%

I did it for AcTh
AdAh,AdAs,AhAs,
KK-JJ,TcTd,TcTs,TdTs,AdKd,AhKh,AsKs,AdQd,AhQh,AsQs,AdKc,AdKh,AdKs,AhKc,AhKd,AhKs,AsKc,AsKd,AsKh,AdQc,AdQh,AdQs,AhQc,AhQd,AhQs,AsQc,AsQd,AsQh

2 things about the AT hand:

first: you probably take one of the shitiest hand in your complete range to shove, if you shove ATo here you could probably shove your complete MP opening range because ATo has the worst equity of all. (it obv has blockers but i doubt that makes up for the difference in equity (and your Axs have blocker as well).
for example even 76s has 31%, Axs has 30% and low pairs have 35%
You do want to play back at his high sq% but i gues you dont want to overdo it.
If you would just shove all pairs (much better equity) and all suited aces (better equity and almost same blocker value), which are much better to shove with, you would already be shoving almost half your opening range, seems enough to me



second thing: not that it matters much but you shouldnt take the % of splits into account since thats alrdy accounted for in your equity.

the way you did it your total % goes over a 100 0,2626+0,7374+0,0147 = 1.0147 or 101,47% which is obviously impossible.
This only affected your equity by less than a dollar but its kind of a weird mistake which i think i saw in earlier vids as well so i figured i'd point it out.

Time Link to 00:39:59

On the QJ6 flop against the passive reg...

How about 3-bet folding on this flop? I don't like 3-bet getting it in because I think when he shoves he never has KQ/AQ/KT/T9 etc. because our hand looks so strong. I think if he's stacking off he has either 66 or QJ here. I don't think he's shoving KT/T9 because we are pretty deep and our line looks so strong.

But by 3-betting, we get value from draws and one pair type hands. We can balance this out by doing this with sets/two-pairs, or the occasional bluff. When he shoves I think we're almost behind here so I don't think we're being exploited with the flop 3-bet.

As played, I think the turn is a fold. He's not betting AQ/KQ/KT there ever and he can't really have a bluff in this spot so I'd just lay it down and wait for a better spot.

Time Link to 00:27:41

Does the fact that he shows up here w/A3 mean that in a similar spot next time, you would then value bet the turn with a 6 or 8, pair+draws that FWF said earlier check the turn?

On the QJ6 flop against the passive reg...

How about 3-bet folding on this flop? I don't like 3-bet getting it in because I think when he shoves he never has KQ/AQ/KT/T9 etc. because our hand looks so strong. I think if he's stacking off he has either 66 or QJ here. I don't think he's shoving KT/T9 because we are pretty deep and our line looks so strong.

But by 3-betting, we get value from draws and one pair type hands. We can balance this out by doing this with sets/two-pairs, or the occasional bluff. When he shoves I think we're almost behind here so I don't think we're being exploited with the flop 3-bet.

As played, I think the turn is a fold. He's not betting AQ/KQ/KT there ever and he can't really have a bluff in this spot so I'd just lay it down and wait for a better spot.

I don't like putting money in to "see where I'm at" and folding when I think the opponent is fishy enough that I may just be putting more money in and making a big mistake because he's a huge donk in some unexpected way

Does the fact that he shows up here w/A3 mean that in a similar spot next time, you would then value bet the turn with a 6 or 8, pair+draws that FWF said earlier check the turn?

Meh even if he calls twice with all ace highs I don't think you're a favorite with a pair of sixes here. Hard to pokerstove because I'm not sure what his flatting range is but I'm guessing that even if he calls A3 every time as long as he flats all his pairs we're monster dogs. Probably betting an 8 is good though

If you would just shove all pairs (much better equity) and all suited aces (better equity and almost same blocker value), which are much better to shove with, you would already be shoving almost half your opening range, seems enough to me

Against a guy like this it's very possible that you can just jam so wide until he tightens up that waiting for better hands doesn't really make sense

second thing: not that it matters much but you shouldnt take the % of splits into account since thats alrdy accounted for in your equity.

the way you did it your total % goes over a 100 0,2626+0,7374+0,0147 = 1.0147 or 101,47% which is obviously impossible.
This only affected your equity by less than a dollar but its kind of a weird mistake which i think i saw in earlier vids as well so i figured i'd point it out.

