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

Finally Canadian: Episode Two

This video is a two minute preview. To view the entire video, please Log In or Sign Up Now
Get the Flash Player to see this player.
 

Finally Canadian: Episode Two by Ansky

Ansky is playing 4-tables of $2/4 and dissecting his opponents play as well as reviewing a few hands he didn't play to his own satisfaction.

About Finally Canadian Subscribe to

Ansky returns to the virtual felt from across the border in Canada in this series of ghost style videos covering different games in his wheelhouse.

Tags

ansky finally canadian 4-tabling $2/4 400nl 400 nl

Video Details

  • Game: nlhe
  • Stakes: Mid Stakes
  • 44 minutes long
  • Posted almost 3 years ago

Downloads

Premium Subscribers can download high-quality, DRM-free videos in multiple formats.

Sign Up Today


Comments for Finally Canadian: Episode Two

or track by Email or RSS


lassoboy

Avatar for lassoboy

1 posts
Joined 08/2011

I like the live sessions videos! Especially if you have hands ready in dull moments Keep it up

Posted almost 3 years ago

Ansky

Avatar for Ansky

470 posts
Joined 08/2009

Not a big deal, but why are you folding KQ here on BB when there is a reg isolating a limping fish?



Might have been because I was talking about these guys and how they scratch their balls. Also might have been because he made it 24 and I might have not realized that it was a 2b and not a 3b.

Either way, ty that was stupid.

Posted almost 3 years ago

Ansky

Avatar for Ansky

470 posts
Joined 08/2009

Why do you 3-bet to 7bb in position, rather than 9bb, let's say? Do you want them to call more and play oop postflop or you think they're not adjusting and folding too much?



In theory you should always be 3b less IP. It is harder for them to call profitably OOP, so you lay yourself a better price on the steal and you also keep the pot to stack ratio more favorable to you when they do call.

Posted almost 3 years ago

TheGeek

Avatar for TheGeek

1478 posts
Joined 01/2009

Time Link to 00:09:29

Do you think the hands like 77-99 are just jamming over your squeeze pre?

Also, would you expect hands like AJs or AQ to get it in pre here a lot or do you think they'll flat?

Posted almost 3 years ago

DireStr88

Avatar for DireStr88

1419 posts
Joined 08/2010

In theory you should always be 3b less IP. It is harder for them to call profitably OOP, so you lay yourself a better price on the steal and you also keep the pot to stack ratio more favorable to you when they do call.



I experimented with something very similar about a year ago, when you 3bet less than 9bb do you find them significantly increasing their calling range OOP, and with which parts of their range are they calling you with (i.e. are they just set mining or are they calling middle value hands)? Also, do you bother to 3bet a stronger, depolarized range as a default when you do this or a non-dominated polarized range considering those Axs, Kxs hands can become a liability and the SPR is low enough for SCs not to be check jammed on after they cbet and lose their equity share?

Really interested to hear your thoughts on this school of 3betting, because I think it's widely under used.

Posted almost 3 years ago

HighOctane

Avatar for HighOctane

829 posts
Joined 09/2008

Time Link to 00:35:20

One reason, and it probably still is not sufficient, for 3 betting 53s is that it was blind vs btn and since you are going to flat more being in position, 53s is never dominated by other no pair hands (it's dominated but not in the KQ vs KT sense). Also I guess if you are deep it wouldn't be as bad because he can barrel and you are less likely to flat your big pairs preflop because it would be harder to get stacks in by the river, making big pairs more likely to be in his range.

Posted almost 3 years ago

Ansky

Avatar for Ansky

470 posts
Joined 08/2009

Do you think the hands like 77-99 are just jamming over your squeeze pre?

Also, would you expect hands like AJs or AQ to get it in pre here a lot or do you think they'll flat?



I think usually they are jamming, and even if they arent they might fold now. AJs he might have, which also doesnt help me Frown

Posted almost 3 years ago

Ansky

Avatar for Ansky

470 posts
Joined 08/2009

I experimented with something very similar about a year ago, when you 3bet less than 9bb do you find them significantly increasing their calling range OOP, and with which parts of their range are they calling you with (i.e. are they just set mining or are they calling middle value hands)? Also, do you bother to 3bet a stronger, depolarized range as a default when you do this or a non-dominated polarized range considering those Axs, Kxs hands can become a liability and the SPR is low enough for SCs not to be check jammed on after they cbet and lose their equity share?

Really interested to hear your thoughts on this school of 3betting, because I think it's widely under used.



I think they call with everything more, so far it feels like I am getting 4b the same though. You lost me on that last part, can you explain what you are asking?

Posted almost 3 years ago

Sillygoose87

Avatar for Sillygoose87

85 posts
Joined 08/2011

Time Link to 00:36:02

Senor Ansky et all,

Please feel free to disregard this but here are my thoughts on 3-betting low suited connector type hands:

I completely agree with you, and not just because you are better at poker than I am. However, I do not 100% agree with your reasoning, IE I feel something was left out. In essence, when we are 3-betting a polarized range the bottom end will invariably contain bluffs. The way one beats a polarized range is to call more often. This much has been discussed at length. The power of hands like low suited connectors comes from their ability to barrel multiple streets, this power is greatly reduced when oop. Further, when we 3-bet this hand our SPR is greatly reduced which makes maneuvering/barreling less effective.

