---

Poker Video: No Limit Hold'Em by threads13 (Micro/Small Stakes)

Very nice vid!

vs. a TAG, you say you don't hate calling KK in MP - could you expand on that a bit? fwiw, I'm a 6max player with very little FR experience, I'd only be calling KK in CO/BTN with someone left to act that I expect to squeeze relatively often, and/or with fish in the blinds, would never occur to me to flat in MP? Thanks!

Sure, when you're playing vs aware TAGs you have to be aware of your perceived range. Your perceived range looks crazy strong when you 3-bet here. You can't go crazy 3-bet bluffing too much as his range is strong, and there's still several people left to act that can just happen to show up with a hand. So, we can't bluff a lot. In general when we can't have a lot of bluffs it becomes harder to value bet (he'll bluff catch less if he doesn't think we're bluffing). So, since we can't really be bluffing a lot, he should be able to play really well against our range when we 3-bet. Meaning he probably makes more mistakes vs us if we flat KK than if we 3-bet it. Thus, we probably do better to flat KK in that spot without image.

In a 6-max game people are more default getting it in with AK,QQ, JJ type hands pre-flop, and thus 3-betting KK is going to be much more appealing. That's just a case of where ranges change because of the general game dynamics of 6-max vs FR (players don't like getting it in as wide in FR in general). Also, it's way easier to build an active image pre-flop because you're facing wider ranges, so 3-bet bluffing is more of viable strategy. So, people expect more bluffs and your stats/image will tend to agree with the story they expect. When people see a story they want to believe in, and see it confirmed, you can expect them to react. Thus, your image and people's general behavior makes 3-betting KK much more appealing.

Time Link to 00:29:38

Great explanation of perceived ranges in that spot, makes perfect sense.

I'm asking questions while watching the video, apologies if I ask about something you address later in the vid.

Here you have A3o on table 4 in the CO, and start saying it's an interesting spot because we might be thinking about stealing with this hand against tight players left to act, but we want to think about what hands we want to be stealing with against tight players - and then you flop a straight bvb on table 2.

You continue talking about hands to play against tight players a few minutes later, talking about the diff between 66 and T9s utg against a tight lineup left to act - here, though, in LP is this not a good steal opportunity if we have tight players to act? The postflop value of this hand isn't great, just like the 66 utg discussion, but isn't the pf steal value good enough if the players left to act are folding a ton to a LP steal? As you might guess from my question, I like to steal with a pretty wide range until someone behind me gives me a reason .to narrow my range.

Never mind, you did address it a few minutes later, thanks!

Time Link to 00:37:04

Any particular reason you raise to $1.25 from the cutoff w/ Q6 suited on table three here? You've bounced around between raise sizes and I didn't know if this was an accidental reflection of the strength of your hand manifesting itself in your open size.

Any particular reason you raise to $1.25 from the cutoff w/ Q6 suited on table three here? You've bounced around between raise sizes and I didn't know if this was an accidental reflection of the strength of your hand manifesting itself in your open size.

Na, it has nothing to do with my specific hand's strength. I typically use different raise sizes by position and I also make bigger raises when there's a bad player I'll be isolating. I'm making it 4bb in EP, 3bb in MP, 2.5bb from LP. The stronger my range, the bigger the raise. If there's a bad player in the blinds, I make the raise size bigger. So, I'll make it 4bb across the board (I probably could make it 5bb in EP then). If the loose and bad player from the blinds is short stacked, I make just make it 3bb anyways because I won't have any trouble getting his stack in, and that keeps the SPR a little bit higher so that I have a little more flexibility.

Time Link to 00:52:23

I'm not sure whether I get your point on checking back A9. Let me see whether I get it. You are saying that we're not going to double barrel because we don't think we have a lot of FE on a double barrel, so checking back A9 on the flop does two things for our range:
1.) Because we aren't betting A9, our flop betting range is stronger and does better against his flop calling range. Also, our double barrel range is also more weighted towards value, which is good since our turn bets aren't getting a lot of folds
2.) The EV of checking A9 on the flop and c-betting A9 on the flop are about the same, but it allows us to have a more +EV double barrel range.

Sound about right?

I'm not sure whether I get your point on checking back A9. Let me see whether I get it. You are saying that we're not going to double barrel because we don't think we have a lot of FE on a double barrel, so checking back A9 on the flop does two things for our range:
1.) Because we aren't betting A9, our flop betting range is stronger and does better against his flop calling range. Also, our double barrel range is also more weighted towards value, which is good since our turn bets aren't getting a lot of folds
2.) The EV of checking A9 on the flop and c-betting A9 on the flop are about the same, but it allows us to have a more +EV double barrel range.

