---

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

Time Link to 00:31:06

How would you like a shove from villain if he had TJ of spades? I mean, if he thinks you have a better draw or if you valuebet thin like 99 as you say you might would do, then a shove with TJs here would be good wouldn't it? Besides, if he sees you as a good reg., he must know you will 2nd barrell that Queen a lot, right? Or am i missing something here?

How would you like a shove from villain if he had TJ of spades? I mean, if he thinks you have a better draw or if you valuebet thin like 99 as you say you might would do, then a shove with TJs here would be good wouldn't it? Besides, if he sees you as a good reg., he must know you will 2nd barrell that Queen a lot, right? Or am i missing something here?

yea that def could be good

You seem to be a great Coaching duo, love it!

Funny to listen to and great explanations.

Both of you have a great talent to really tell your listeners why you do stuff and not only what you do and in such a way that the listeners can easily adopt their own thought process to a higher level.

Thanks guys!

Time Link to 00:09:03

Where the Buffalo Groan imo

Nice vid guys. Very interesting content.

Where the Buffalo Groan imo

Nice vid guys. Very interesting content.

oh give me a home, where the bluffalo groan

You seem to be a great Coaching duo, love it!

Funny to listen to and great explanations.

Both of you have a great talent to really tell your listeners why you do stuff and not only what you do and in such a way that the listeners can easily adopt their own thought process to a higher level.

Thanks guys!

much appreciated, man

In the first hand,

If we have lets say 88 and villian checks the turn, are we gonna bet? If so and villian c/c are we gonna fire rivers?

In the first hand,

If we have lets say 88 and villian checks the turn, are we gonna bet? If so and villian c/c are we gonna fire rivers?

prob showing down 88 most of time

Any word on iphone mv4 for this episode? Episodes 2 through 8 are all available

lol jared you such a cash game donkey, LRR is old hat for the tourney donks

WORD!

Late to catching up with this series, but just wanted to echo everyone else here. Really fantastic job, guys. Thanks for the series.

Time Link to 00:04:55

Here, in the first hand, would you call preflop with any suited broadway of fold all of them (but AK obv.) because of the likelihood of being dominated too much and the playability of a hand would not surpass that? If you would call with AQ it makes sense to at least call with KQs because they have almost the same equity vs the 3% range


This episode has no intro, zOMG

Here, in the first hand, would you call preflop with any suited broadway of fold all of them (but AK obv.) because of the likelihood of being dominated too much and the playability of a hand would not surpass that? If you would call with AQ it makes sense to at least call with KQs because they have almost the same equity vs the 3% range


This episode has no intro, zOMG

not knowing anything else about the guy, I'd be folding those hands worse than AQ as a standard and I don't think folding AQ is unreasonable here given table positions and the small stat sample and no postflop reads. Having some kind of preflop and/or postflop read, it changes things obv.

Also the hot/cold equity doesn't really tell the whole story

Time Link to 00:32:01

Obviously late to this party (thanks for posting another excellent series though guys), but just want to ask a question about one of your 'what if' hands here. You mentioned on the turn you could value bet (albeit thin) here with 88/99, but then on the river you would check/decide (and probably check/fold by the sounds of it) when the 7 rolls off. My question is -

a) Given that the villain raised UTG (even with the fish in the BB) he can't have many sevens in his range (maybe A7ss, 77, 78ss and a couple of others)

b) surely if he did have 7 on that flop he would raise to protect

c) if he just calls on flop you reckon he would fold marginal 7s on turn (e.g. 78)

- then why is 7 on river a bad card to value bet if you did have e.g. 99. I understand you might be worried about value betting the river in general (given that over pairs/sets could be just calling your down) - I just don't understand why the river 7 is that much worse than e.g. 2. Is it merely because of the small likelihood he did call you down with 7 and ends up hitting trips?

it's not so much that we are worried about him having a bunch of combinations of trips, it's that the 7 hits some of our perceived range and there may not be a ton of worse hands that will be excited to call on the turn/river. If the river is a 2 and he has a hand like A7s or 88, he might be able to convince himself to bluff catch since none of our perceived hands improve or maybe talk himself into us having a worse value hand every now and then. Remember, if we aren't putting many 7x in villain's range, then there should be even fewer 6x and 3x, so we're left with some hands like 55/44/88/A6s/65s (most of which can be discounted one way or another) that we need him to bluff catch with a high %, compared to the times we just value cut ourselves against TT+ which probably play this way almost every time.

I disagree about the flop raising to protect with a hand like 7x (or even big overpairs), simply because people aren't sure what to do when they get re-raised. Unless the donk bettor is very straight forward, it's a pretty tough spot to be excited about raise/folding or raise/getting it in with a hand like QQ or A7 just because the range for leading can have some draws and some worse value hands, it's unclear how many worse value hands are going to want to play a big pot for a reraise on the flop, so the guy in position is going to be looking at sets/straights/big draws/few worse value hands when big money gets in. Therefore, it usually makes more sense to just call and play a turn and let the worse value hands keep betting and try to make good decisions on various turn/river run outs.

Thanks for the explanation WoT, makes sense now.