---

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

you guys seriously didn't edit this part out lol?

LOL WHOOPS wtf

Time Link to 00:17:42

What do you think about the iso baluga with K5s i wouldn't personally do it and i wouldn't cbet here into two people because i don't think we get two people to fold all that often on an A95 board. If called what would be your plan for later streets..

ty

What do you think about the iso baluga with K5s i wouldn't personally do it and i wouldn't cbet here into two people because i don't think we get two people to fold all that often on an A95 board. If called what would be your plan for later streets..

ty

whole thing looks pretty good, i'd probably give up vs most people on the turn.

Andrew

Time Link to 00:33:08

Lol "what was i talking about? Shit!" Nice to smile a bit whilst watching all these vids
Great Job Balugawhale.

Time Link to 00:07:25

With a hand like K8 suited you advocate possibly calling because we start getting close to no better hands folding. I think I still like a 3bet.

Say we are up against a guy that opens 40% of buttons and he is going to call or 4bet mid PPs+ and suited or strong broadways combined with some bluffs and other calls.

Against the roughly 30% range that he will fold (obviously ranges will vary here) we are still flipping, so when you combine being able to collect that money now with having to play a marginal hand OOP vs an undefined range, can't an argument still be made that a 3bet might be better with this type of hand?

Thank in advance for the answer. Loving the series so far and I think this discussion is fantastic for micro stakes players that don't know how to play against regs.

Time Link to 00:33:09

Solid 60 seconds of analysis here. Dallas leveled us though

Time Link to 00:52:22

When you turn that discussion of the AQ into a blind vs blind discussion, what is your hand when flatting a 4bet against this player?

Time Link to 00:51:24

But AQs you just 4bet/fold right?

Text results appended to pokerstove.txt

54,793,728 games 0.148 secs 370,227,891 games/sec

Board:
Dead:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 29.361% 25.46% 03.90% 13952300 2135723.50 { AcQd }
Hand 1: 70.639% 66.74% 03.90% 36569981 2135723.50 { JJ+, AQs+, AKo }

Time Link to 01:00:09

Hi Guys I love this series!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I think the fakt that Villian is UTG, the pot is 3 way, Kristy has the A , on the board flopped the Q, the board is unconected reduces the draws so dramatically in Villians Range that I would pet the monsters under Kristys bed^^

Time Link to 00:43:29

i didnt put him on AT on the flop.. i think he knew he is behind on the flop and he would have called with flush draws\open ended and not just a gut shot ..

Time Link to 00:13:45

I have some questions about the AKo hand:

First of all, do you really expect villain to call JTs,QTs kind of hand here oop vs a MP raise? I usually put most reasonable opponents on something like, AQ,AJ,KQ, 22-TT(JJ), without further reads. Thoughts on that?

Secondly, if we go for the bet/c line on the flop, what is our plan for future streets?

Call all xh turncards, and call any xh rivercard? And on blank rivers fold if he bets, bet if checks to us?

And on Ax/Kx call down?

I have some questions about the AKo hand:

First of all, do you really expect villain to call JTs,QTs kind of hand here oop vs a MP raise? I usually put most reasonable opponents on something like, AQ,AJ,KQ, 22-TT(JJ), without further reads. Thoughts on that?

Secondly, if we go for the bet/c line on the flop, what is our plan for future streets?

Call all xh turncards, and call any xh rivercard? And on blank rivers fold if he bets, bet if checks to us?

And on Ax/Kx call down?

1) vs most ssnl villains, yes.

2) depends on how aggressive he is. the more aggro, the more we dont fold. the less aggro, the more we fold.

Andrew

Time Link to 00:08:55

I wanted to maybe get into the issue of leveling for a second. On the T8 hand on the top left: if we are starting to see more and more good players who will be better at reading our hands should we be more inclined (if only slightly) to bet broadway cards? I feel this may be the case because we are 3-betting oop which means villain will think this means we are 3-betting polarized range (i think). This means our perceived broadway range will crush his when we get to showdown and villain will be less likely to call light. Further, when we check/check/fold the bottom end of our polarized 3-bet range we make it very easy for villain as he knows he'll never be bluffed when broadway hits. This could be problematic for our meta considerations

I have the bad tendency to level myself and think my opponent will think my 3-bet range will contain a lot of broadway cards when they don't and that could be what I'm doing here. I just think that if villain is a good level 2 thinker and our perceived nuts:air ratio is balanced for polarized 3-betting then villain will be less inclined to call light and may fold things as strong as TPWK (although I doubt he shows up with weak kickers often here).

Again, I very well could be very far off and could easily be convinced I'm wrong (and the queen already being on the board certainly hurts my argument) but to me, the K hitting that board could very well be a great card to bluff at least some of the time if for nothing more than balance.

A) doing things for "nothing more than balance" is bad

B) the biggest problem is the fact that they hit the board, not whether we can represent hitting the board. When you play a lot of cards, you can represent hitting just about any board, but our opponents will tend to try to hit the board and hope we barrel into them.

C) In the event that our villains start calling lightly then we add broadways and start c-betting high boards.

Andrew

Time Link to 00:44:22

A) doing things for "nothing more than balance" is bad

B) the biggest problem is the fact that they hit the board, not whether we can represent hitting the board. When you play a lot of cards, you can represent hitting just about any board, but our opponents will tend to try to hit the board and hope we barrel into them.

C) In the event that our villains start calling lightly then we add broadways and start c-betting high boards.

Andrew

Baluga,

I only got to watch 1/2 of the video last night and you said at this timestamp is exactly what I was trying to say last night only 20 times better.

To be clear, I didn't mean that we should be betting for balance purposes alone. I just thought that against a really tough opponent it should be a strong consideration. My mistake was assuming there were enough really strong opponents at $.5/$1 to make this type of play worthwhile where we really don't start seeing them with regularity until higher stakes.

Thanks again for your comments. As always you have been super helpful in my understanding the concepts.