---

Poker Video: No Limit Hold'Em by KRANTZ (Micro/Small Stakes)

Krantz did you realise you were viewing a 50nl HU video ? In my opinion you were rambling too much on abstract concepts and also a little bit too much high level thinking for the average joe you encounter at 50nl HU. Please pay more attention to the actual hands played and adjust according from there. (no need to pinpoint every possible adjustment you can make on every possible line villain could take)

lolz at 1 post, you gotta be joking?

Krantz did you realise you were viewing a 50nl HU video ? In my opinion you were rambling too much on abstract concepts and also a little bit too much high level thinking for the average joe you encounter at 50nl HU. Please pay more attention to the actual hands played and adjust according from there. (no need to pinpoint every possible adjustment you can make on every possible line villain could take)

I kind of agree (w/ the abstract concept part, not the pinpointing adjustments part -- that is relevant at any stakes regardless of skill level), I'll be more conscious of this kind of thing in the future. Hopefully Mark can rein me in if he senses what I'm saying just doesn't make any sense. Everything I say should (hopefully, in an ideal video of this type) make sense for everyone and/or give you guys something to chew on.

It's important to understand that learning poker is all about developing a better understanding of how to think about poker better. Most people playing micros and small stakes aren't thinking about the game correctly -- if they are, it's by accident, or they've got a piece of the puzzle nailed down but the rest is a mess. Looking for a playbook to tell you how to play exact hands in a video like this isn't really useful because the context will always be different when you yourself are at the table playing. There is no one correct way to play pocket eights, for instance... it's always context dependent, and I'm hoping to help you guys improve your methods of evaluating and understanding those shifting contexts.

krantz do you have a reccomendation for a 6max player looking to start heads up as far as videos go here? I have been getting killed heads up at the nl 50 level great vid thanks

krantz do you have a reccomendation for a 6max player looking to start heads up as far as videos go here? I have been getting killed heads up at the nl 50 level great vid thanks

pr1nnyraiding and dogisheadsup, and bosoxx's videos

24offsuits latest video series looks like it would be great for you too

"It's important to understand that learning poker is all about developing a better understanding of how to think about poker better. Most people playing micros and small stakes aren't thinking about the game correctly -- if they are, it's by accident, or they've got a piece of the puzzle nailed down but the rest is a mess. Looking for a playbook to tell you how to play exact hands in a video like this isn't really useful because the context will always be different when you yourself are at the table playing. There is no one correct way to play pocket eights, for instance... it's always context dependent, and I'm hoping to help you guys improve your methods of evaluating and understanding those shifting contexts."
+1
How did MarcoPolo luckbox his way into a series with you? Micros shirt?

Time Link to 00:34:25

@ KRANTZ

I'm a little be confused about that dry flop that we got raised and you said his range is more towards being a bluff or a weak hand.

My understanding from your thoughts is, because we didnt go out of line so far in the match there is no reason for him to raise us on this board, did i get it right?! im just talking about specifying his range that he raise us on this board (obviously the board didnt help us that much but in the same time its unlikely the board improve him that much that he can raise)
My second question is, what kind of image we should have had so this raise from him in a 3bet pot on this board is a more likely that is not a bluff and if we shove we get call most of the time with a strong hand?!

I love the way you explain, when i ask different situation from they know what to do but they dont really know why, which i guess they just memorize it... i think its very very important to know why you take different line of action. hope we see more videos from you.

It's important to understand that learning poker is all about developing a better understanding of how to think about poker better. Most people playing micros and small stakes aren't thinking about the game correctly -- if they are, it's by accident, or they've got a piece of the puzzle nailed down but the rest is a mess. Looking for a playbook to tell you how to play exact hands in a video like this isn't really useful because the context will always be different when you yourself are at the table playing. There is no one correct way to play pocket eights, for instance... it's always context dependent, and I'm hoping to help you guys improve your methods of evaluating and understanding those shifting contexts.

Exactly.
Great vid, looking forward to the rest of the series with you two!

Time Link to 00:20:13

With the 78 what happens if we get raised what is the plan?

My understanding from your thoughts is, because we didnt go out of line so far in the match there is no reason for him to raise us on this board, did i get it right?! im just talking about specifying his range that he raise us on this board (obviously the board didnt help us that much but in the same time its unlikely the board improve him that much that he can raise)
My second question is, what kind of image we should have had so this raise from him in a 3bet pot on this board is a more likely that is not a bluff and if we shove we get call most of the time with a strong hand?!
.

hey,

obv, i'm not Krantz, but i'll give you my take on this hand ( I assume you mean QJs on 963r or something like that?)

