sweeet. I find myself concurring with oink constantly here and on 2p2. It will be great to see a guy who is one step further on road to high stakes than I am.

I\'m going to watch right now, and I\'m sure I\'ll make commentary later.

Somehow I managed to convince DD and the guys that I had something to contribute... Or something.

No sexy accent unfortunately ;) . Scandinavians dont have that. Italians tho...


Anyways. I also posted this on 2p2. Looking through the video I felt I played pretty well comparing to my own standards. Obviously I am no DD. I am really looking forward to any comments on potential awfull play and leaks.

For what it\'s worth, I really liked it. I love seeing more of this LAGTAG thingy in action. Or should it be LAGLAG on Oink\'s case?

TY. Appreciate it


About the T7 hand

First of all. Your image matters a lot here.

So I know that villain was a TAG and as I remember on the weakish side.

I also know his range is wide. Something like 50-60%

He doesnt know me. And I am aware of that. I recently changed SN and the numbers I have on him are likely mined.

I think all this makes this a fairly easy raise. He is going to fold any hand that missed the board and maybe even pp\'s because he is OOP against an unknown. (remember he is weakish TAG)


The fact that I am unknown to him also implies that I have to check the turn if he calls - since when he calls he will have a pair almost always on this board. If I improve to a pair and he bets river fast I will not call. If he thinks and then bets I will prolly call thinking he has a 6.


My possible outs becomes more important if he is aware of me being a LAGTAG. In that case he might choose to call my flop raise and even see a SD with hands like good Kx and QJs, QTs, JTs, Q9s with bdfd\'s. Stuff like that. (Not seeing a SD with Qx and Jx prolly.)

In that case I can get more value out of my hand when it improves since I will be betting again on the turn and not fold a whole lot if he fires the river.

Another thing is that since I have a few ways to improve it actually sucks a bit when he 3-bets. If I have 63 on AK8 flop and he 3-bets me I prolly have 0% eq. If he 3-bets me in this hand I will give up maybe about 8% eq on average in a 9SB pot when I fold or make a bad call when I call. So the fact that I have outs will enhance my mistake when he 3-bets me.


Now say villain is OTB and a TAG. I will c/r here 100% if I know I am unknown to him. Again, he is simply folding way too many hands not to take a shot here when your image is non-retarded.

When my image is retarded, which it will usually be after 100+ hands with villain I will not take a shot 100%. But still do it once in a while.


I want to add 1 final thing.
When you defend your BB IP against a TAG you can pop so many flops. Any AKx and AQx flop sucks for a very large part of villains range. Two high cards is even better because people tend to peel more when they have two overcards to the middle card. On a AK6 flop they cant have that of course. On these flops IP in a BvB I raise 100% when I have a good image and villain is a TAG

I think it was a great video. I agree with most of your decisions. But I have 2 comments.

In minute 20 you had T3s in the SB, there was one limper, and the big blind was a TAG. You decided to complete and I don\'t like it much. Playing suited crap getting less than 5:1 is OK when you are closing the action, or when the guy remaining to act is passive, but i don\'t think it\'s good with an aggresive player left to act. Then the BB raised and you called again getting 5:1 and closing the action. Too loose again, because someone raising in the BB against two people usually have a strong hand.

In minute 20 too, you had KJo in the button and openraise. TAG SB 3bets you and you cap (i don\'t think it\'s great to cap because you said that he knows you are LAG, but it\'s ok I don\'t mind the cap). But the flop is K44, he donks and you raise. I don\'t like that raise, you are WA/WB and I think that raising gains nothing in this situation. What do you think?

Thanks! And again, great video.

Great video Oink, I don\'t really have any questions regarding the video the things I was going to ask about have already been metioned in this thread. I hope you get the chance to make some more of these and post them here, I liked the way you explained your decisions in the video.

I think Oink\'s point makes sense when you have somewhat of a read on a guy but he doesn\'t have one on you. As he mentioned, the 5/10ish level is filled with a lot of fairly weak TAGs. They play preflop well but haven\'t had a lot of experience with tough thinking Danish LAG monsters (hehe) so they let you get away with stuff postflop. After showing some hands down though they will pick up on the fact that he is robbing them blind and then he has to go back to his more normal style of choosing spots and value betting them to death.

-DeathDonkey

Some rambling thoughts. Mostly just me thinking out loud. Don\'t feel obliged to comment if the comments are too clueless. :-)

- 08:50: unknown on the button opens, you defend w A8o, flop is KT8r, you check-raise, villain calls the raise, you lead the turn, 2 , which brings a heart draw on the board and you say you expect to be raised on this turn fairly often. Would you call-down on this spot given that no or Q, J, 9 type of cards didn\'t hit the river? There are a lot of draws on the board and the villain could very well be semi-bluffing. Though in hindsight perhaps not this particular villain.

Also, on the river, brick 4 , you\'re undecided whether you can valuebet it but the discussion comes off short as you begin to timeout.

- on 09:00ish, you open w 77 on the hijack, get 3-bet by a TAG on SB. Flop comes A 9 4 you ponder whether you can profitably call flop and turn and fold on the river UI and check behind if the villain checks. The pot is 8 SB after SB bets, and the reasoning goes that you\'re expecting to pay 1.5BB for showdown that you have a some chance of winning (and that the villain will not be betting the river on a bluff), for a 5.5BB pot. So, assuming something like a 13% 3-betting range for the villain, pair of sevens has around 30% equity here, which seems to justify the semi-call-down. This is somewhat eye-opening, as I would have probably just folded, never giving a second thought for it. Something like pair of tens should be enough for that line, then, right? (Though TT could have been capping hand preflop also.)

- 09:45 You have A 5 on BB and a TAG opens from the button. Flop comes 2 9 K and you try to decide whether to check-call, check-call, check-fold. You aren\'t going to try to steal on this spot ever w flush draw and potential gut-shots on the board and with ace high, right? But say you had 7 T (again :-) ), and the board was rainbow, you\'d might go for a pure check-raise steal? (Depending on your image and the villain, of course.)

- 17:34 you defend with A T against UTG raise and mistake the situation for a cold call on the villain\'s part and donk the flop of 7 7 J . What would your play have been if you had check to the preflop raiser? Doesn\'t seem like a board that you can get AK/AQ or pocket pairs to fold, but your equity is decent there, though the preflop raise did come from UTG.

- 32:35 Q8o not good enough to complete in 2/5 blind structure when a bad player has limped and you have an aggressive player on the big blind?

- 36:00 Good discussion on turn decisions when you opened w T9o and the flop came something like 4 8 9 , turn is K . Now, you said that w, say, 66 you would be more inclined to check behind and and call a river bet, because the K makes him fold large part of the range that he would have had bet the river as a bluff. So it would be the same as 66 if you had Ace high with reasonable kicker there?