---

Poker Video: Limit Hold'Em by BigBadBabar (Micro/Small Stakes)

Right table. You isolate a limper with A3o on the button. You mention here (and in previous videos) that you will often isolate a limper with a hand that you would normally have open raised with pf.

The A3o has some high card strength with the Ace, suggesting that you can possibly win the hand unimproved if your isoation raise allows you to play the hand heads up with the limper. However, would you also consider iso raising a limper with a hand without much high card strength, that you might open raise with, such as the 96o in the above hand on the left table ?

Sure. Isoing with hands like T9s is common and has plenty of merit. I have no problem lopping off the bottoms of your opening ranges when you're going to iso, though. A lot of the value of opening a pot lightly comes from the potential to take the pot down preflop, and as soon as someone limps that opportunity is no longer available. So I might open 96o otb but only iso 98o or maybe not even that. Something like T9o or 98s would be standard though.

It's not only showdown value that's important here (high card strength or a pair, etc) -- equity, fold equity, and postflop playability are other important factors. Hypothetically if we knew a player limped any two cards and only continued on the flop when he flopped something reasonable (pair or good draw) then it'd be correct to iso him with any two cards and always fire the c-bet. Obviously such players don't really exist but my point is that vs guys who give up too much on the flop, or play in a really predictable way, that the strength of your hand pf isn't the only, or even main, factor.

Right table. You continue bet the 355K turn with your A3o. River is another 5 and you call your opponent's strange donk bet, which could be a weaker 3 or random bluff.

Villain had K9 and you mention that he missed value by not check raising the turn. However, you were planning on bet/folding the turn. So, villain's strange line appeared to win him an extra bet.

If villain were your student, how would you explain to him that his line was poor, after he argued that it gained him an extra bet ?

In passing, I dont like villain's play either !

His play got an extra bet vs my exact hand but I don't think it's good vs my overall range.

I'd say to him that his hand has too much value vs my range to play it so passively/just as a bluffcatcher. While I might bet/fold stuff weaker than a king on the turn, many of his opponents at these stakes will bet/call down with worse hands vs a turn checkraise. Also, if the argument is that he's bluffcatching to maximize value vs the air/barrel parts of my range, then he should check the river too, hoping I fire the the last barrel on the river with my air. Betting lets me off the hook when I'm weak.

You mention that you would consider open limping some hands in a full ring game. I presume the game would need to have mainly loose passive players, and that you were talking about open limping from early position with the expectation of some over limping behind you.

What type of hands might you consider open limping with in these circumstances in a full ring game ?

The book Small Stakes Holdem covers a lot of solid basics for loose fullring games, so check that out if you haven't. Good implied odds hands like small pairs, medium/good suited connectors, etc, would be what I was talking about here.

Right table. You defend your BB heads up with QTs against an UTG raise. You then check fold on a 973 flop.

Might it be worth considering a flop peel with your 2 overcards and various backdoor flush and straight draws? Any 8, J or diamond would give you a good draw and your pair outs might be good.

Or does the combination of UTG probably having a narrow pf raising range and the pot being a modest size, make a flop call not worthwhile? Would a flop call become reasonable if the pf raiser had been on the button ?

I think a peel would be reasonable. I think to justify it I would need to semibluff a lot of turn cards and since he's raised UTG I don't think I'd have necessary fold equity vs his range to make it a good plan. Check/calling and re-evaluating is okay, but be careful not to always check/call any two overs and then check/fold the turn unimproved. Your opponents will often double barrel (both because they have a strong range and also because I'm not showing any strength) and I don't think you'll improve enough relative to the size of the pot to make your play a correct one.

Right table. You have AK and your opponent donks into you on a T8JJ (3 to a flush board).

This is the same villain that did not check raise you when he paired his K in the earlier 96o hand. So, this is the answer to how you exploit your opponent's poor play earlier in the session ?

You use your read gained that he likes to donk made hands to probably save a bet (or bets) in a situation where you otherwise might have called at least another bet !

Yeah, that was my thought process here. I could be drawing dead or very thinly.

Left table. You open raise J8o from the SB. The BB calls and check raises you on a dryish J73 rainbow flop.

You plan on calling the BB's flop raise with the intention of check raising the turn, and say that you expect the BB to have a wide range.

Why do you think the BB has a wide range for c/raising this flop as few draws other than gut-shots are possible ? And what do you think the BB's likely hand range is ?

Also, would you consider 3-betting the flop and leading the turn (as an alternative line), to prevent the BB from possibly checking behind on the turn for a free card ?

He just raised me on the flop, not a check/raise, since he's in position.

From my experience vs sort of bad aggressive players (on Cake there are a lot, but also elsewhere) a lot of the more aggro players like to raise dry flops with wide ranges including bluffs, top pair, middle pair, bottom pair, draws, and some random stuff. Vs. that range I'm doing very well. I think he's going to bet his entire range on the turn so I make one more small bet by checkraising there as opposed to 3betting the flop. The problem with 3betting the flop is that it's very hard to balance (especially so on dry boards) since your range almost immediately narrows to top pair and better. For the times when you have top pair or better, this is fine (except for potentially not getting the extra half bet in by b/c flop c/r turn), but the problem is that you don't always have top pair or better - in fact, not that often! So if you always b3b strong hands, then any time you just b/c your opponents can figure out that you're not that strong, and can have a profitable 2barrel.

However, since there are lots of hands I would bet/call this flop with, like overs, 99, mp, bp, etc, then it's a lot easier and better for my range to just bet/call the flop, not giving away information, and then check/decide on the turn. If i got a read that my opponent liked to free card raise drawy boards then yes, bet3betting becomes viable again to prevent his line. On a dry board I'm not much worried about that though.

Left table. You c-bet KJo on a 9Q36 turn with the intention of folding to a raise. You subsequently decide that it may have been better to check/call the turn as you are unlikely to get a better hand to fold.

Does that mean that you think your opponent will have more hands that beat you (such as pairs, which you later mention) in his flop calling range than hands that you beat, such as draws like JT ? And that with a gut-shot and possibly good pair outs if you are behind, you would prefer to see the river for another bet as opposed to folding to a raise.

If you did check/call the turn, were you planning on folding the river unimproved ?

Yes, exactly, and yes. When they peel wet boards they tend to have wider ranges compared to when they peel dry boards (absence of draws)

Left table. You have T8s and are check raised after c-betting your open ended straight draw on the 97A flop.

The turn 3 completes a possible flush, and you consider that if your opponent had only called your flop bet, that you would not have continued to semi-bluff on this board.

So, does that mean (if your opponent just called your flop bet) that you would have check called this turn with the intention of check folding the river unimproved ?

I'm not sure I understand your post. I was in position vs him. If he had just called my flop c-bet then I think a turn bet would be fine given that I have an OESD to go along with my ten high (very low in my range and no SD value). What I was saying was that the flush card on the turn makes it a bad card for me to semibluff raise the turn now, since it hits his flop checkraising range reasonably hard.

ty Fantam and Digger

Yw BBB.

Thankyou for the detailed responses, which as always are very informative and helpful.