Sound about right?

Yep, you got it.

Sure. I actually want to get rid with a lot of these (maybe I'll do that now that I'm thinking about it). I used to have a monster HUD, but as I play the more I want to simplify things and rely on note taking. I'll probably get rid of stuff like Donk bet flop, and limp-call, and just look at them on my HUD.

Name/Hands/Steal/BB fold vs Steal
VPIP/PFR/3-bet/Squeeze/Fold to 3-bet
Flop c-bet/Fold to flop c-bet/Donk bet flop/Limp-call
EP/MP/CO/SB/BTN,<------------------ (this line is all raise first in by postion)

Is there any way you can upload your HUD link so I can import it? My old computer crashed and I need to redo my 6max HUD on a new computer...

Is there any way you can upload your HUD link so I can import it? My old computer crashed and I need to redo my 6max HUD on a new computer...

Unfortunately I've changed my HUD since this moment. I don't mind sending my current one, but it's quite a bit different now.

Unfortunately I've changed my HUD since this moment. I don't mind sending my current one, but it's quite a bit different now.

That would be great! Do you feel like the change is an improvement. Another thing I would love to know is how you use aggression factor,aggression frequency and aggression percentage. I have been playing for years and I use these to gage how aggressive an opponent is but I steal don't really know the difference between the two. I know the formulas but I still can't put the difference in words. Also while working on a popup for my HUD under Aggression Holdem Manager has Aggression factor but then it has Aggression percentage and when you put aggression percentage total it shows up in the HUD as aggression frequency, which is it aggression frequency or aggression percentage because they are different aren't they? I tried emailing holdem manager but they just sent me a link to the stat definitions which didn't help at all

That would be great! Do you feel like the change is an improvement. Another thing I would love to know is how you use aggression factor,aggression frequency and aggression percentage. I have been playing for years and I use these to gage how aggressive an opponent is but I steal don't really know the difference between the two. I know the formulas but I still can't put the difference in words. Also while working on a popup for my HUD under Aggression Holdem Manager has Aggression factor but then it has Aggression percentage and when you put aggression percentage total it shows up in the HUD as aggression frequency, which is it aggression frequency or aggression percentage because they are different aren't they? I tried emailing holdem manager but they just sent me a link to the stat definitions which didn't help at all

I'm pretty sure Aggression Percentage = Aggression Frequency. I personally don't really use Aggression Factor at all. It takes forever to converge and it isn't really that intuitive like Aggression Frequency is. I actually don't use frequency that much either, but much more than AF. You do have to look at it in conjunction with other stats. For example, if a guy is playing a PF style of 11/9 he SHOULD have a higher aggression than a guy playing 50/20 because the nit just has better hands more often - which would lead to him being more aggro. This goes from street to street. The more aggro the guy is on the flop, the more air he has on the turn. The streets are connected. Generally speaking, seeing frequencies over 40% can be high, and they should tend to decrease from street to street. So, if you see post-flop frequencies of something like (flop/turn/river) 40/35/30... that's a pretty aggro, but not ridiculously out of line, tough player. If you see something like 50/40/20... that's a player who's likely 2-barreling a lot, and then runs out of steam on the river. As always, check your sample sizes. It takes a lot of hands to get a sample on the river stats because not many hands get to the river.

Here's the file. Make sure you select the correct site in the "use for" area. I started by using the Leak Buster HUD, but I've made a lot of changes to it.

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=555JSURT

At the 18:30 mark on table 3, you elect to bluff shove the river. You bet about $40 into a $28 pot. My question is about the size. Why wouldn't you bet a smaller amount, say pot or 2/3 pot? It seems like a spot where you could risk less & get the same result.

At the 29:00 minute mark on table 1, you get QQ in the SB & elect to flat vs a button raise from a player we have no stats on & 2 fish who had limped. My question is why wouldn't you 3-bet there? I understand the point you made about keeping the fish in, but I would 3-bet there as we are out of position & our hand loses equity the more players we face.
I've been losing w/ QQ over my last 50k hands, so I found this to be an interesting spot since I would play it different & would love to hear any thoughts you have on playing QQ in general. Thanks.

At the 54:00 minute mark on table 4, you get 99 in the small blind vs a BTN open raise. My question about this hand is similar to my last one regarding the QQ. Why do you flat as opposed to 3-betting?

At the 18:30 mark on table 3, you elect to bluff shove the river. You bet about $40 into a $28 pot. My question is about the size. Why wouldn't you bet a smaller amount, say pot or 2/3 pot? It seems like a spot where you could risk less & get the same result.

I feel like shoving actually gets a few extra folds such that we do better to shove even though it risks more. I showed some math with this in my first short. Check that out and let me know if you have any questions.

