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

Hold'em Helper: Episode One

This video is a two minute preview. To view the entire video, please Log In or Sign Up Now
Get the Flash Player to see this player.
 

Hold'em Helper: Episode One by sthief09

For the premiere, Sthief09 and DeucesCracked member, Justin, review some interesting and difficult hands Justin recently encountered.

About Hold'em Helper Subscribe to

Need help on your hold'em game? This season, DeucesCracked members will drive the content. sthief09 will help members by reviewing interesting HHs, frustrating sessions, and recent databases in order to help you, the members improve. Please post or PM your request in the first weeks of the season to get your requests on video!

Tags

nlhe sthief09 hand replayer ipod friendly hh review hold'em helper

Video Details

  • Game: nlhe
  • Stakes: Micro/Small Stakes
  • 46 minutes long
  • Posted over 2 years ago

Downloads

Premium Subscribers can download high-quality, DRM-free videos in multiple formats.

Sign Up Today


Comments for Hold'em Helper: Episode One

or track by Email or RSS


stl_jones

Avatar for stl_jones

352 posts
Joined 06/2011

Really good video.


I think that's hilarious that he intentionally bets $74 so he'll have $50 left in the TT hand.

Posted over 2 years ago

SnappieVouz

Avatar for SnappieVouz

2620 posts
Joined 03/2009

sthief is back. I'm looking forward to a series about solid poker. what is the target audience? I prefer HH reviews and database analyzes. Spotting the leaks. Live play is good to.

Posted over 2 years ago

flavas

Avatar for flavas

51 posts
Joined 10/2008

Time Link to 00:05:54

I think there are two decent options here, but it's hard to pick which is better in a vacuum. The first is to check behind, with the benefits being mainly that you defend yourself from a bet-check-bet bluff line when you have a weaker hand. The second is to bet small to collect your equity in the pot. You're probably 90%+ against his range already, but even 5% of this pot is enough that it might be worth a small bet.

I don't think jamming makes sense as a bet-size. It could make sense if we had either trips or a bluff and wanted to turn his hand into a bluffcatcher, but when we bet here we almost always have a medium-strength showdown hand looking to win the pot. I don't see any benefit to betting three times as much when 1/3 pot will win the pot just as easily.

Posted over 2 years ago

itsatrap

Avatar for itsatrap

1726 posts
Joined 07/2008

Time Link to 00:05:22

what are your thoughts on checking this turn to accomplish two things:

1) allows villain to bluff river.
2) allowing us to pick up one street of value from the marginals in his range.

I don't think villain would call two streets with much worse being that our range screams Ax (opening EP, calling squeeze, calling flop, betting turn)... and with villain being short, he might not even call a turn bet with a hand like JJ (thinking he will likely face a river bet again and have to give up before getting to showdown). Thinking we can only get one street of value (if that), wouldn't it be best to check and then bet small on river if it checks? If we are only getting one street, wouldn't villain more likely call a river bet with marginal holdings than to call a turn bet?

Posted over 2 years ago

itsatrap

Avatar for itsatrap

1726 posts
Joined 07/2008

Time Link to 00:17:38

This is a spot (strong hands getting monotone flop) that came into discussion in one of my groups the other day and I wanted to get your thoughts on it. You mentioned check/calling AA on a monotone flop but what about just betting to get value from alot of pairs/high 1-spade hands?

And if betting is better than check calling, would betting pot rather than 2/3rds like JMo did here be better? You get more value and it doesn't change increase his folding range any more than 2/3rds would, correct?

Posted over 2 years ago

itsatrap

Avatar for itsatrap

1726 posts
Joined 07/2008

Time Link to 00:41:19

If villain could be expected to check back JhJx/QhQx and maybe even AQ/AJ with a heart would it be better to just lead for value say maybe $20-25 to entice a call or would checking still be better?

If checking is better, is it to pot control and prevent him for jamming over or is it to allow him to try and bluff/value cut?

Posted over 2 years ago

Allermand_DK

Avatar for Allermand_DK

955 posts
Joined 11/2008

Time Link to 00:28:39

I see yours logic in call turn and bluff river when checked to sthief, but I asume if you call turn, you're always calling a river shove getting 2:1?

Thanks..

Posted over 2 years ago

donkrx

Avatar for donkrx

68 posts
Joined 02/2012

Time Link to 00:05:46

Something to consider doing here is min betting ...... I know it sounds horribly fishy but that's kind of the point. You might get marked as a fish instantly by some people which is of huge value to you later. Also, you really don't expect to get money from this hand unless he spazs out, and you aren't worried about any rivers, so your bet size isn't really of critical importance here. Min bets piss some people off and theyll randomly check raise you here to some stupidly small amount like $20 which is great for us... more value plus some metagame / image benefits.

