---

Poker Video: MTT/SNG by OMGClayDol (Mid Stakes)

Love the vid but could you talk slightly slower? It's hard to keep up sometimes.
I like how you used the wizard for deeper analyzes

Hey man, thanks for your comment. Yep, I realise this and someone else also mentioned the same thing to me. I will slow down in future videos in general, and also in general probably use sng wiz a bit also, and possibly (but not definitely) use Hold Em resources too, since it also allows me give equilibrium ranges exactly based on different stack sizes, as opposed to say Kill Everyone charts which are just based off M assuming everyone has the same etc, although this was talked about this video a bit.

Grats to Falsetto23 for being the first to PM/msg for the HH review btw
(This also means other people do not message me about this anymore, lol)

05:35 - JJ on K75 two tone board.

If this board texture is one where we'd cbet 100% of our air, does that mean you'd cbet this board vs a more thinking villain so that we aren't turning our hand face up, or would you still check behind for pot control vs flopped sets and to get value from smaller PPs? I know most thinking villains wouldn't be limp calling pre to start with, but at t30 I'd still expect some OK players to be open limping some portion of their setmining range from MP.

Time Link to 00:12:48

With <30bbs I'd be wanting to open for less than 3x here, especially because we're on the BTN and we want to have a wide opening range. Opening for >10% of our stack seems a little sub-optimal to me. On balance I think I prefer anything from 2-2.5x, with 2.5x being the max I'd consider. I think t110 accomplishes the same thing as t150 here, especially since neither of the blinds has seemed to have shown themselves to be particularly call happy so far (that I've seen from the video at least). Honestly, I think minraising is often just as effective, and it allows us to maintain a wide BTN opening range, and fewer of our steals have to be successful in order for us to show a profit from them.

Time Link to 00:51:24

Totally agree with isloating wide vs regs who are shoving with ~5BBs, but one thing that I think is worth considering is that when we have unknown players still to act behind us then our iso shove is going to sometimes adversely impact our image, as the hand is definitely going to be shown down. In certain situations I think it can occasionally be more profitable to fold the lower end of our iso range to maintain our image in order to carry on stealing from the unknown blinds, who may well start calling us lighter if they see us iso shoving too wide.

Edit: lol - I should have watched a few more seconds of video before posting

05:35 - JJ on K75 two tone board.

If this board texture is one where we'd cbet 100% of our air, does that mean you'd cbet this board vs a more thinking villain so that we aren't turning our hand face up, or would you still check behind for pot control vs flopped sets and to get value from smaller PPs? I know most thinking villains wouldn't be limp calling pre to start with, but at t30 I'd still expect some OK players to be open limping some portion of their setmining range from MP.

Probably 90% of the 180 man regs aren't really that competent at hand reading and therefore whilst in practice vs. most if I check back there it's usually something like a pocket pair or sometimes ace high, I don't think turning our hand face up is that big of an issue. In any case, I'd usually check back for pot control/to possibly get one street of value later. Agreed that some players will be limping some low pocket pairs, even some regs/thinking players. If you want to balance I think I would prefer to check back some of my stronger hands sometimes too, instead of just c-betting everything. Note that some of the stuff I check behind like worse ace highs I often just fold to a single turn bet by villain.

With <30bbs I'd be wanting to open for less than 3x here, especially because we're on the BTN and we want to have a wide opening range. Opening for >10% of our stack seems a little sub-optimal to me. On balance I think I prefer anything from 2-2.5x, with 2.5x being the max I'd consider. I think t110 accomplishes the same thing as t150 here, especially since neither of the blinds has seemed to have shown themselves to be particularly call happy so far (that I've seen from the video at least). Honestly, I think minraising is often just as effective, and it allows us to maintain a wide BTN opening range, and fewer of our steals have to be successful in order for us to show a profit from them.

Ya I think this is fine and also a preference thing, it's probably ok to open 3x here, since I still wouldn't really open thaaaat wide unless vs. nits at this level here but agreed that as a standard I would usually open a little smaller; like probably 2.25x.. That being said if I 30~ table, TN can't adjust by position so unless not many actions are currently occuring I either have to open 3x everytime at t50, or for e.g. 2.25, and I'd rather open 3x everywhere than 2.25 everywhere as an example. But ya I agree a bit smaller is preferable

Totally agree with isloating wide vs regs who are shoving with ~5BBs, but one thing that I think is worth considering is that when we have unknown players still to act behind us then our iso shove is going to sometimes adversely impact our image, as the hand is definitely going to be shown down. In certain situations I think it can occasionally be more profitable to fold the lower end of our iso range to maintain our image in order to carry on stealing from the unknown blinds, who may well start calling us lighter if they see us iso shoving too wide.

Edit: lol - I should have watched a few more seconds of video before posting

Haha yeah sounds like I did mention something along these lines later, but to clarify often yes folding marginal isolations, or even just shoves full stop is going to be good to avoid going to showdown occasionally, to maintain an image vs. randoms so our fold equity is decent on later streets. In general though I don't think this is huge, and I would probably disagree it adversely affects our image. Or if it does, this isn't a bad enough thing to pass up anything but a marginal edge, generally speaking.

On the contrary in spots where say you are in the BB and facing a shove from anyone and you have a probably VERY SLIGHTLY -EV call since say with 82o you aren't getting the right pot odds to call vs. atc vs. someone who is probably shoving atc, then you can call so people are a bit less inclined to shove light on you after seeing you are willing/capable of making light calls..

On the contrary in spots where say you are in the BB and facing a shove from anyone and you have a probably VERY SLIGHTLY -EV call since say with 82o you aren't getting the right pot odds to call vs. atc vs. someone who is probably shoving atc, then you can call so people are a bit less inclined to shove light on you after seeing you are willing/capable of making light calls..

