---

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

Time Link to 00:10:52

did you mean you think its best to go just bet out yourself with your value hands? because a bit later you said you think you should only c/r as a bluff?

nice discussion Hielko.

a few questions:
1. If you are CO here with AJ of spades, I assume you'd just call the c/r as you beat pretty much all of his bluffs?

2. If yes, then what's the worst A high that you'd call with and what A highs would you rebluff with?

3 When you do rebluff, are you jamming?

4. If you are Hero here and the CO basically 3bet clicks it back, would you consider jamming? If yes, then wouldnt that mean that CO should be jamming if he is going to rebluff?

I would assume that we would jam in, if we would in Villain`s shoes rebluff.
Rebluffing seems lol b/c we cannot rep ourselves anything, but I guess that is no prob b/c we would put the last money into the pot, so Villain would not be able to do anything about it.

Cool short, btw - thx^^

I feel a check raise on the river here also includes hands like 22, 33, Q3 Q2 in hero's range a lot of the time. He's certainly not holding a queen and i highly doubt a set because he allowed two players to draw against him. So I'm putting him on 99-JJ or complete air a ton of the time. And with you protecting your big bling with ducks or tres, or even Q2 or Q3 suited is very possible. Checking such a blank on a board might induce a bluff on CO's end because he too sees missed draws, so why would you be c/r there on such an obvious blank? I'm relatively new to the game so I'd love to hear some feedback

something else interesting: say CO is a good hand reader who would read this river c/r for a bluff pretty much always. would hero c/r'ing TT here to induce bluffs from CO be a viable play? or is that just FPS spew lol.

did you mean you think its best to go just bet out yourself with your value hands? because a bit later you said you think you should only c/r as a bluff?

Yes I think it's best to bet turn and river with most value hands againts most players, since we should assume that villain would check behind with his bluff catchers a lot (even though I think that a good villain should be able to valuebet those frequently).

nice discussion Hielko.

a few questions:
1. If you are CO here with AJ of spades, I assume you'd just call the c/r as you beat pretty much all of his bluffs?

Why would we bet this hand in the first place?

2. If yes, then what's the worst A high that you'd call with and what A highs would you rebluff with?

I think we should usually be happy to check behind with most of our A-high hands, but I guess that around AT you want to start rebluffing instead of bluff catching since you don't want to bluff catch only to see that he's bluffing with a better hand.

3 When you do rebluff, are you jamming?

Yes, given how big the pot and if you have a value 3bet hand I can't see myself going for a smaller 3bet.

4. If you are Hero here and the CO basically 3bet clicks it back, would you consider jamming? If yes, then wouldnt that mean that CO should be jamming if he is going to rebluff?

I would consider it, but probably wuss out on it figuring that almost no-one is crazy enough to 3bet rivers as a bluff.

I feel a check raise on the river here also includes hands like 22, 33, Q3 Q2 in hero's range a lot of the time. He's certainly not holding a queen and i highly doubt a set because he allowed two players to draw against him. So I'm putting him on 99-JJ or complete air a ton of the time. And with you protecting your big bling with ducks or tres, or even Q2 or Q3 suited is very possible. Checking such a blank on a board might induce a bluff on CO's end because he too sees missed draws, so why would you be c/r there on such an obvious blank? I'm relatively new to the game so I'd love to hear some feedback

Q2/Q3s should not really be in hero's range, but if you think a value xr is a good play your range could certainly be wider than 22/33. 77/88 for starters, but you could basically do it with Q+ IF you think that the value xr is a good play. But I don't think it is, because villain usually has some 2nd pair here that would often check behind, but will call a lot when you bet. And I also think he has a bluff catcher a lot more than a potential bluff hand, so think that against most typical villains a valuebet is way better than a check to induce a bluff or thin value bet.

something else interesting: say CO is a good hand reader who would read this river c/r for a bluff pretty much always. would hero c/r'ing TT here to induce bluffs from CO be a viable play? or is that just FPS spew lol.

It could be viable, but you need a lot of variables to be all right to make it work. Not only need CO to be a good hand reader, but he also needs to valuebet thin, you also want someone who does not potentially check behind weak Qx on the flop, and even if he's a good hand reader you also need him to be able to act on those reads. And at the same time you have a super easy bet on the river that almost certainly is going to work.

Why would we bet this hand in the first place?

I usually wouldnt bet that hand, but in the original thread some posters were saying that A high is never good when hero checks the river, so CO should consider bluffing. I disagreed because I think it gets looked up a lot because the draws missed, but the arguement was that if hero views CO as a good player who can thin value bet and is "too good to bluff a missed draw on that board," then CO's range should be skewed toward thin value hands and hero should therefore fold 8x and 7x, which means that CO can put some bluffs in his range. To me, this seemed like it may have been a few levels too deep, but still a reasonable arguement imo.

I usually wouldnt bet that hand, but in the original thread some posters were saying that A high is never good when hero checks the river, so CO should consider bluffing. I disagreed because I think it gets looked up a lot because the draws missed, but the arguement was that if hero views CO as a good player who can thin value bet and is "too good to bluff a missed draw on that board," then CO's range should be skewed toward thin value hands and hero should therefore fold 8x and 7x, which means that CO can put some bluffs in his range. To me, this seemed like it may have been a few levels too deep, but still a reasonable arguement imo.

That should not be the case at all. Hero's range here to bet the turn should contain a shit load of bluffs, and he certainly should give up those bluffs a decent amount of the time on the river. And if he has a lot of bluffs that are giving up, A-high in CO-shoes should be good. And I also don't agree with the statement that if CO is a good player he should not bluff the river, because hero's river checking range should contain a lot of bluffs that are just giving up, and if CO has a hand that can't even beat a bluff he should strongly consider bluffing it. And since that is just a small part of his range, and he certainly could valuebet thin (even though we expect that he usually checks behind) I see no reason why he shouldn't be able to bluff. And at the same time hero should never fold 8x and 7x, but those things are actually not contradictory.
.

And since that is just a small part of his range, and he certainly could valuebet thin (even though we expect that he usually checks behind) I see no reason why he shouldn't be able to bluff. And at the same time hero should never fold 8x and 7x, but those things are actually not contradictory.
.

Why arent they contradictory? If bluffs are just a small part of CO's range and he can value bet thin, then why should hero never be folding 8x and 7x?

Why arent they contradictory? If bluffs are just a small part of CO's range and he can value bet thin, then why should hero never be folding 8x and 7x?

Because villain could still have to many bluffs to be folding a bluff catcher, but that doesn't mean a bluff from villain can't be good since hero isn't going to have a bluff catcher that often.

I really liked that you showed the forum comments on that hands. Its interesting to here what you think about, as well as what others do and the relevance of it all. Very nice