---

Poker Video: No Limit Hold'Em by sthief09 (Micro/Small Stakes)

But since we are out of position wouldn't our opponents be most likely to call?

I think 4-bet frequency isn't really as much of an issue at these stakes since they will have position on us and are more likely to call or at least that's what I've been seeing a lot of the past month or two since I've been back.

I could definitely be wrong here but I'd like your take on it. TBH I don't even have 4b frequency as a stat or ever check it since anyone who 4 bets me a lot stands out like a sore thumb...I might need to start doing that.

Don't get me wrong...I've definitely been seeing some of the higher limit players videos such as Ansky's talk about shoving their mid pair's (66, 77 etc.) to squeezes from aggro players but I haven't seen this much with players at 1/2 and below. On the other hand, I've seen an absurd amount of calling. This is on stars btw so it might vary a little from site to site.

So your read in your games is that mostly unknown regulars will call a lot of 3-bets in position and not 4-bet a lot. Then without information it makes sense to be 3-betting. If you happen to have stats and a large sample on some or all of the players, I'd definitely take a look and see if they 4-bet a lot before 3-betting. You don't need it on your HUD but it's default on the HEM popup so I'd recommend getting used to it.

Let's flip the situation around and make us the PFR. We open in the CO, BTN calls, SB who might be a fish calls, and BB who is an aggro regular squeezes 200bb deep. I like this as a 4-bet bluffing spot for us. First off, BB's range for squeezing is likely fairly wide. I think lots of people don't like calling 4 ways with hands like AQo, AJo, KQo, KJo, KTo, QJo, so I'd expect those to squeeze often. Secondly, there is lots of dead money. Finally, if we do 4-bet, we're leveraging our entire stack vs. the BB. For the most part, he's either 5-betting and committing 200bb or he's folding. The only hands that can really feel totally comfortable 5-betting without history/reads are AK, AA-QQ. The rest of his squeezing hands probably fold. Even JJ, TT, AQ, AJs are in a crappy spot. Put together the dead money, a reasonably wide 3-bet range, and a narrow 5-bet all-in range, and you have a recipe for a profitable 4-bet bluffing spot.

That's why I'm hesitant to just auto 3-bet KQs here. If villain is aggressive preflop he might see the situation similarly to how I am seeing it. Your read is that this is rare in your games. I buy that and you can go ahead and 3-bet. I just wanted you to know exactly why I fear a 4-bet here and why I'd usually check for villain's 4-bet frequency before I squeeze.

So your read in your games is that mostly unknown regulars will call a lot of 3-bets in position and not 4-bet a lot. Then without information it makes sense to be 3-betting. If you happen to have stats and a large sample on some or all of the players, I'd definitely take a look and see if they 4-bet a lot before 3-betting. You don't need it on your HUD but it's default on the HEM popup so I'd recommend getting used to it.

Let's flip the situation around and make us the PFR. We open in the CO, BTN calls, SB who might be a fish calls, and BB who is an aggro regular squeezes 200bb deep. I like this as a 4-bet bluffing spot for us. First off, BB's range for squeezing is likely fairly wide. I think lots of people don't like calling 4 ways with hands like AQo, AJo, KQo, KJo, KTo, QJo, so I'd expect those to squeeze often. Secondly, there is lots of dead money. Finally, if we do 4-bet, we're leveraging our entire stack vs. the BB. For the most part, he's either 5-betting and committing 200bb or he's folding. The only hands that can really feel totally comfortable 5-betting without history/reads are AK, AA-QQ. The rest of his squeezing hands probably fold. Even JJ, TT, AQ, AJs are in a crappy spot. Put together the dead money, a reasonably wide 3-bet range, and a narrow 5-bet all-in range, and you have a recipe for a profitable 4-bet bluffing spot.

That's why I'm hesitant to just auto 3-bet KQs here. If villain is aggressive preflop he might see the situation similarly to how I am seeing it. Your read is that this is rare in your games. I buy that and you can go ahead and 3-bet. I just wanted you to know exactly why I fear a 4-bet here and why I'd usually check for villain's 4-bet frequency before I squeeze.

