---

Poker Video: No Limit Hold'Em by blah234 (Micro/Small Stakes)

No, because if your BB/100 for calling 3bets is -250 you're profiting on your calls because not calling would have been -300.

But your bb/100 for calling 3bets better be higher than your bb/100 for facing 3bets, or you're making -EV calls (assuming there's no variance).

But does a "call 3bet" filter take into account what would have happened if you folded, or does it measure your winrate from the point at which you made the decision and called?

But does a "call 3bet" filter take into account what would have happened if you folded, or does it measure your winrate from the point at which you made the decision and called?

bb/100 is in HEM always calculated from the beginning of the hand - which makes it a pain to use when making EV calculations.

EV of folding is no longer 0 it is 0-[the amount you have put into the pot]

bb/100 is in HEM always calculated from the beginning of the hand - which makes it a pain to use when making EV calculations.

EV of folding is no longer 0 it is 0-[the amount you have put into the pot]

ahh ok thank you ^^

Time Link to 00:00:10

You know what?

Screw it I am watching anyway I got free time and work done for today

Time Link to 00:15:54

Hah did you include this because of the Grindcoring thread?

Time Link to 00:17:03

I am beating a dead horse here most likely, but where is your stance on constructing a range and most +EV spot?

e.g. BvB spot with K5s against an unknown, one response from
here
http://www.deucescracked.com/topics/416761-NL200-K5s-3-bet-in-BvB?forum_id=34-Small-Stakes-Shorthanded-NL&per_page=15

was

I think it's ok if you 3b even though you could flat with it, calling is +ev but 3betting should have higher ev with us not knowing anything about villain and how he plays postflop/what he opens with and having a clean image no?

'If it's +EV to call Kxs and it's -EV to call Kxo, then we should call Kxs and 3bet Kxo because vs opponents who 4bet/fold our suitedness is irrelevant and the EV of 3betting Kxs and Kxo are equal to each other. Is it +EV to 3bet Kxs? Yes. Is it greater EV to call Kxs and 3bet ATC instead? Yes. It's a question of optimization, just because something is +EV doesn't mean it's the best decision.'

What's your stance on this popular topic

I am beating a dead horse here most likely, but where is your stance on constructing a range and most +EV spot?

e.g. BvB spot with K5s against an unknown, one response from
here
http://www.deucescracked.com/topics/416761-NL200-K5s-3-bet-in-BvB?forum_id=34-Small-Stakes-Shorthanded-NL&per_page=15

was

'If it's +EV to call Kxs and it's -EV to call Kxo, then we should call Kxs and 3bet Kxo because vs opponents who 4bet/fold our suitedness is irrelevant and the EV of 3betting Kxs and Kxo are equal to each other. Is it +EV to 3bet Kxs? Yes. Is it greater EV to call Kxs and 3bet ATC instead? Yes. It's a question of optimization, just because something is +EV doesn't mean it's the best decision.'

What's your stance on this popular topic

Doc, can you find that one epic thread from a few weeks ago where there was a long discussion on this stuff? I'd like to save it for future reference, but I can't find it.

Time Link to 00:20:24

Table selection
Two people I know that that moved up really fast told me they never quit anyone. Their reasoning was that all SSNL regs suck and it's just a question of time before they find out how to make money of them.
They'd make a plan against each villain and look for mistakes, and they would ALWAYS show up.
One of them (he is Swedish maybe it doesn't count? ) said he was actually actively looking for matches against regs, 3 handed and deep play.
There is also the famous philosophy of Phil Galfond who pays 2mil being the worst player just to learn from the better players in Razz, and he has done that on his way to NL nosebleeds as well.

I know this doesn't apply for micro stakes and probably not even NL100 because of the stupid rake, but from midstakes is it sometimes ok to play in a immediately slightly -EV (and significantly -EV if you think about opportunity cost in the form of printing money against fish on other tables) scenarios where you 'play to learn' and to try to find long term leaks in villains and put yourself into uncomfortable spots, or is it just better to try to build my BR asap and play even better players at higher stakes?

Doc, can you find that one epic thread from a few weeks ago where there was a long discussion on this stuff? I'd like to save it for future reference, but I can't find it.

It's in microstakes hall of fame, I think Blah posted there but he was sort of pushed to the corner, it left me pretty confused (on the topic, the thread itself was great for many reasons and concepts)

Time Link to 00:21:54

lalalalalalala

Ok I will not skip this part because I am making notes, at one in time point I was left with 0 abc no standard play and only creative fps lines. I was more like Apex Faildator

Time Link to 00:23:30

Ok this will seem like a retarded question given topic, but if I haven't been paying attention (!) and have only stats or very low frequency sample and a TAG image, how soon do you start adjusting?

e.g. someone folds 3/3 to 3bets and you are in a steal spot, how wide would you make your range? (don't want specific hands as you forbid me to ask and it will differ between limits, just e.g. would you be a lot looser than usual, slightly looser...)

Time Link to 00:34:07

I have question regarding position and cbetting.

I can't recall where but I read that you should be cbetting more out of position than in position. The reason given was I believe OOP you lose the pot when you check a lot where IP check behind is a viable option. The counter argument is of course that people fold more to cbets when they are OOP than when they have position, could you elaborate a bit on that?
Sorry if's not an Apex Predator kind of a question

Time Link to 00:35:07

For a long time I was ridiculing the people that were posting in the forums with no image, forums, etc.

