---

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

Really bad analysis in the first hand imo

Discounting 2x because of preflop hand combos is pretty standard but using the fact that he minraised (and didn't raise bigger) to discount Jx is completely ludicrous. Fish minraise all the time, with random hands and on random board textures. Using his flop sizing to basically justify sticking in 100bbs with no pair is absurd.

"He can't have a flush draw and he can't have a jack, because if he had it, he'd be trying to put more money in the pot, and not give us the right price if we have a pocket pair to counterfeit him"

Essentially you're making certain assumptions about his game that he's capable of thinking about sizing his value range appropriately ("if he had a jack, or a flush draw, he'd raise bigger), and at the same time making the assumption that he's nonthinking and doesn't realize he's repping an extremely thin value range on this texture.

You're making way too many assumptions with no info on the player. As the board ran out I don't completely hate the calldown. I'd expect a lot of fish to randomly raise a jack on the flop (for information, or whatever they think they're doing it for), but the queen rolling off on the turn and our opponent betting $20 should discount a jack a bunch. I feel a lot more confident in this assumption vs an unknown than about any assumptions about his flop range. Seriously, you see so much random stuff from fish on this flop, including hands like 33-TT and weak Jx, as well as a bunch of total air, and 2x if they ever get there with that pre

Essentially you're making certain assumptions about his game that he's capable of thinking about sizing his value range appropriately ("if he had a jack, or a flush draw, he'd raise bigger), and at the same time making the assumption that he's nonthinking and doesn't realize he's repping an extremely thin value range on this texture.

Thanks for telling me what I was doing - I was wondering, and now I know!

Really bad analysis imo

Thank you for your feedback.

One more note about the first hand: you go out of your way to talk about how we have so few hands on our villain that we can't make too many preflop assumptions based on our low sample. And then you justify getting 100bbs in with A-hi based on a slew of seemingly arbitrary postflop assumptions. There's a disconnect there

Really doubt you would show that hand if villain showed up with AJ. Seems like you just picked a bunch of lucky / sensationalist hands and tried to pass them off as instructional content

Thank you for your continued feedback.

If you believe I'm a fraud please pass your concerns to the DC management. If they agree with you I will be happy to resign my post.

Really bad analysis in the first hand imo

Discounting 2x because of preflop hand combos is pretty standard but using the fact that he minraised (and didn't raise bigger) to discount Jx is completely ludicrous. Fish minraise all the time, with random hands and on random board textures. Using his flop sizing to basically justify sticking in 100bbs with no pair is absurd.

"He can't have a flush draw and he can't have a jack, because if he had it, he'd be trying to put more money in the pot, and not give us the right price if we have a pocket pair to counterfeit him"

Essentially you're making certain assumptions about his game that he's capable of thinking about sizing his value range appropriately ("if he had a jack, or a flush draw, he'd raise bigger), and at the same time making the assumption that he's nonthinking and doesn't realize he's repping an extremely thin value range on this texture.

You're making way too many assumptions with no info on the player. As the board ran out I don't completely hate the calldown. I'd expect a lot of fish to randomly raise a jack on the flop (for information, or whatever they think they're doing it for), but the queen rolling off on the turn and our opponent betting $20 should discount a jack a bunch. I feel a lot more confident in this assumption vs an unknown than about any assumptions about his flop range. Seriously, you see so much random stuff from fish on this flop, including hands like 33-TT and weak Jx, as well as a bunch of total air, and 2x if they ever get there with that pre

I have to disagree, I can see your points, but I usually find a min raise or a small raise on a paired flop to be a bluff, unless theres some metagame going on. I usually think to my self, why would he raise me off my hand, if he floppet trips, or has a really strong hand? But I would personally re-raise him of his hand and end the hand right there, 'couse what if he bets 15-17 when the queen lands, in this ex. this could easily be a vbet and we'd have to fold imo.

One more note about the first hand: you go out of your way to talk about how we have so few hands on our villain that we can't make too many preflop assumptions based on our low sample. And then you justify getting 100bbs in with A-hi based on a slew of seemingly arbitrary postflop assumptions. There's a disconnect there

Really doubt you would show that hand if villain showed up with AJ. Seems like you just picked a bunch of lucky / sensationalist hands and tried to pass them off as instructional content

I can see where you're comming from with this, I have had my suspicions as well, but have wachted all of the vids that Tim has done, and seen him hand read this well in other vids, where he hadn't seen the action (euro trip). He is just that good

Thank you for your continued feedback.

If you believe I'm a fraud please pass your concerns to the DC management. If they agree with you I will be happy to resign my post.

I think you should view this as a compliment Tim, that you hand read so well, that people think that you're being results oriented.

Where's the love?

Time Link to 00:55:22

What do you think of villain's play in the hand? I know I would've cbet the flop, but is not cbetting it bad (or better than firing)?
How much of your 3bet calling/turn stabbing range is Kx with with x>8? Seems to me his river bet is good even though it's bad (in this case), applying the same logic you are to the hand.

