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

pr1nnyraiding: Episode Six

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.
 

pr1nnyraiding: Episode Six by KRANTZ, WiltOnTilt

In Episode 6, KRANTZ and WiltOnTilt teach you how to float like a butterfly and sting like a bee to crush the hyper aggressive Maniacs and good thinking LAGs through inducing bluffs, staying one step ahead, and using bet sizing and atypical lines to confuse those players who can't help themselves with over-aggression.

About pr1nnyraiding Subscribe to

Krantz and WiltOnTilt provide a heads up No Limit primer. A comprehensive guide to beating small stakes HU NLHE.

Tags

krantz wiltontilt hu head's up hunl aggressive opponents maniacs adjusting to aggression

Video Details

  • Game: nlhe
  • Stakes: Mid Stakes
  • 61 minutes long
  • Posted over 6 years ago

Downloads

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

Sign Up Today


Comments for pr1nnyraiding: Episode Six

or track by Email or RSS


Liquid Cash

Avatar for Liquid Cash

144 posts
Joined 07/2011

Time Link to 01:00:20

This is a bit off topic- However. Here you say you only have to be good about 28-29% of the time for it to be profitable. I just want to make sure I am not missing anything because I calculate the pot odds at 2.5 to 1 roughly which is about 40 % so for it to be profitable you pretty much have to be good every other time right? I really love the videos you guys have made and I am not trying to nit pick I just want to make sure I am figuring this out correctly. Thanks for your time and I think that these videos are amazing.

Posted over 3 years ago

WiltOnTilt

Avatar for WiltOnTilt

2670 posts
Joined 10/2007

This is a bit off topic- However. Here you say you only have to be good about 28-29% of the time for it to be profitable. I just want to make sure I am not missing anything because I calculate the pot odds at 2.5 to 1 roughly which is about 40 % so for it to be profitable you pretty much have to be good every other time right? I really love the videos you guys have made and I am not trying to nit pick I just want to make sure I am figuring this out correctly. Thanks for your time and I think that these videos are amazing.



2.5:1 is 1/3.5 = 28.5%

Posted over 3 years ago

Liquid Cash

Avatar for Liquid Cash

144 posts
Joined 07/2011

Wow amazing response time and I was just logging back in now because I realized my mistake. Thank you.

Posted over 3 years ago

can'twin

Avatar for can'twin

192 posts
Joined 07/2011

Time Link to 00:08:52

I only ask because I know both of you have experienced these situations with such frequency that you may be able to answer this in general terms.

Rosenkrantz states that players who see you calling down their bluffs thinly are usually aware enough not attempt a similar play 'immediately thereafter.'

Assuming that the typical lag players we're discussing are thinking players to the extent to which at least the above statement is true, is the converse also true?

If a particular bluffing spot has worked for your opponent in the past, is it similarly just as likely that a typical (not quite maniacal) lag opponent will attempt the same bluff immediately given the next opportunity in a similar situation?

Given the premise earlier outlined that the lag style is so difficult to play that it's rare to find a strong lag (especially at small stakes I'd assume):
I'm also interested to know what your opinion is regarding how a typical small or lower-mid stakes tag would play in the same scenario after a successful bluff.

This is obviously highly player dependent, but I'm curious about combating a standard General strategy. Would you be comfortable bluffing a tag in the exact same way repeatedly without yet knowing how quickly he will adjust? He hasn't given you a reason not to, after all........

Posted over 3 years ago

can'twin

Avatar for can'twin

192 posts
Joined 07/2011

(sorry if I missed the answer to my last post if it was in one of the episodes -feel free to just tell me to rewatch it if I did. I'm going to be watching them again regardless..)

Posted over 3 years ago

WiltOnTilt

Avatar for WiltOnTilt

2670 posts
Joined 10/2007

I only ask because I know both of you have experienced these situations with such frequency that you may be able to answer this in general terms.

Rosenkrantz states that players who see you calling down their bluffs thinly are usually aware enough not attempt a similar play 'immediately thereafter.'

Assuming that the typical lag players we're discussing are thinking players to the extent to which at least the above statement is true, is the converse also true?

If a particular bluffing spot has worked for your opponent in the past, is it similarly just as likely that a typical (not quite maniacal) lag opponent will attempt the same bluff immediately given the next opportunity in a similar situation?

Given the premise earlier outlined that the lag style is so difficult to play that it's rare to find a strong lag (especially at small stakes I'd assume):
I'm also interested to know what your opinion is regarding how a typical small or lower-mid stakes tag would play in the same scenario after a successful bluff.

This is obviously highly player dependent, but I'm curious about combating a standard General strategy. Would you be comfortable bluffing a tag in the exact same way repeatedly without yet knowing how quickly he will adjust? He hasn't given you a reason not to, after all........



As you mentioned, it really depends on the player, but in general after a successful bluff in a small/medium pot I'd expect most (and I would myself) continue to to hammer away at it even if the spot came up relatively quickly thereafter. The only exception I can readily think of might be preflop with 3bets and 4bets where it's somewhat important to temper the aggression there as to not force them to adjust. Also an exception would be in big pots where people just get fed up such as in 3bet pots where you triple barrel on some "standard" barreling run outs. The second time people might be a bit less to run the river bluff if the first worked correctly since the opponent might be getting more frustrated. Of course it's very hard to know this. Knowing when someone is about to crack is very much an art and is hard to quantify.

It's worth thinking about what might be going on when repeatedly bluffing in some recurring small/medium postflop spots. Them folding might reflect a few different things: 1) show a weakness in their game plan or 2) indicates how they hand read or 3) simply that they do not give you credit for being able to take it to another level higher or 4) they simply had a hand with no showdown value. It's hard to know which one, but a good place to start is seeing certain lines you take with value hands where you never seem to get looked up.

Posted over 3 years ago

can'twin

Avatar for can'twin

192 posts
Joined 07/2011

That's interesting. The earlier in the hand, the quicker even the worst players may adjust. Thus it's still advantageous to hammer successively at their weak post flop spots.

It's worth thinking about what might be going on when repeatedly bluffing in some recurring small/medium postflop spots. Them folding might reflect a few different things: 1) show a weakness in their game plan or 2) indicates how they hand read or 3) simply that they do not give you credit for being able to take it to another level higher or 4) they simply had a hand with no showdown value. It's hard to know which one, but a good place to start is seeing certain lines you take with value hands where you never seem to get looked up.



Very clearly said, thanks *copy/pastes into episode notes.* I agree. It's taking me a while for me to integrate all of this analysis in-game. In the metagame of heads up each of these concepts seem to branch off into more details about their play that are defined by progressively more specific situations. It's a lot to think about. This is the type of thinking that separates the experts from the other players.

Posted over 3 years ago

perfectibilists

Avatar for perfectibilists

55 posts
Joined 01/2014

I never thought about using smaller bets to get aggressive players to bluff more and come over the top. I always do the standard bets flop turn and river. I like how you guys use different bet sizing to get them to do things they probably normally wouldn't do to a normal bet size. Very interesting.

Posted 11 months ago




HomePoker ForumsHeads Up NL → pr1nnyraiding : Episode Six