But aren't they just trying to get the ABC play and standard assumptions about villains on the limit?
i.e. you play a tag with 21/17 8% 3bet at NL600 SH on on Pokerstars on specific conditions, without reads you just need to assume what the range of an average player with the information you have so far, shouldn't you be able to construct an average range and give an answer with the KJs hand?

Good luck Blah.

Time Link to 00:41:45

Stats are only averages - hey that's what I posted somewhere recently, did I inspire you to put it in?

*One time baby*
This vid was made before the thread most likely lol

Time Link to 00:47:47

Uhh uhh can you focus on flatting in blinds against regs?

You got a great video voice, although you scared my girlfriend a couple times as you are almost shouting when you put emphasis on words sometimes (and that is saying something, she is Chinese and some of her casual conversations in her native language are practically shouted).

I'm not sure when I will watch the next episodes as this series is not on my 'serious' playlist and it shouldn't be, but it shows great promise. Thanks a lot and hopefully DC will give you more space for e.g. mentors type vids or DC Shorts.

I also made a doodle of what one will feel like after watching this series on my notes, I hereby give you copyright permission to use it for your next ep's title page ;p
http://i.imgur.com/twIHi.png

Table selection
Two people I know that that moved up really fast told me they never quit anyone. Their reasoning was that all SSNL regs suck and it's just a question of time before they find out how to make money of them.
They'd make a plan against each villain and look for mistakes, and they would ALWAYS show up.
One of them (he is Swedish maybe it doesn't count? ) said he was actually actively looking for matches against regs, 3 handed and deep play.
There is also the famous philosophy of Phil Galfond who pays 2mil being the worst player just to learn from the better players in Razz, and he has done that on his way to NL nosebleeds as well.

I know this doesn't apply for micro stakes and probably not even NL100 because of the stupid rake, but from midstakes is it sometimes ok to play in a immediately slightly -EV (and significantly -EV if you think about opportunity cost in the form of printing money against fish on other tables) scenarios where you 'play to learn' and to try to find long term leaks in villains and put yourself into uncomfortable spots, or is it just better to try to build my BR asap and play even better players at higher stakes?

I'm still of the opinion that it's difficult to move up fast without the proper BR. Playing at games where you have smaller edge = longer to build your BR.

I have question regarding position and cbetting.

I can't recall where but I read that you should be cbetting more out of position than in position. The reason given was I believe OOP you lose the pot when you check a lot where IP check behind is a viable option. The counter argument is of course that people fold more to cbets when they are OOP than when they have position, could you elaborate a bit on that?
Sorry if's not an Apex Predator kind of a question

position should affect your decision to cbet or not but the general rule of thumb to cbet more OOP than IP is wrong. Your decision to cbet should be because you think its more +EV than all your other options and not just because you are OOP/ don't know what to do if you check and villain bets. Villain who has position on you can also play back vs you cbet more and they can continue with a wider range.

Ok this will seem like a retarded question given topic, but if I haven't been paying attention (!) and have only stats or very low frequency sample and a TAG image, how soon do you start adjusting?

e.g. someone folds 3/3 to 3bets and you are in a steal spot, how wide would you make your range? (don't want specific hands as you forbid me to ask and it will differ between limits, just e.g. would you be a lot looser than usual, slightly looser...)

It's difficult to adjust if you don't know what you're adjusting to. Start playing ABC and use some default assumptions in the games you play. Assign ranges to people based on the more popular coaching videos is a good start.

You should go slightly looser as you start adjusting then push the boundaries and see how far out of line you can go.

sweet jebus ..... I love this shizil, super stoked for this series because blah234 takes it outside the box and tells u how he did it. Very smart guy he works full-time and still manages to make 100k in his first year playing poker and playing 35k hands a month. Effing WOW (shows the dedication and hardwork it takes....oh and the obsession), its like he took the best videos out of deuces cracked and actually applied the concepts.Unlike most poker players including myself, that think they take the game hardcore but really dont. And look at this hes got Improva and grindcore posting on his vids, some of the most greatest minds in poker.

Iam stoked for this series....and damn the man doc.lemon u got like a million time markers on this vidgey-oh.....

I can't recall where but I read that you should be cbetting more out of position than in position.

This was in the Poker Blueprint and it always confused me.

My only criticism is that 4 episodes devoted to Live play is far too much.

Just to clarify, I thought you meant B&M Live play.. duh.

4 Episodes w/ online play will be great.

Hi Blah234.

Really looking forward to watch and learn, what I call "real" poker.


Best Regards Sune

Hi Blah,

Sound vid - I found the discussion of how our equity differs facing polarised/depolarised 3 betting ranges using the KJs example particularly enlightening. That wasn't something that had occurred to me beforehand.

40% equity is all you need for direct pot odds because you already have some money in the pot. Of course we don't expect to make much money calling 3 bet with KJs vs 8% range but if you can lose less than 300bb/100 its higher EV than folding.

As regards this, I've read through the subsequent comments ITT, and would the following be the correct way of looking at this concept? I figured I'd hash it out in my own words to just be sure I'd understood.

Assuming we fold 100% of the time when 3 bet, after having opened to 3bbs preflop, then we will lose at a rate of -300bb/100 when we face a 3 bet. To the extent that our bb/100 is less negative when we call or play back, then we are profiting from our calls/4 bets and can be said to be implementing a winning strategy vs. 3 bettors (though of course, there is likely always room for improvement and more +EV opportunities to take advantage of/leaks to plug).

Thanks.

When talking about poor range construction you mention how regulars isolate parts of their range by taking certain lines, and that makes them easy to read. What is an example of what you are talking about here?