Really bad analysis in the first hand imo

Discounting 2x because of preflop hand combos is pretty standard but using the fact that he minraised (and didn't raise bigger) to discount Jx is completely ludicrous. Fish minraise all the time, with random hands and on random board textures. Using his flop sizing to basically justify sticking in 100bbs with no pair is absurd.

"He can't have a flush draw and he can't have a jack, because if he had it, he'd be trying to put more money in the pot, and not give us the right price if we have a pocket pair to counterfeit him"

Essentially you're making certain assumptions about his game that he's capable of thinking about sizing his value range appropriately ("if he had a jack, or a flush draw, he'd raise bigger), and at the same time making the assumption that he's nonthinking and doesn't realize he's repping an extremely thin value range on this texture.

You're making way too many assumptions with no info on the player. As the board ran out I don't completely hate the calldown. I'd expect a lot of fish to randomly raise a jack on the flop (for information, or whatever they think they're doing it for), but the queen rolling off on the turn and our opponent betting $20 should discount a jack a bunch. I feel a lot more confident in this assumption vs an unknown than about any assumptions about his flop range. Seriously, you see so much random stuff from fish on this flop, including hands like 33-TT and weak Jx, as well as a bunch of total air, and 2x if they ever get there with that pre

Setting aside the jackassery of your tone, your essentially saying 'fish can do anything'. It is true. Fish can and do. I've run into plenty of fish that would in fact MR a Jack on the flop. Nothing is impossible - as inavacuum said - especially with fish. But fish do in fact raise bigger with a 2 or J. So X% of his range is a J or A2, and Y% of the time he does the usual thing and raise it bigger. Maybe half Y% he MRs a J. That he sometimes has a hand, and out of those sometimes, he sometimes plays it in an unusual way, doesn't make the analysis wrong. In fact, in a similar situation to my question above, it may not matter if the fish does or doesn't MR a J here because it's not enough of his range+times he plays it that particular way. Even if the fish showed AJ in this hand, inavacuum would be right IMO.
(BTW, while watching, I thought, 'sure he could MR a Jack.' I just realized that it doesn't make anything wrong.)

I think you should view this as a compliment Tim, that you hand read so well, that people think that you're being results oriented.

Where's the love?

Thanks for your comments cam. When dealing with those I believe are confrontational for the sake of being confrontational/because the get a kick out of it/because that's just how they are, then I prefer to remove the debate, as there is no genuine debate to be had.

What do you think of villain's play in the hand? I know I would've cbet the flop, but is not cbetting it bad (or better than firing)?
How much of your 3bet calling/turn stabbing range is Kx with with x>8? Seems to me his river bet is good even though it's bad (in this case), applying the same logic you are to the hand.

I believe he has to bet the flop. I see no reason why he did not bet the flop, considering all the factors at the time. I think he did not bet the flop because he wasn't sure what to do. There is nothing wrong with his river bet with the hand he has.

Hmm, i sound like I was in the bathroom, but just so you guys know, I wasn't

Thanks for your comments cam. When dealing with those I believe are confrontational for the sake of being confrontational/because the get a kick out of it/because that's just how they are, then I prefer to remove the debate, as there is no genuine debate to be had.

Are you joking right now? I clearly illustrated why I thought your analysis was terrible and based on a bevy of assumptions about villain's postflop tendencies that seemed to be drawn out of thin air. I continue to subscribe to this site because there are a ton of great producers, and when I see a video I really enjoy, I'm always sure to give props to that producer. DC is home to Ansky, who is the best video maker on the internet.

I've noticed, however, that unlike CardRunners, DC member feedback tends to be overwhelmingly positive, sometimes just for the sake of being positive. When I see a video that I feel is lacking in content, I feel the need to voice my concerns. Saying that I'm being confrontational for the sake of being confrontational not only makes a lot of assumptions about my character (you're good at assuming) but disregards the fact that I specifically outlined why I thought your analysis was bad.

It's not that I think you're a fraud, but I do feel as though the hands you selected here are very results oriented, and that your egocentrism hampers your ability to give a complete analysis of the hands, and acts as a blockade to the viewer's learning experience.

Are you joking right now?

I never joke.

DC is home to Ansky, who is the best video maker on the internet.

I did not know that, but I can believe it is true. Thank you for letting me know. Since I do not have the time to find out for myself, please also let me know the best:

EPL fantasy football player
Badugi player
Blind grimmer

on The Internet.

It's not that I think you're a fraud, but I do feel as though the hands you selected here are very results oriented, and that your egocentrism hampers your ability to give a complete analysis of the hands, and acts as a blockade to the viewer's learning experience.

Thank you thricely for your renewed feedback. Can I ship to Stars for the psychotherapy? UB? I dont think I should be getting this for free.