At the 29:00 minute mark on table 1, you get QQ in the SB & elect to flat vs a button raise from a player we have no stats on & 2 fish who had limped. My question is why wouldn't you 3-bet there? I understand the point you made about keeping the fish in, but I would 3-bet there as we are out of position & our hand loses equity the more players we face.
I've been losing w/ QQ over my last 50k hands, so I found this to be an interesting spot since I would play it different & would love to hear any thoughts you have on playing QQ in general. Thanks.

I think we do better by letting the bad players in than we do by 3-betting and getting a lot of folds. I'm not too worried about an equity loss because I think we will be play very well post-flop vs fish. The limpers are very likely to make more mistakes which adds to our equity. Basically, keeping them in likely sets up situations what we play better post-flop than everyone else, while 3-betting just gets a lot of folds as the player won't have much of a reason to think we are bluffing. If I had some image or knew anything about the player I would be 3-betting here very, very often. As is, I just expect him to fold to my first 3-bet a lot.

He'll still continue with KK+,AK though.

At the 54:00 minute mark on table 4, you get 99 in the small blind vs a BTN open raise. My question about this hand is similar to my last one regarding the QQ. Why do you flat as opposed to 3-betting?

I think by 3-betting he mostly just folds a whole bunch. Most of the stuff he calls with does well vs 99. He'll call with AQ, JJ, etc. So, we just set up a situation where our equity isn't that good, but the pot is really big. That's a bad situation. By flatting I keep all of his worse hands in and can allow him to bluff when I'll be able to call fairly often. That's a good situation.

In both of these cases I didn't expect to get as much action from worse hands by 3-betting as I do by calling. I really only 3-bet 99 if I feel like I can shove over a 4-bet.

At ~48:00 when you have A9o against a loose passive fish, what are the advantages of betting the turn compared to checking and taking your A9 to showdown? You mentioned that you don't mind checking the flop, because villain is loose/passive... I totally agree. But can't we apply the same logic to the turn situation? We have A high with a decent kicker versus his range (AK/AQ would've raised pre, maybe not 100% because he's loose/passive but I think it's close). So if we bet, he'll only call with hands that beat us and will not fold to a turn barrel. Or do you think villain is bad enough so he'll call with A4, A5, 45s, 56s, xxcc. So we're also betting for thin value?

Just wondering, because this is a spot where I usually take a 'showdown-line'

Awesome series btw, gonna watch all eps asap

At ~48:00 when you have A9o against a loose passive fish, what are the advantages of betting the turn compared to checking and taking your A9 to showdown? You mentioned that you don't mind checking the flop, because villain is loose/passive... I totally agree. But can't we apply the same logic to the turn situation? We have A high with a decent kicker versus his range (AK/AQ would've raised pre, maybe not 100% because he's loose/passive but I think it's close). So if we bet, he'll only call with hands that beat us and will not fold to a turn barrel. Or do you think villain is bad enough so he'll call with A4, A5, 45s, 56s, xxcc. So we're also betting for thin value?

Just wondering, because this is a spot where I usually take a 'showdown-line'

Awesome series btw, gonna watch all eps asap

Good question.

I mostly expect him to bet a K into us on the turn. So, when he checks the turn he ends up having a range of air and weak pairs. I agree that he's unlikely to fold any pair but he has way more air. If he's never going to bet that air, there's no point in giving him a free card to catch up and beat us when he has 6 outs most of the time. We could bet the flop for the same reason, but if we know he's going let us know when he has a K by betting the turn, we can check the flop for that extra information. Once he checks the turn we have a much better idea about his range and can be a cleaner bet. You could also just do something like bet 1/3 that may get you some calls from worse A-high but still gets his air to fold.

It's one of this situations where we are likely to have the best hand, and unlikely to get called by a range that we do well against, yet we still bet. It seems a little funner, but basically if we know we have the best hand most of the time then checking is a mistake. If we check in this spot we should be hoping to induce a bluff or a light call - a mistake from him. If that is unlikely to happen (it is) then he never makes mistakes. So, we shouldn't check and be the only one to make a mistake. We lose in that situation.

Time Link to 00:12:15

Hope this is not too late to ask questions on this episode. I am reviwing it, still a lot of useful info to work on my game.

You are mentionning that we need to 3 bet more vs tight players that folds a lot to 3 bet and that we should have a bluffing range as wide as our value range. In term of fold to 3 bet %, as a starting point, what could be considered a player that folds a lot to 3 bet? I mean, I guess vs a guy that folds less than 50% of the time, 3 betting light is probably almost unprofitable, vs a guy that fold 50-60% we could have a x% of our range as a bluff and so on...

