---

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

26:03: you squeeze TT IP vs a guy that seems to be a reg, it obviously is for value, I can't see you squeeze fold TT like ever but.. don't you think its a bit too marginal without history? I personally usually polarize my 3betting/squeezing range hard IP but when I get the feeling my image is getting crazy I mix it up by squeezing 99 TT AQ IP.. it just looked a bit marginal without any history, obviously, it seems that the stars and ftp games are alot more aggro then the games I play in on some euro site, is squeezing/stacking off with TT in that spot std vs stars regs?

31:48: you call 67s from the SB against a pretty weak 17/8 player, would you have 3bet against a strong reg opening at your regular stakes? Also, let's say our hand was 88, the board and actions are completely the same except that the river brings the 7 of spades completing the flush, would you consider riverbluffing? I think when he checks back that K turn he usually has something {like 99 TT QQ Jx} that is going for thin value on the river.

44:24: AcJc hand vs the loose passive player, what are your toughts about check/shoving the turn against thinking aggressive players?

46:38: you float AQ on JdJs3d, what if, you were in villain his shoes, and you had AJ in that spot, your opponent calls IP (a strong player like yourself) and the flush hits, toughts on check/calling?

What are your toughts on minraising a wide range OTB vs 2 regs in the blinds?

I saw you calling pretty wide from the SB and BB, in your opinion, what are the differences between SB and BB that you have to consider before making calls?

solecism,
in the 76ss hand, I think he has Jx or better on the river something like half the time. When he bets when checked to, it's more like 85% of the time.

Aart,

26:03: you squeeze TT IP vs a guy that seems to be a reg, it obviously is for value, I can't see you squeeze fold TT like ever but.. don't you think its a bit too marginal without history?

That's a very standard 3-bet in these games. I'm not too thrilled when I get 4-bet, but I am pretty happy when I get called, and I'm also pretty happy when they both fold. See my response to edmuntus about 3-betting for more on why I don't think you should be polarizing your 3-betting range.

31:48: you call 67s from the SB against a pretty weak 17/8 player, would you have 3bet against a strong reg opening at your regular stakes? Also, let's say our hand was 88, the board and actions are completely the same except that the river brings the 7 of spades completing the flush, would you consider riverbluffing? I think when he checks back that K turn he usually has something {like 99 TT QQ Jx} that is going for thin value on the river.

Whether or not I 3-bet there just depends on how often I expect my opponent to fold to a 3-bet there. I think I'd need about 60% to make 3-betting better than calling.

If I had 88 and the river came 7s, I wouldn't turn my hand into a bluff because I just don't think he's folding a better hand often enough.

44:24: AcJc hand vs the loose passive player, what are your toughts about check/shoving the turn against thinking aggressive players?

I don't like it. A good thinking aggressive player's range here is going to include a lot of hands that he's absolutely not folding but that may check back. Lots of pairs + decent FDs and pairs + OESD + FD, etc.

46:38: you float AQ on JdJs3d, what if, you were in villain his shoes, and you had AJ in that spot, your opponent calls IP (a strong player like yourself) and the flush hits, toughts on check/calling?

I don't like it. The only hands I'm floating on that board are AQ and KQ, so it's not like floats are a huge part of my range. Most of my range is going to be mid PPs, which will check back if he checks but usually call a bet.

What are your toughts on minraising a wide range OTB vs 2 regs in the blinds?

Depends on the regs. I do this vs. nits.

I saw you calling pretty wide from the SB and BB, in your opinion, what are the differences between SB and BB that you have to consider before making calls?

Depends a lot on who the BB is. If the BB is a solid, aggressive player, I'm significantly tighter in the SB because I don't want to get squeezed. If BB is a nit or just a reg who doesn't 3-bet much, I'm probably roughly the same in the BB and the SB. If the BB is a fish, I'm much lighter in the SB than the BB because I get good equity when BB comes along.

yayy just saw this new ghost. can't wait to watch.. Noah's vids are awesome.

Time Link to 00:00:16

You say that villain is going to call the turn very often and fold vs a river 3 barrel. Why would you make a small 1/2 pot turn bet in that case? If he calls a bigger bet and then folds it's even better for you. And since his turn calling range is a lot of pair+straightdraw type of hands his calling range vs a bigger bet doesn't get that much narrower I would guess.

You say that villain is going to call the turn very often and fold vs a river 3 barrel. Why would you make a small 1/2 pot turn bet in that case? If he calls a bigger bet and then folds it's even better for you. And since his turn calling range is a lot of pair+straightdraw type of hands his calling range vs a bigger bet doesn't get that much narrower I would guess.

Sounds like you're right, but I can't find the hand you're talking about. Time stamp goes to the very beginning of the vid.

The hand was @ 8:20 on table 1.

The hand was @ 8:20 on table 1.