Posted over 2 years ago

donkrx

Avatar for donkrx

68 posts
Joined 02/2012

Time Link to 00:38:10

And this is an example of why min betting on the AQs hand (link in my post above) could work lol........ slightly different situation, but still shows that sometimes you get a raise because it doesn't make sense. It happens a LOT.

Posted over 2 years ago

sthief09

Avatar for sthief09

3115 posts
Joined 07/2007

sthief is back. I'm looking forward to a series about solid poker. what is the target audience? I prefer HH reviews and database analyzes. Spotting the leaks. Live play is good to.



I never went anywhere Smile

I try to have as wide a target audience as possible. I'm not sure how the stakes will vary for the series yet, but usually they tend to span 25NL-200NL, maybe 10NL as that seems to be a popular game among members on the forums.

Posted over 2 years ago

sthief09

Avatar for sthief09

3115 posts
Joined 07/2007

I think there are two decent options here, but it's hard to pick which is better in a vacuum. The first is to check behind, with the benefits being mainly that you defend yourself from a bet-check-bet bluff line when you have a weaker hand. The second is to bet small to collect your equity in the pot. You're probably 90%+ against his range already, but even 5% of this pot is enough that it might be worth a small bet.

I don't think jamming makes sense as a bet-size. It could make sense if we had either trips or a bluff and wanted to turn his hand into a bluffcatcher, but when we bet here we almost always have a medium-strength showdown hand looking to win the pot. I don't see any benefit to betting three times as much when 1/3 pot will win the pot just as easily.




yeah I agree with all of this. I'm definitely a fan of tiny bets in situations like these if betting is the route we decide to go in.

Posted over 2 years ago

sthief09

Avatar for sthief09

3115 posts
Joined 07/2007

what are your thoughts on checking this turn to accomplish two things:

1) allows villain to bluff river.
2) allowing us to pick up one street of value from the marginals in his range.

I don't think villain would call two streets with much worse being that our range screams Ax (opening EP, calling squeeze, calling flop, betting turn)... and with villain being short, he might not even call a turn bet with a hand like JJ (thinking he will likely face a river bet again and have to give up before getting to showdown). Thinking we can only get one street of value (if that), wouldn't it be best to check and then bet small on river if it checks? If we are only getting one street, wouldn't villain more likely call a river bet with marginal holdings than to call a turn bet?




It's possible to induce a bluff if he's basically an unknown reg. I just don't expect it. I do think it makes sense though because even if he bluffs 5-10% it's better than nothing. on the other hand, like flavas wrote above, we may give a small pair a free shot at 5% equity. there are pros and cons.

As for #2, I know the delay float is more widespread than it used to be, but I tend to think it looks bluffier to bet the turn rather than checking the turn and betting the river.

I think it's close. It's going to be hard to extract much value regardless.

Posted over 2 years ago

sthief09

Avatar for sthief09

3115 posts
Joined 07/2007

This is a spot (strong hands getting monotone flop) that came into discussion in one of my groups the other day and I wanted to get your thoughts on it. You mentioned check/calling AA on a monotone flop but what about just betting to get value from alot of pairs/high 1-spade hands?

And if betting is better than check calling, would betting pot rather than 2/3rds like JMo did here be better? You get more value and it doesn't change increase his folding range any more than 2/3rds would, correct?



It was the first time I saw these hands, so sometimes I went through my thought progression. I don't really like checking without a reason for doing, though I do think it's a spot where someone aggro can barrel off and we can call down a lot of the time. I like checking hands like this, against which someone can value bet worse, rather than c/c something like TT, which is a pure bluff catcher.

I go somewhere in the middle regarding bet sizing. I don't want to bloat the pot before the turn. The turn can really make or break our equity on monotone and 3-straight boards. We've only gotten value the times we make it to showdown. If the board comes such that we are forced to give up, then it doesn't matter whether he was ahead or behind on the flop. Even if our hot and cold equity is something like 60-65% against a calling range, being out of position facing a number of very bad cards makes the effective equity closer to 50/50.

Posted over 2 years ago

sthief09

Avatar for sthief09

3115 posts
Joined 07/2007

If villain could be expected to check back JhJx/QhQx and maybe even AQ/AJ with a heart would it be better to just lead for value say maybe $20-25 to entice a call or would checking still be better?

If checking is better, is it to pot control and prevent him for jamming over or is it to allow him to try and bluff/value cut?




I hate this hand. I like the idea of leading the turn in similar situations, but here I wonder (1) will he really put us on a blocking bet or pure bluff? (2) doesn't it kinda look like we have a flush, FH, or AhKx type hand? (3) we're giving him nearly a breakeven price with QQh/JJh. there's value despite this, just not much of it.

If we bet, I think jamming looks a bit bluffier. Betting small to me looks like an invulnerable type hand rather than a naked Ah or 99 type hand.

Posted over 2 years ago




HomePoker ForumsSmall Stakes Shorthanded NL → Hold'em Helper : Episode One