Makes a lot of sense, well put. I'll definitely be checking into that 4 betting frequency stat much more often.

Last question : Would your thought process be the same if we were 100bb deep and we were confronted with the same situation? How would it change and would you ever 4b bluff as the PFR?

Very good video and your knowledge of the game is great!

Makes a lot of sense, well put. I'll definitely be checking into that 4 betting frequency stat much more often.

Last question : Would your thought process be the same if we were 100bb deep and we were confronted with the same situation? How would it change and would you ever 4b bluff as the PFR?

Very good video and your knowledge of the game is great!

From the CO's perspective, he probably won't be able to 4-bet/fold 100bb deep. Any 4-bet is likely to be committing, so shouldn't really be bluffing. As a result, the BB's squeeze should be more effective in taking the pot down 100bb deep.

I'd be likely to flat the KQs 100bb deep because I'm closing the action and the stack/pot ratio is set up nicely in a 4-way single-raised pot. I don't see squeezing having the benefits that it would 200bb deep.

I think the big adjustment against a typical regular is just tightening up OOP deep-stacked. 3-bets are less effective so reduce your frequency. You want to mix up your range to be unpredictable, so you can throw in 3-bets with 44, QTs, A5s (hands that play well deep-stacked). But a hand like A9o, that I would consider squeezing 100bb deep, I would just muck 200bb deep OOP. Conversely, open up your ranges when you have position, for raising, 3-betting, and calling raises.

Time Link to 00:38:24

With the the K7s, would it be better to make 3bets a bit bigger here? I'm thinking I like 11bb at least, considering--like you say in the vid--we are deep, and we're going to be getting called more. True we have position, so getting called isn't horrible, but I'd think we would be just as happy with a fold here. (I mean, not when we can flop the nuts, obv. )

Time Link to 00:44:02

This discussion could be expanded into a whole video...or even series. More please

Also, do you think raising K2o on the BTN with the bad loose player in the sb is not necessarily going to be fun unless you get folds?

Time Link to 01:01:04

Shut your mouth! I live in KC...I'm dead on the inside this season.

With the the K7s, would it be better to make 3bets a bit bigger here? I'm thinking I like 11bb at least, considering--like you say in the vid--we are deep, and we're going to be getting called more. True we have position, so getting called isn't horrible, but I'd think we would be just as happy with a fold here. (I mean, not when we can flop the nuts, obv. )

Generally I'd prefer to make my raises smaller in a spot where I'm likely to be bluffing a lot. Calling too many 3-bets OOP is a leak that's easy to exploit, so I'm happy to let him make that mistake.

This discussion could be expanded into a whole video...or even series. More please

Also, do you think raising K2o on the BTN with the bad loose player in the sb is not necessarily going to be fun unless you get folds?

I'd say HU in position with K2o vs. a fishy SB caller would be a +EV spot. So if you have a tight BB it's not too bad. K2o is obviously very trashy though. Even K5o is a good amount stronger.

Shut your mouth! I live in KC...I'm dead on the inside this season.

ouch. good news is teams can make quick turnarounds in the NFL.

Just wanted to say thanks to Josh for allowing me to do this vid w/ him

Just wanted to say thanks to Josh for allowing me to do this vid w/ him

Thanks to you for taking the time to make the video more interesting!

Time Link to 00:04:56

which sites do you play on Josh? and why? thanks

good video

Time Link to 00:47:45

On FTP, there is a faster way to determine if someone has raised you pot. If you made/called the bet before the raise, you should always be getting 2:1. So if the amount written on the "Call $X.XX" button is half the amount of total pot, it was a pot sized raise.

Obviously sthief's method is better to get into the habit of because you can use it in any environment, but if you hate math this way is easier.

Again, this only works if you are the one who bet and got raised. If someone else bet and a third party raises, your odds will be different. But in that case you usually have a good idea whether or not you're continuing