Yeah, you're right. I bet small there out of habit because I'm used to a lot of similar spots where a bigger bet folds out a decent amount of hands that I want to call and then fold the river.

When you talk about keeping your range less polarize when 3 betting, you are talking about 3betting out of position right? It makes sense, flatting hands like KQo or ATo even though may be ahead of their pfr raising range, you just don't have enough equity post flop. Since villain will have initiative and position.

But in position it's better to call in position more and 3bet a polarized range? Your main goal in 3 betting in position is just to win the initial raise. Whereas if you 3 bet oop, you are not only trying to set up to win the initial raise but you are also looking for the initiative stab on the flop if he does happen to defend.

I dont know if that makes sense. It's late at night and i'm tired.

I'd just say our deception advantage needn't be so big IP because we're already possessive of the positional advantage - just going from the assumption that we should polarize OOP more than IP. I didn't hear that from NoahSD (because I wasn't attentive enough )

Barrin + Eisflamme,
You guys are right that you can get away with calling more with marginal hands in position. I still usually 3-bet hands like AT/KQ/KJ, though, because the same logic applies... now there's just a bit more equity to calling and a bit more equity to 3-betting and getting called.

I won't 3-bet them all the time against regs that I play with a lot because I'd like them to see them in my calling range sometimes, but I'm still 3-betting them the vast majority of the time in that case. The times when I consistently don't 3-bet them are pretty standard--against stations who rarely fold preflop and rarely fold to c-bets, against people who 4-bet really often, and against people with super tight ranges preflop.

Time Link to 00:37:01

Defintely would be betting here.

Your assumption: villain not have a lot of mid pp's in his range preflop. I disagree; he's 39/30 over a smallish sample and I feel like you have a lot of FE here. Any reasons you're feeling this that I'm just not getting?

Agreed that 9x could be in his range, as well as flush draws and other draws such as gutters and the OESD (this is on the flop). I just imagine this guy is going to c/c decently wide here. Given this, and given the fact that we're losing on any non-K,Q,J river which misses a flush, I'd think we should take advantage of our pot equity and just bet here in position.

I agree that our fold equity isn't phenomenal, but I feel like it's better to be keeping the initiative in the pot here, especially when we have position and can potentially triple A's as bluff (probably not the best guy to run this play against, but still) and bet K's and Q's for value.

Thoughts? Well done on the vid btw.

just noticed that you sort of answered my question above. i feel like villain could still have a 9 often and will fold it a relatively small amt of the time, but vs. the entirety of his range and some small FE, it's still a bet :-P

at least, i think so. you're a BIT better than me though :-D

Can someone please tell me how to get this mod for PS???

Thanks!

-heehaaw12

Defintely would be betting here.

Your assumption: villain not have a lot of mid pp's in his range preflop. I disagree; he's 39/30 over a smallish sample and I feel like you have a lot of FE here. Any reasons you're feeling this that I'm just not getting?

Agreed that 9x could be in his range, as well as flush draws and other draws such as gutters and the OESD (this is on the flop). I just imagine this guy is going to c/c decently wide here. Given this, and given the fact that we're losing on any non-K,Q,J river which misses a flush, I'd think we should take advantage of our pot equity and just bet here in position.

I agree that our fold equity isn't phenomenal, but I feel like it's better to be keeping the initiative in the pot here, especially when we have position and can potentially triple A's as bluff (probably not the best guy to run this play against, but still) and bet K's and Q's for value.

Thoughts? Well done on the vid btw.

FWIW, someone who's 39/30 barely ever limps mid PPs (because they're raising 30% of hands on average). The sample's too small to say too much about his preflop tendencies, but given how rare open limping mid PPs is and the fact that he doesn't have incredibly passive stats over this sample, I think it's very unlikely he has a mid PP here.

I just don't really see anything in your post that overcomes the fact that if we bet we're putting in more chips against a range that beats us with almost no fold equity.

heehaaw,
http://software.deucescracked.com/DC_STARS_052009.exe

I'm going to start displaying my gold star status now, so people will think I'm a fish.

I admit that I'm also guilty of stereotyping players based on their # of stars, but I think there are a lot of players (even good ones) who play on multiple sites. Just because they don't multitable at pokerstars enough to get supernova, doesn't automatically make them a fish. And on the flip side, supernova status does not necessarily mean that someone is a "good player." A lot of players will get supernova by playing tons of sit-n-go's or MTT's, and (especially at these stakes) they may be just learning cash games. Or they're playing a ton of tables and are super-nits.

I've seen a LOT of players at these stakes who multi-table every day and are terrible players. They may think they are pros, but they are really just action junkies. Your stereotypes may be accurate at higher stakes, but at NL200 there just aren't that many players you can assume to be "good" just because they're playing four or six tables.

I did like your video, and I'll definitely watch the next one. Thanks for taking the time to come back and respond to everyone's comments.