So what hands are good 3-bet candidates? A really great poster on 2+2 named Ronintalken postulated in an article he wrote in the theory forum that hands like weak jacks and queens represent great candidates because they contain blockers to your opponents calling range and allows us to play perfectly against villain more often. When villain raises we can easily dump our hand or, when we have the nuts portion of our range, giggle like a silly goose and shove.

The kickback I anticipate from people who like to 3-bet low suited connectors (and it's very valid, to be honest), is that our hands will play particularly poorly post-flop when we 3-bet Jxss type hands as we'll be dominated quite frequently... But I think this is really making something out of nothing. First, we aren't dominated nearly as much as we think. Second, because our range contains so many blockers to villains calling range we'll see flops less often. Third, this is the part of our range that's supposed to be dominated fairly often, this is our balance, these are our bluffs. Finally, for every hand that dominates Jxss there are 2 hands that Jxss will play better against than 35ss.


That's my rant and I'm sticking to it.

Posted almost 3 years ago

runners23

Avatar for runners23

129 posts
Joined 01/2011

Time Link to 00:29:00

you were saying this is a great spot to 4B with QJ here. I agree but with ur image vs that villian how good can it really be...I mean u just suked out on that guy with J7s like 14min previous to this.Is there some higher level im not on or not understanding?

Posted almost 3 years ago

runners23

Avatar for runners23

129 posts
Joined 01/2011

Time Link to 00:29:00

Sorry if i come off as a dick here just wanted to know. Very good video so far and loved the first one Thks.

Posted almost 3 years ago

Grindcore

Avatar for Grindcore

2383 posts
Joined 11/2008

you were saying this is a great spot to 4B with QJ here. I agree but with ur image vs that villian how good can it really be...I mean u just suked out on that guy with J7s like 14min previous to this.Is there some higher level im not on or not understanding?



I don't know what stakes you play but most regs at MSNL are professional players and much less sensitive to this sort of stuff than lower stakes regs. Ansky's play on each street was reasonable and he can just shrug it off as a cooler. And there's also a bit of leveling involved even if he did think we were out of line: would we really do it again after showing it down last time? At lower stakes you're probably right it hurts our image a bit more, but it's somewhat compensated by the regs there being less capable of doing something about it. Also, if our image is so bad, villain might flat pre with his premiums.

Posted almost 3 years ago

DireStr88

Avatar for DireStr88

1419 posts
Joined 08/2010

I think they call with everything more, so far it feels like I am getting 4b the same though. You lost me on that last part, can you explain what you are asking?



Sure, if villains are calling OOP vs 3bets more based on your decreased raise size, are you depolarizing your 3bet range to include AQ (or other medium value hands) for value vs. their increased calling ranges and defending your AQ vs. their 4bets by calling in position? And for the bottom of your 3bet range, are you using suited blockers like Axs or Kxs or are you afraid that their increased calling range dominates the bottom of your 3bet range and that SCs are a better choice because of their live equity combined with greater stack depth?

Basically, fwiw in 2009 to 2010 at 200nl to 400nl players were only using a depolarized 3bet range in position (3bet/5bet hands like AK and TT+ for value and blockers like A5-2o and Kxs for bluffs) assuming villains would only 4bet/fold or 4bet/call and never call 3bets OOP and assuming there was no reason for them to call 4bets IP. Once you manipulate villains into calling 3bets OOP by decreasing your raise size, those assumptions no longer hold and depolarizing your 3bet range with AQ, prefering live equity vs. dominated blockers and defending your AQ by calling 4bets in position (I'm assuming 3bet/folding AQ and 5bet shoving AQ are terrible alternatives to calling) seem like logical adjustments that should be made.

Categorically, in position every one agreed that blockers were better than SCs as the bottom of your 3bet range because they had all the advantages of decrease your opponent's 4bet range without the worries of being called since calling 3bets OOP was chastized as being terrible on 2p2 etc. and nobody seems to agree on what the best hands are to 3bet OOP be it suited blockers or suited connectors etc. and I'm wondering whether or not "inviting" calls from the opponent by decreasing our 3bet size makes blockers less desirable IP. Do you think the added lines the suited blockers give you, like being able to bet/call vs. flop shoves or check/call with TPNK as PFR OOP are just better than clean equity in every 3bet situation?

Note: AQ is just an example of a value hand that isn't traditionally 3bet in position vs regulars, I'm sure others apply.

Thanks for reading that and I hope it's understable, it's kind of difficult to articulate.

Posted almost 3 years ago

improva

Avatar for improva

3891 posts
Joined 02/2008

In theory you should always be 3b less IP. It is harder for them to call profitably OOP, so you lay yourself a better price on the steal and you also keep the pot to stack ratio more favorable to you when they do call.



By 3betting that small you create spots where shoving hands like AQ becomes -EV unless villain is 4betting a _really_ wide range and they need fewer postflop skills for a call to be +EV.

8bb - 8.5bb is fine. 7bb is too small.

Posted almost 3 years ago

Ansky

Avatar for Ansky

470 posts
Joined 08/2009

you were saying this is a great spot to 4B with QJ here. I agree but with ur image vs that villian how good can it really be...I mean u just suked out on that guy with J7s like 14min previous to this.Is there some higher level im not on or not understanding?




What grindcore said.

I believe I have said this in previous videos, but I think a common symptom of my ssnl and msnl students is that they are too focused with short term metagame. Just because you ran a bluff 15 minute ago (which is like an eternity while multitabling), does not mean the guy will be so much more likely to think you are bluffing now.

Posted almost 3 years ago




HomePoker ForumsMid Stakes Shorthanded NL → Finally Canadian : Episode Two