---

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

Are you calling if the short stack reg, shoves in hand 1?

And if not, I think it begs the question at what point the BB should be shoving his entire range preflop.

Time Link to 00:11:38

Question 2:Q6s on Q67A two tone board

I kind of feel that we should have folded to the turn bet. And even though there is so little behind on the river, I feel like the shove on the river is too thin.

I know folding two pair seems crazy in a 3-bet pot. But I just think that he has too many nutted hands in his range on the turn.

I'd say his 3-bet calling range out of position is something like:
AA = 33%
AQ - AJ, KQ,
JJ - 99
ATs, KJs, QJs

And his range for check-raising the flop would be something like:
AA, AQ, and flush draws. And that range just crushes us on the turn. Even if you include hands like KQo in his check-raising range on the flop, I think they probably slow down a bit on that particular turn -- even though it should discount AQ and AA in our range.

RIVER: I just don't think KQ is calling a river bet, and I don't really think AQ is folding either.

Enjoying the series - question 2 I got wrong, then totally agreed with you when you explained the answer, very helpful!

BTW off topic, every time I hear this commercial (constantly) I think of Baluga, the voice sounds very similar to me lol. are u in a band perchance?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82UL-l0OFVE

Round 7
Is it really going to be profitable calling 86s when we don't plan to take it away at some point?
We just miss the board so much that we mostly are just going to be folding flop. And even if we hit a draw, were still going to be underdog to his value range, and since we don't think that we cant make him fold, were never winning unless we hit.

Are you calling if the short stack reg, shoves in hand 1?

And if not, I think it begs the question at what point the BB should be shoving his entire range preflop.

I think its an easy fold once the BB shoves. And i dont think he can shove super light here since he runs the risk of the bad player calling him.

And his range for check-raising the flop would be something like:
AA, AQ, and flush draws.

If we assume this is his range, then turn play shouldn't matter because we should just be getting the money in OTF. He's never folding any of these hands.

Time Link to 00:10:34

Baluga- You made a similar choice in line that I disagree with in an earlier "Baluga Show". The pot on turn when he bets 30bb and we call is 126bb; effective stacks will be 37bb. We have plenty of information to know that a reg (any even a fish prob) will not bluff shove with no FE (laying us 4.4 to 1). And we can't even rep a missed draw given the main draw got there on turn so e always have SD value. Thus, the correct play is to jam turn even without this hand as history.

I get that you want his air to continue on river and if there was an SPR of even like .75 left then I can see the argument. But in this case, whats more likely A) he has air, won't call our shove and will shove river as bluff laying huge odds or B) He has some draw or made hand that will have to call off getting 4.4 to 1 and/or he will give up bluffs if we flat so we gain by protecting our equity in a large pot when he folds.

I can't really see a valid argument for A)

Do you disagree?

Time Link to 00:18:04

Baluga,
I think its close between C and B. I don't think we can safely extrapolate from the evidence that he gives up a bluff in a 3bet pot where our range is strong enough to 3bet preflop, call a flop c/r and turn barrel to surmise that he won't 3 barrel in this spot. In this hand our range is much weaker. All we did was flat a CO open on the BTN, and we called a cbet and turn barell. We already have evidence that he can be agressive with low equity. In this example he has river leverage with being able to bet pot so he has more FE. We can have plenty of one pair hands that will fold river here. I think its a marginal spot leaning towards a call on river and the info we get from a call pushes it to a definite "call, but not happy about it".

-Zach

And his range for check-raising the flop would be something like:
AA, AQ, and flush draws.

If we assume this is his range, then turn play shouldn't matter because we should just be getting the money in OTF. He's never folding any of these hands.

I agree. But it wasn't my point.

Do you disagree with what his check-raising range would likely be?

[quote]If we assume this is his range, then turn play shouldn't matter because we should just be getting the money in OTF. He's never folding any of these hands.[/quote]
I agree. But it wasn't my point.

Do you disagree with what his check-raising range would likely be?[/quote]

I might expect him to be a little wider than that, but against an unknown with no dynamic I would probably just get it in OTF. But everyone has different base assumptions against unknowns based on site and stakes, so it's hard to say what is correct with no info. The reason we would just call would be because we expect him to have a decent amount of low equity hands and we want to give him the opportunity to put more money in with a weak range. So if that's the reason we just call OTF, then we should continue to call OTT imo. Otherwise, our assumptions don't seem to add up from street to street.

Round 2
I agree we shouldn't be 3-betting a polarized range if he calls OOP
but
I don't think we've played the hand correctly. Look, you c-bet, he x/r 2.4x and you call - what is your perceived range? How often do you see a so called "bluff call IP"?
I mean, if you call - you almost always have something.
And if you raise, you have ~~ a similar range AND you also may have some bluffs. I'd click it back to 38-40 bbs to induce a spazz. I'd hate my life if a / K / A / 7 shows up. Another thing is, the board is semi-wet and we should protect our hand.

how can i be on the show?

Round 5
Again, the same thing - click it back has the same advantage over the shove - it may induce a spazz, KQ hand comes to mind, whereas it folds to a shove. Not mentioning any other pure bluffs. Flushdraws and made hands will come over the top anyway.
And the argument that Reggie didn't continue bluffing is valid for the river play, we don't know how he is gonna react vs click it back yet.

This should also a part of our overall strategy, if we have never ever clicked it back, then sticking to the standard shove could be better. But on the other hand - bluff 3b shoves occur super infrequently.

Baluga,
I think its close between C and B. I don't think we can safely extrapolate from the evidence that he gives up a bluff in a 3bet pot where our range is strong enough to 3bet preflop, call a flop c/r and turn barrel to surmise that he won't 3 barrel in this spot. In this hand our range is much weaker. All we did was flat a CO open on the BTN, and we called a cbet and turn barell. We already have evidence that he can be agressive with low equity. In this example he has river leverage with being able to bet pot so he has more FE. We can have plenty of one pair hands that will fold river here. I think its a marginal spot leaning towards a call on river and the info we get from a call pushes it to a definite "call, but not happy about it".

-Zach

Just adding to this, doesn't the history of the last hand where he c/folded the river pretty much guarantee he's getting to showdown with his AK/AQ hands?