100% agree with this and think it's def worth mentioning. Imo, it's good both vs an unknown for the duration of this game, and for longer term/meta vs players we expect to come across regularly.

I forgot to say, thanks for doing this series - nice to see DC paying some more attention to this type of game. While I have more experience with 45 mans than 180s, I do play both and this series has a lot of merit imo.

Haha yep I'll try remember to mention it in the future. You're right, it makes sense since I myself recommend taking notes on regulars who made light calls on you and subsequently adjusting by pushing tighter in the future

You're welcome, I did actually apply to DC to coach/make videos for these games since I felt that back then at some stage when I was looking around for videos on 180s I couldn't really find anything specifically for them, and overall I feel like they are pretty teachable/learnable

Best wishes and let me know if you have any questions at anytime! Goes for everyone too.

Probably 90% of the 180 man regs aren't really that competent at hand reading and therefore whilst in practice vs. most if I check back there it's usually something like a pocket pair or sometimes ace high, I don't think turning our hand face up is that big of an issue. In any case, I'd usually check back for pot control/to possibly get one street of value later. Agreed that some players will be limping some low pocket pairs, even some regs/thinking players. If you want to balance I think I would prefer to check back some of my stronger hands sometimes too, instead of just c-betting everything. Note that some of the stuff I check behind like worse ace highs I often just fold to a single turn bet by villain.

That is a very important issue with which I strugle in regular MTTs too. I don t want to ''burn'' money on Cbets at early stages. I believe u played it well, in possition we are able to evaluate fish's hand based on his bet sizing. Smaller PP checks to you on the turn so you may attempt a valuebet.

How do you feel about limping PP in first 2 lvls in early/middle possition?
I think that limping is quite EV+
I mean you meet a lot of randoms who will overlimp, and who don t even try to put opponents on ranges. And when someone isolates u, u have implied odds to try to flop it (especially at 1st lvl).
I mean, I am new to 180s and as long as regs won t recognise it, I would limp them.

How do you feel about limping PP in first 2 lvls in early/middle possition?
I think that limping is quite EV+
I mean you meet a lot of randoms who will overlimp, and who don t even try to put opponents on ranges. And when someone isolates u, u have implied odds to try to flop it (especially at 1st lvl).
I mean, I am new to 180s and as long as regs won t recognise it, I would limp them.

Yeah you can either value bet turn and check back river or check back turn and call river/value bet river. It depends on the board and opponent but the latter is sometimes better because this way you can also sometimes let him bluff, whereas with the first option you only get a street of value if he has a piece. That being said it depends on the board/hand strength, once again, e.g. TT on Jxx I prefer to bet turn since more "bad overs" can come etc..

Open limping PPs, not so sure, a lot of regs do it, a lot of regs don't. I would always limp behind (meaning someone limped first) PPs (probably TT and under, TT is a strong hand but you can't really get thaaat much value when you don't hit, since you make the majority of your money when you hit a set it can be better to even limp behind TT sometimes). Also, limping behind encourages further limping, as you said randoms will overlimp and the more players to a flop, the better, when you have a pocket pair because it's more likely when you hit someone will pay you etc.. Maybe be a little careful with the mid and especially small pocket pairs though since in a limped pot if a reg is giving a lot of action on a board like 752r and you have 22, you are almost up against 55 or 77 exactly, unless he is one of the uncommonish bad regs who are willing to stack off something like 99 or TT on that board. Sometimes 75s overlimped, I guess, but just giving a point out.

I do remember however that a while ago someone said that on their HEM they filtered over a pretty big sample open limping small PPs in earlyish position and it wasn't profitable cEV wise. That being said, if we lose 20 chips A LOT of the time and occasionally (say 1/20 times or something) stack someone or better, I might still be willing to take this slightly -EV play because when I double (or better) my stack I can also be deeper vs. deeper fish/randoms which is good for obvious reasons, whereas if I lose 20 chips it barely affects me, if at all..

As for what happens if someone raises you, IF you do limp, not 100% sure about this. In short, many, many of the regs are just unable to fold top pair top kicker, especially AQ or better on Qxx and same with AK or better on Kxx... Randoms will obviously never fold top pair/overpairs, and a lot of randoms isolate somewhat tight ranges, like they will limp behind AJ or whatever. So if I do limp, I'm definitely calling an isolate from most randoms unless they make it really big. That being said, I think unfortunately vs. most regs you probably have the odds to limp/call with small pp lol since the 180 regs mostly just don't fold top paip, top kicker +.

In short, I don't open limp PPs but I think it's probably ok, and mostly a preference thing. Another thing I kinda talk about is how some of these really marginal thing may affect your decision making when you are mass multi-tabling and therefore I often pass up spots which are marginal to avoid the effect it could have on me mass-multitabling, or whatever.

Would do it up to t30 at most though, at t50 and beyond definitely clear fold with low pps in EP etc, and open limping them becomes pretty bad. Reason is basically because implied odds aren't as good.

In general you wanna consider a few things, the opponent (i.e. how likely he is to stack off/how likely you will get paid), if it's a multi-way pot (since the more opponents, the more likely you get paid) and of course effective stack sizes. Also in position/oop. In a heads up pot I'd want at least 1-12 or so, in position, and prob more like 1-15 at minimum oop. You hit like 1/8.5 times but you obviously don't always get paid off, and sometimes they have a higher set than yours AND even if you get it in vs. an over pair you don't have 100% equity of the pot. These numbers are just approximate, if it's multi-way be more generous with the odds you need, if the opponent is very good and won't pay off you need way better odds, if you are oop you need better odds etc etc. Finally a small point is the smaller the pp, the more likely it is that you get set over setted, which is something worth at least considering.

Hope that helps, gl!