I had been fairly aggro, and had 2-barred a few times. So, villain should expect me to keep firing, if he's aware at all. Also, look at the board, its very hard for him to have a hand than can be raising for value. A9 or TT would really be the only value hands, while at the same time, they would be a bad raise given my aggression and the dynamic.

if you contrast that with the last hand of the video, where i call it off with ATo on 764cc, 7o Turn, the villain's raise on 764cc is much stronger. He might raise any set here, any 2pair, any draw ( 45, 56), etc, etc. So if i jammed here, i can't really count on much FE.

As for your 2nd question, board texture really plays a key here. But if you want to bet / 3bet on 963r and get called alot, you prob have to look like a psycho.

hey,

obv, i'm not Krantz, but i'll give you my take on this hand ( I assume you mean QJs on 963r or something like that?)

I had been fairly aggro, and had 2-barred a few times. So, villain should expect me to keep firing, if he's aware at all. Also, look at the board, its very hard for him to have a hand than can be raising for value. A9 or TT would really be the only value hands, while at the same time, they would be a bad raise given my aggression and the dynamic.

this, + if he has those value hands (he can have more/stronger value hands too -- like if he slowplayed an overpair), what's the point of raising with them? you would just fold your bluffs. it makes way more sense to let you see the turn. try to mentally swap places with him. if you are in his shoes, do you have a reason to raise A9 or TT? a set? what are the pros/cons?

With the 78 what happens if we get raised what is the plan?

call, see what the river brings (what card, if he bets, what amount he bets)

this, + if he has those value hands (he can have more/stronger value hands too -- like if he slowplayed an overpair), what's the point of raising with them? you would just fold your bluffs. it makes way more sense to let you see the turn. try to mentally swap places with him. if you are in his shoes, do you have a reason to raise A9 or TT? a set? what are the pros/cons?

Vs players who are good hand-readers and are "high-intensity" in that they will act on their reads, don't you think it's good to value raise in spots like this where you rep a very narrow value range in order to induce action from him? I guess it's a classic leveling spot, but value raising in a spot like this allows you to a) get a read on how he might react in these types of spots where you rep nothing and b) if it goes to showdown, you can start bluffing on these boards where both players often have nothing. The arguments for just calling are good as well, but aren't there some good arguments for raising too? I mean, on the one hand you say if he value raises we just fold all our bluffs so he shouldn't be value raising, but if we want to jam 2 overcards here or oop float, then we aren't folding all our bluffs.

Vs players who are good hand-readers and are "high-intensity" in that they will act on their reads, don't you think it's good to value raise in spots like this where you rep a very narrow value range in order to induce action from him? I guess it's a classic leveling spot, but value raising in a spot like this allows you to a) get a read on how he might react in these types of spots where you rep nothing and b) if it goes to showdown, you can start bluffing on these boards where both players often have nothing. The arguments for just calling are good as well, but aren't there some good arguments for raising too? I mean, on the one hand you say if he value raises we just fold all our bluffs so he shouldn't be value raising, but if we want to jam 2 overcards here or oop float, then we aren't folding all our bluffs.

my take on this is that its very villain + game-flow dependent, but that in a vacuum its not optimal b/c its hard to get played back at by worse without history. It would be much different if you knew the opponent would respond with a lite 3bet, but without that read, we are just hoping he plays back at us when he is likely to be bluffing and we have a pretty strong hand.

I'm very much open for debate on the following....

It seems you are getting into sacrificing EV just to "balance" your ranges, which I disagree with in theory. I understand the reasoning you gave, but I prefer to just play the next spot based on history, and adjust to that. While we can't bluff raise the next board, we can float it, and he has to worry about us being pretty strong. ( so its a different benefit, but still a benefit).

The problem with raising is, we always rep a really narrow range, and we don't necessarily want to be raising our strong hands on 963r.

Vs players who are good hand-readers and are "high-intensity" in that they will act on their reads, don't you think it's good to value raise in spots like this where you rep a very narrow value range in order to induce action from him? I guess it's a classic leveling spot, but value raising in a spot like this allows you to a) get a read on how he might react in these types of spots where you rep nothing and b) if it goes to showdown, you can start bluffing on these boards where both players often have nothing. The arguments for just calling are good as well, but aren't there some good arguments for raising too? I mean, on the one hand you say if he value raises we just fold all our bluffs so he shouldn't be value raising, but if we want to jam 2 overcards here or oop float, then we aren't folding all our bluffs.

yah vs good players, "high intensity" (i like that i may steal it ), those are good arguments for raising. i don't see those conditions in place here, though. it's all about context!