---

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

Time Link to 00:20:24

do you mean he should probably x/r the flop or the turn?

do you mean he should probably x/r the flop or the turn?

I meant the turn there. I have no clue if there was any history between those two or what it was, so it's hard to recommend c/r 99 on the flop. On the turn, I think he should be folding anyway, and it's possible that a pure bluff would work often enough. I don't think I'd do it without an idea of his 2 barrel range (betting nearly any 2 on overcard club?) and how stubbornly he's going to peel.

Thanks for share

I meant the turn there. I have no clue if there was any history between those two or what it was, so it's hard to recommend c/r 99 on the flop. On the turn, I think he should be folding anyway, and it's possible that a pure bluff would work often enough. I don't think I'd do it without an idea of his 2 barrel range (betting nearly any 2 on overcard club?) and how stubbornly he's going to peel.

ahh so the reasoning is that even if we are "good" against his 2barrel range because he has a lot of bluffs, having to play the river gives us reverse implied odds such that calling probably isn't +EV. But, even though we already "beat" a lot of his range and we won't be folding out many better hands, raising may still be the best play as long as it works often enough to be +EV since we are sort of preventing him from constructing his river ranges in a way that gives us reverse implied odds and makes calling down -EV?

We should have a thread just dedicated to how we are doing with this new agressive bankroll management. I get to take shots at 100nl now. I'm going from part time 50nl (full time 25nl) to part time 100nl (full time 50nl and 25nl). This is fun and exciting again. Less than a week into this I'm able to move up. I love it. Hopefully the run good continues.

ahh so the reasoning is that even if we are "good" against his 2barrel range because he has a lot of bluffs, having to play the river gives us reverse implied odds such that calling probably isn't +EV. But, even though we already "beat" a lot of his range and we won't be folding out many better hands, raising may still be the best play as long as it works often enough to be +EV since we are sort of preventing him from constructing his river ranges in a way that gives us reverse implied odds and makes calling down -EV?

Yeah the basic principle is that the tougher the guessing game, the greater the overlay you need between your equity vs. his range and the odds you're getting.

Simple example: let's say villain had half potted. if all-in, we'd need 25%. From crunching #s in the past, I can say with confidence that (barring spectacular reads) calling with even 35% there would be a losing play since the board is so brutal and the river guessing game will be so difficult. I would say you have to actually be ahead of his range to call.

disagree that there are fewer number of players and tables. If you look at historical data from pokerscout you can see that the number of real money players has increased. The fact that there just was a tournament with 200.000 players in it is testament to the fact that poker has grown a lot in the last few 6 years.
What has decreased is the number of random fish. so you do need to learn how to beat bad regs.

disagree that there are fewer number of players and tables. If you look at historical data from pokerscout you can see that the number of real money players has increased. The fact that there just was a tournament with 200.000 players in it is testament to the fact that poker has grown a lot in the last few 6 years.
What has decreased is the number of random fish. so you do need to learn how to beat bad regs.

I think you misunderstood my conclusion, because I didn't argue anything to the contrary. I can't speak to Stars' size right now, but all I meant is that there are more players dispersed across more sites and the result is smaller individual player pools. With smaller individual player pools, you're more likely to run into the same regulars over and over, making it more valuable review hands they've played at your tables. Maybe this isn't true of Stars. I wasn't making assumptions about the overall online poker player pool though.

I think you misunderstood my conclusion, because I didn't argue anything to the contrary. I can't speak to Stars' size right now, but all I meant is that there are more players dispersed across more sites and the result is smaller individual player pools. With smaller individual player pools, you're more likely to run into the same regulars over and over, making it more valuable review hands they've played at your tables. Maybe this isn't true of Stars. I wasn't making assumptions about the overall online poker player pool though.

I think the conclusion is valid and extremely important, in fact. I love the methodology with which you are approaching it, kinda "why didn't I think of that" .
My small gripe was just the method with which you arrived at your conclusion is not true. It may be true only in the US, but it is certainly not true on Stars, Party or iPoker skins. Stars continually has 50+ tables at NL25/NL50.
However, it can't be that bad for you guys either based on the fact that you said you can 20-table. That is a dream for a LHE player like me

I meant the turn there. I have no clue if there was any history between those two or what it was, so it's hard to recommend c/r 99 on the flop. On the turn, I think he should be folding anyway, and it's possible that a pure bluff would work often enough. I don't think I'd do it without an idea of his 2 barrel range (betting nearly any 2 on overcard club?) and how stubbornly he's going to peel.

I don't know it's such a good idea to turn 99 into a bluf on that turn.
Many players cbet that flop w/ most of their range especially when IP. The turn is a good DB card so, again many players DB there. I think 99 is ahead of the DB range but we only need to be 40% of the time ahead given the bet we're facing.
By check/raising the turn we invest the same amount of money we would given we would call a 3rd barrel but now we've folded all his bluffs and we have one more street to play.
Calling that turn and sometimes calling the river has 2 advantages:
1. we keep his bluffs in
2. we see a showdown/collect information
C/R the turn has 2 disadvantages
1.we keep only (read mostly - some % he's calling w/ AcX) hands that beat us
2. we're not guaranteed a showdown for same amount invested

I don't know it's such a good idea to turn 99 into a bluf on that turn.
Many players cbet that flop w/ most of their range especially when IP. The turn is a good DB card so, again many players DB there. I think 99 is ahead of the DB range but we only need to be 40% of the time ahead given the bet we're facing.
By check/raising the turn we invest the same amount of money we would given we would call a 3rd barrel but now we've folded all his bluffs and we have one more street to play.
Calling that turn and sometimes calling the river has 2 advantages:
1. we keep his bluffs in
2. we see a showdown/collect information
C/R the turn has 2 disadvantages
1.we keep only (read mostly - some % he's calling w/ AcX) hands that beat us
2. we're not guaranteed a showdown for same amount invested

bolded is actually incorrect. this is something I looked into a lot in the Playbook series regarding reverse implied odds. you're OOP so you need much more than that since you will face a river bet sometimes. these stubborn calls are usually a losing proposition. it's possible that even if you play perfectly on the river and have more than 40% equity, calling is -EV. that's because of reverse implied odds --> the fact that when money goes in on the river, you're an underdog.