---

Poker Video: No Limit Hold'Em by sthief09 (Mid Stakes)

Looks good so far. D3rJack's volume is too faint tho.

Time Link to 00:51:09

I would fold here because i would put a passive guy like on a range of two pairs, sets and sometimes over pairs

I don't think a passive guy/girl would ch/r all in with top pair

but you guys say its very standard to get it in here. Do i give passive people to much credit for having a hand when they raise?

I would fold here because i would put a passive guy like on a range of two pairs, sets and sometimes over pairs

I don't think a passive guy/girl would ch/r all in with top pair

but you guys say its very standard to get it in here. Do i give passive people to much credit for having a hand when they raise?

It's just 22 hands. You can't make any sort of assumption outside of "general fish." Even if we knew for sure he was a 45/5 but nothing else about him, it still tells us little about postflop. It's likely he's passive postflop but I've seen plenty of fish who are loose/passive preflop and aggro/spazzy postflop.

He's a fish, and when fish make overbet pushes on the flop it's usually something really stupid like top pair (often), pair+draw, or random spaz bluff. For 30bb, I'd need an extremely strong read to not snap call. I'd probably call off 100bb there tbh. Most fish are oblivious to board texture, so the general consideration that "raise on 876 flop represents 2pr+" goes out the window.

Looks good so far. D3rJack's volume is too faint tho.

I tried to level out the volumes but it was introducing some background noise that made it worse. I'll see what I can do to make next week's part better. I think/hope that it's not bad as is, but I agree it could be better.

It's just 22 hands. You can't make any sort of assumption outside of "general fish." Even if we knew for sure he was a 45/5 but nothing else about him, it still tells us little about postflop. It's likely he's passive postflop but I've seen plenty of fish who are loose/passive preflop and aggro/spazzy postflop.

He's a fish, and when fish make overbet pushes on the flop it's usually something really stupid like top pair (often), pair+draw, or random spaz bluff. For 30bb, I'd need an extremely strong read to not snap call. I'd probably call off 100bb there tbh. Most fish are oblivious to board texture, so the general consideration that "raise on 876 flop represents 2pr+" goes out the window.

didnt know that, you just put some more +EV to my game, thank you man

My favourite episode of this series so far. Both of you guys are doing real nice analysis. I'm glad we'll see some more - I'd suggest even a whole series for the next season.

Time Link to 00:15:17

I feel once the fish raised it's not close at all. Also there's the consideration that sb could have been planning to check raise a strong range too with 100bbs, if he had even just an open ended straight draw, it's not a bad ship for him knowing that when the money goes in he's getting better than 2-1 on his $. I'd feel like if the FD was stronger or the straight draw was higher it'd be a closer spot. When I saw the action I was thinking insta-fold with 8tcc 200bbs deep.

Also the turn and river becomes easier for you to play in position with a draw than it is for villain with whatever he has. I think flatting the reraise is even better than making a small raise. His hand becomes really defined with further action.

Ipod version of this video?

Time Link to 00:04:22

I can see all the reasons for the 2ndBarell here, but I mean,
when you 2ndBluffbarell this hand, you can practically bluff here 100% which is very unoptimal...

I can see all the reasons for the 2ndBarell here, but I mean,
when you 2ndBluffbarell this hand, you can practically bluff here 100% which is very unoptimal...

theoretically you are correct. we will be value betting some Kx and 9x/AA/boats but if we are raising 53o and 2 barreling it we're at least at 90% bluffs. but as the results show, it doesn't matter if villain isn't astute enough or is playing too many tables to exploit us for it. if villain is a tough regular whom we play with often, then it's terrible and we should just give up on the flop as it's literally the bottom of a range that is super loose to begin with.

theoretically you are correct. we will be value betting some Kx and 9x/AA/boats but if we are raising 53o and 2 barreling it we're at least at 90% bluffs. but as the results show, it doesn't matter if villain isn't astute enough or is playing too many tables to exploit us for it. if villain is a tough regular whom we play with often, then it's terrible and we should just give up on the flop as it's literally the bottom of a range that is super loose to begin with.

Ok, I see^^

Time Link to 00:16:18

But when you do not expect him to bluff often the turn, then I anyways prefer betting the flop.
Yeah it is true,
less better hands folds (maybe 33-66) and worse worse hands call,
but if you do not want to play here for bluffinduce than betting the flop has at least the sense in making PotEQ-shares to fold and collecting the deadmoney which is actually for us a good result when we do not expect him to buff on the turn often...

But when you do not expect him to bluff often the turn, then I anyways prefer betting the flop.
Yeah it is true,
less better hands folds (maybe 33-66) and worse worse hands call,
but if you do not want to play here for bluffinduce than betting the flop has at least the sense in making PotEQ-shares to fold and collecting the deadmoney which is actually for us a good result when we do not expect him to buff on the turn often...

if you don't think he bluffs the turn, you can simply fold the turn when he bets. you don't get to see 5 cards, but if he had a better hand to begin you avoided putting flop money in with at best 25% equity.

if you plan on 2 barreling most turns given your equity and the prevelance of pocket pairs in his range, then I'm okay with that. I just think betting flop then being done with the hand is the worst option here.

btw, protecting equity is a very minor concern. small pot, and we have the nut no pair so only hands like JTs and 98s have the 6 full outs.

I'm always interested in counter-arguments so lmk if you don't agree.

.

I'm always interested in counter-arguments so lmk if you don't agree.

That is a cool atitude (to be open), imo
But here after "rethought" it, I am now also on the cb-side b/c in fact we have here the Nut_no-pair" and also the pot is small -> so your are fundamentally right that here making PotEQ-shares to fold and collecting the deadmoney is not a very strong reason for an action.

I guess your opinion would anyways maybe change if we would have here for example 33?
Just b/c our hand is then regards to more parts of Villain`s range vulnerable?
Or would you also prefer here to checkback?