---

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

Time Link to 00:20:17

Imo you shoud/could have weighted far more down all the J9s,T9s,98s,T8s,87s. 76s just b/c of Preflop.
I man, vs. a MP-oRaiserange from a standard TAG (15-20%), I would guess that it is not such a good idea for more or less 100BB effective stacks to flat OOP.

For instance vs Co or exspecially a wide Bu-Stealrange, it would be good to flat it pre and hence more realisitc for BB`s Range - but ok, that is only a small note b/c that is not so important for the sake of the series, which will become imo epic - I already love it like I have loved Prof. Plotkin - respect and thank you for this

Imo you shoud/could have weighted far more down all the J9s,T9s,98s,T8s,87s. 76s just b/c of Preflop.
I man, vs. a MP-oRaiserange from a standard TAG (15-20%), I would guess that it is not such a good idea for more or less 100BB effective stacks to flat OOP.

For instance vs Co or exspecially a wide Bu-Stealrange, it would be good to flat it pre and hence more realisitc for BB`s Range - but ok, that is only a small note b/c that is not so important for the sake of the series, which will become imo epic - I already love it like I have loved Prof. Plotkin - respect and thank you for this

Those are among the higher weights overall. I usually prefer not to put anything much over 90% and those are pretty close to that. J9s is only 75% and could probably go up to 80%+, but overall I agree those are among the most likely hands to flat preflop and c/c the flop, along with the pocket pairs.

Those are among the higher weights overall. I usually prefer not to put anything much over 90% and those are pretty close to that. J9s is only 75% and could probably go up to 80%+, but overall I agree those are among the most likely hands to flat preflop and c/c the flop, along with the pocket pairs.

hm, I actually meant that these hands are probably (assuming Villain is a TAG) not so ikely b/c of preflop + positions...

Time Link to 00:38:45

When Paddy said "Instinctively I think betting $720..." I was lol'd. I totally was thinking to myself "I'd bet $720".

I think bluffing as over-bet in this spot makes standard TAGs kick off their hand reading and just fold.

hm, I actually meant that these hands are probably (assuming Villain is a TAG) not so ikely b/c of preflop + positions...

Well it depends on how good MP opener is, but I think flatting hands like T9s and J9s is going to be +EV from the BB closing the action HU. QJs and JTs are very standard calls, and T9s/J9s are not significantly worse. I would fold the 76s and 86s, but against a random TAG regular, we're going to see him show up with those hands some non-zero % of the time.

When Paddy said "Instinctively I think betting $720..." I was lol'd. I totally was thinking to myself "I'd bet $720".

I think bluffing as over-bet in this spot makes standard TAGs kick off their hand reading and just fold.

I think Paddy and I would both like to explore overbetting in the series. The problem is that it is so opponent-dependent but I think we can still do it. The secret is out as far as overbetting goes (you see it a lot more than you used to) but most people still probably aren't doing it with correct frequencies.

Well it depends on how good MP opener is, but I think flatting hands like T9s and J9s is going to be +EV from the BB closing the action HU. QJs and JTs are very standard calls, and T9s/J9s are not significantly worse. I would fold the 76s and 86s, but against a random TAG regular, we're going to see him show up with those hands some non-zero % of the time.

All right, thanks very much for responding

Time Link to 00:30:37

Maybe you missed here by accident that the turnpotsize is 225$, instead of 175$?
-> hence EV or Turncheck would be: 0,38 x 225 = +85,5$

Time Link to 00:31:25

Oh hoppla and sry:
Obv. I paused the vid to try the calculations on my own and before there was written out that turnpotsize was 175$....

Time Link to 00:43:00

What is the title of the second column?
It look like combos but at what point in the hand? And are those numbers used anywhere in the spread sheet qouted?

(I am trying to recreate this exercise on my own and are having trouble getting the same numbers as you at the bottom of the columns "Better", "WBC" and "Nothing")

I was also thinking that these categorizations of river cards are simplifications for the sake of our sanity, right? Because different spade rivers will affect the effective combos left for villain, let say the J of spade falls then we can remove AsJs and KsJs from his range.

I think Paddy and I would both like to explore overbetting in the series. The problem is that it is so opponent-dependent but I think we can still do it. The secret is out as far as overbetting goes (you see it a lot more than you used to) but most people still probably aren't doing it with correct frequencies.

Agreed. It can definitely get into a bit of a leveling war. One cool thing about it though is that as your bet grows in relation to the pot game theory tells us that bluffs can be a larger percentage of your range (to have a GTO strategy). Not saying that this is the goal, but generally as opponents become better we have to move towards a GTO strategy more and more. Since we are playing NLHE and often have nothing it can become easier to balance/play well against players who can read hands as long as we are willing to both bluff overbet and can value bet thinner than the nuts as an overbet.

Oh hoppla and sry:
Obv. I paused the vid to try the calculations on my own and before there was written out that turnpotsize was 175$....

Yeah I had a mistake on the original ppt. I went and changed it while recording but I guess I left the original in there for a couple of seconds.

What is the title of the second column?
It look like combos but at what point in the hand? And are those numbers used anywhere in the spread sheet qouted?

(I am trying to recreate this exercise on my own and are having trouble getting the same numbers as you at the bottom of the columns "Better", "WBC" and "Nothing")

I was also thinking that these categorizations of river cards are simplifications for the sake of our sanity, right? Because different spade rivers will affect the effective combos left for villain, let say the J of spade falls then we can remove AsJs and KsJs from his range.

What you're seeing is basically me accounting for what you're saying. There are 9 river spades. For example, KsJs is impossible when the river is a Ks or a Js. So on 7/9 of river cards, it is possible. 7/9 = .777 and that's why it says 0.8. That should account for me grouping together all 9 spades.

So yeah, for the sake of my sanity I grouped the river by types, but I did account for this by altering the # of combinations. I can post the excel sheet if you'd like, but it's a bit of a mess right now.

I read your recommendation of Slice. I tried a little bit of it but didn't like it as much because I couldn't find out if it had suit selection. Equilab is best but isn't working anymore. Anyways I have a older version of Equilab that works. Have you used it? I recommend it, let me know if you are interested. Good luck, Yojimgari

Hey threads can you expand on what your thoughts are on overbetting - if/when they cover it.