Thanks for catching that

Time Link to 00:13:59

Idk about this:
I mean, the Opener is def. bad-aggro and certainly not positional aware.
So probably he opens here enough, so that i would at least 3bet him pretty depolar. to isolate him with such a range,
JJ+,ATs+,KJs+,ATo+,KJo+ -> this are 9%.
So a cold4bet of KingBoromir would generate a ton of FEQ (at least 1-(3/9) -> 66% FEQ, though I am not sure if Hielko would react with JJ to a cold4bet.... (?))
-> Said this,
I think actually that flatting here AA in the BigB`s shoes is a pretty smart play.

the KK hand against KingBoromir on QTx -

do you think it would be a good play for KingBoromir to bet like $180 on the river with AA? i get that you win a lot less when Hielko calls, but it seems like it is the clear higher EV play if Hielko calls with most of his Q's and stronger, and he is folding hands as strong as KK (as evidenced obv). i also don't think that jamming to look "bluffier" is much of a consideration - KingBoromir has so few bluffs here compared to monsters and he should think that Hielko knows this.

i mean, if Hielko calls $750 with kings 15% of the time and calls $180 100% of the time, a $180 bet yields 3x more in EV than a $750 bet.

the KK hand against KingBoromir on QTx -

do you think it would be a good play for KingBoromir to bet like $180 on the river with AA? i get that you win a lot less when Hielko calls, but it seems like it is the clear higher EV play if Hielko calls with most of his Q's and stronger, and he is folding hands as strong as KK (as evidenced obv). i also don't think that jamming to look "bluffier" is much of a consideration - KingBoromir has so few bluffs here compared to monsters and he should think that Hielko knows this.

i mean, if Hielko calls $750 with kings 15% of the time and calls $180 100% of the time, a $180 bet yields 3x more in EV than a $750 bet.

Most regs are calling $750 closer to 80-100% of the time w/ KK or AQ for the reasons stated - overpair, 3bet pot, 100bbs, who folds?

what do you think about the set of 9's w/chck call donk bet turn line as you can make him turn hands in to a bluff or even value raise you

Most regs are calling $750 closer to 80-100% of the time w/ KK or AQ for the reasons stated - overpair, 3bet pot, 100bbs, who folds?

but i don`t think good regs are calling 80-100% of the time, and you would think that he considers Hielko to be a good reg. FWF himself said that it`s a spot where KingBoromir expects to have the best hand almost always, yet is getting paid rarely. to be honest, 15% might be generous.

furthermore, again, $750 hardly ever gets called by Qx, but $180 probably gets called a lot.

On the QJ6 flop against the passive reg...

How about 3-bet folding on this flop? I don't like 3-bet getting it in because I think when he shoves he never has KQ/AQ/KT/T9 etc. because our hand looks so strong. I think if he's stacking off he has either 66 or QJ here. I don't think he's shoving KT/T9 because we are pretty deep and our line looks so strong.

But by 3-betting, we get value from draws and one pair type hands. We can balance this out by doing this with sets/two-pairs, or the occasional bluff. When he shoves I think we're almost behind here so I don't think we're being exploited with the flop 3-bet.

As played, I think the turn is a fold. He's not betting AQ/KQ/KT there ever and he can't really have a bluff in this spot so I'd just lay it down and wait for a better spot.

as fwf said, this is a poor application of that concept. sometimes we can raise for value where we expect our opponent to play his worse hands and better hands predictably. in addition, we want him to not only play his worse hands predictably, but we want/need him to continue - otherwise we are merely bluffing to keep from getting bluffed.

we can't be sure how this guy will play his T9/KQ/etc, so this is a poor spot for it.

On the AT hand:

62 combos - 4.7% (range without blockers)
48 combos - 3.6% (range with blockers)

equity when called 26.26%

.2626 * (470.7) + .7227 (-410.7) + .0147 (16) Corrected 1-equity when called
123.6 - 296.8 + .2352 = -173.0

When he folds you win 106 Used to be 102, I think you forgot to count the big blind, 14(open)+14(call)+14(call)+60(squeeze)+4(big blind)=106

106 * x - 173.0 (1-x) = 0
106x - 173.0 + 173.0x = 0
279.0x = 173.0
x = .62

range / (1-x) = 3.6 / .38 ~ 9.5 (percentage)
range / (1-x) = 48 / .38 ~ 126 (combos)

has to work ~62% > villain has to be bluffing (squeeze/folding) with 126 - 48 = 78 combos

So if his entire squeezing range is something like this, we break even.

The 14.1% you came up with was derived from you rounding the 64% up to 66% and multiplying his valuerange by 3 to get to his total range x (4.7 * 3 = 14.1). If you correct for the (small) errors and don't account for blockers, the exact answer is 12.4%.

If you do account for blockers, the answer is 9.5%, a difference of 31% with your initial answer. Did I make a mistake somewhere or do blockers make jamming a whole lot more profitable in this case?