Hope this is not too late to ask questions on this episode. I am reviwing it, still a lot of useful info to work on my game.

You are mentionning that we need to 3 bet more vs tight players that folds a lot to 3 bet and that we should have a bluffing range as wide as our value range. In term of fold to 3 bet %, as a starting point, what could be considered a player that folds a lot to 3 bet? I mean, I guess vs a guy that folds less than 50% of the time, 3 betting light is probably almost unprofitable, vs a guy that fold 50-60% we could have a x% of our range as a bluff and so on...

Over a good sample size, seeing a fold to 3-bet over 70% is a pretty good indicator that you should have a really wide bluffing range and a really narrow value range. It really is one of those things that a stat isn't the best way to do it. It's going to be based on things like... how often does he fold to 3-bets to you, what's both of your positions, will he respond or just keep folding, etc. The fold to 3-bet stat is a variable of course, but only one of of a few.

I'm pretty sure Aggression Percentage = Aggression Frequency. I personally don't really use Aggression Factor at all. It takes forever to converge and it isn't really that intuitive like Aggression Frequency is. I actually don't use frequency that much either, but much more than AF. You do have to look at it in conjunction with other stats. For example, if a guy is playing a PF style of 11/9 he SHOULD have a higher aggression than a guy playing 50/20 because the nit just has better hands more often - which would lead to him being more aggro. This goes from street to street. The more aggro the guy is on the flop, the more air he has on the turn. The streets are connected. Generally speaking, seeing frequencies over 40% can be high, and they should tend to decrease from street to street. So, if you see post-flop frequencies of something like (flop/turn/river) 40/35/30... that's a pretty aggro, but not ridiculously out of line, tough player. If you see something like 50/40/20... that's a player who's likely 2-barreling a lot, and then runs out of steam on the river. As always, check your sample sizes. It takes a lot of hands to get a sample on the river stats because not many hands get to the river.

Here's the file. Make sure you select the correct site in the "use for" area. I started by using the Leak Buster HUD, but I've made a lot of changes to it.

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=555JSURT

Hi. First of all geat series!
About your new HUD stats, why are stopped using PFR and Agression stats? Do you think they are not that important or you are just cheking them in the pop up menu if necessary? I thought PFR is "must to have' stat...?
Thanks for reply in advance.

Hi. First of all geat series!
About your new HUD stats, why are stopped using PFR and Agression stats? Do you think they are not that important or you are just cheking them in the pop up menu if necessary? I thought PFR is "must to have' stat...?
Thanks for reply in advance.

I have PFR on my HUD, but Aggression Factor or Frequency I don't. I will sometimes check Aggression Frequency via my popup to see if anything is really interesting (numbers that fall drastically from the norm), but I've actually removed Aggression Factor completely. I have absolutely no way of ever looking at that number. That should give you an idea how important I think that stat is.

I'm sorry if I sound stupid (I am a fish after all), but why is aggression factor unimportant? I wish, I had a better understanding of these things. Do you use the PFR/Agg freq. and notes to like determine how often he is likely to double/triple barrel postflop?

I'm sorry if I sound stupid (I am a fish after all), but why is aggression factor unimportant? I wish, I had a better understanding of these things. Do you use the PFR/Agg freq. and notes to like determine how often he is likely to double/triple barrel postflop?

To me it's really not intuitive. To calculate it, it's like add all the raises and the bets and divide by the calls... and then you have to figure out where you're at in the lunar cycle or something.

.......... or I could just look at the aggression frequency and see the percentage of time they bet or raise. I think that's way more intuitive

Also it takes forever to converge anyways. VPIP/PFR converges much faster and usually will give you an idea of how your opponent thinks about the game. After a lot of hands I'll start looking at aggression frequency more, but by then I probably have played enough that I have a bunch of notes on the player anyways so it still is only useful every once in a while.

I just can't see a reason to ever use aggression factor now that we have aggression frequency. Aggression frequency is far superior.

Ok Thanks a lot Threads13 for the thorough answer. I'm working on my HUD setup still. I'm kinda a noob, when it comes to HEM as i've played on sites which didn't support it for most of my active poker life. This will help. Thanks!!

Fishy

I have PFR on my HUD, but Aggression Factor or Frequency I don't. I will sometimes check Aggression Frequency via my popup to see if anything is really interesting (numbers that fall drastically from the norm), but I've actually removed Aggression Factor completely. I have absolutely no way of ever looking at that number. That should give you an idea how important I think that stat is.

Hehe. I understand now, thx.

BTW, I asked you about PFR, cause there is no this stat in the file you upload here:"leakbusterfullring".