Poker Video: No Limit Hold'Em by threads13 (Mid Stakes)

Time Link to 00:32:54

Table1

Strange line there. Can you talk more about that?

I just see that you dont have a flop donking range overall. You folded 75s on a double barrel in 3459, also there I thought you could donk bet.

Table1

Strange line there. Can you talk more about that?

I feel that he has something like Tx there a lot, and doesn't want a big pot (that's why he checked, right?). So, I started betting really big to build a big pot so that he would fold.

I just see that you dont have a flop donking range overall. You folded 75s on a double barrel in 3459, also there I thought you could donk bet.

It's not that I don't have a flop donking range, it's that versus certain opponents who I expect to c-bet I don't donk unless I think I get them to play worse by donking. I think I probably just get myself to play worse by donking 75s on 543. It can be a rough spot when we get raised.

If I don't expect that player to c-bet, then yeah, I'd donk for value and as a bluff.

Time Link to 00:36:14

Here is an interesting hand where we make a thin value bet on the river.

In this particular hand, we are doing it with QJ, but what would be your range for thin value here?

What about 99-JJ, + QJ?

And do you call vilain's raise with your whole range? I guess this will depend if we have a read on vilain and his riv agg% (below 20 almost never calling a raise, and above that we are calling a lot).

I think I usually give too much credit to vilain's raises in this kind of spot and end up folding too much.

Here is an interesting hand where we make a thin value bet on the river.

In this particular hand, we are doing it with QJ, but what would be your range for thin value here?

What about 99-JJ, + QJ?

And do you call vilain's raise with your whole range? I guess this will depend if we have a read on vilain and his riv agg% (below 20 almost never calling a raise, and above that we are calling a lot).

I think I usually give too much credit to vilain's raises in this kind of spot and end up folding too much.

Yeah, if I'm taking this small bet line I'm pretty much calling with my whole range. I think 99+ looks pretty good. Maybe 99 is a little thin, but I think 99/TT sounds about right.

Time Link to 00:18:00

Maybe bit late, but I'm watching your series now. Definitely good stuff!

Why did you flat 75s on table 2? Button seems pretty tight, shortstacker behind. I think F > 3b > C is better here in general versus relatively unknowns?

Also, you don't minraise buttons ever. Any reasons for this or just a personal preference?

Time Link to 01:01:52

Maybe weird, but just a thought.

But is he maybe more likely to call because you waited relatively long for shoving and with a strong hand he expects you to shove quicker? I know fish don't think that much about timing tells etc., but maybe it seems like you were hesitating (from his point of view)?

Also, you really think min 3b are weak that often? Then it makes more sense to call the 3b with AJo and play a smaller pot in position and go from there. My experience is that fishy players call 4b pretty wide, and are sticky post with medium pocket pairs, top pair and medium pair.

Maybe bit late, but I'm watching your series now. Definitely good stuff!

Why did you flat 75s on table 2? Button seems pretty tight, shortstacker behind. I think F > 3b > C is better here in general versus relatively unknowns?

Also, you don't minraise buttons ever. Any reasons for this or just a personal preference?

Sure, he looks tight, but we only have 20 hands on him. We can guess he's tight, but we don't know whether he's opening 5% of his hands... or 60%. He's OTB, after all. So, we can ask "what % of hands does a tight player open OTB?" That's the best question we can ask now. He's probably opening at least 30%. 75s plays well vs a 30% range because a 30% range rarely has anything, so we can play our draws aggressively as bluffs, and our medium pairs make for good bluff catchers. These hands are good to play vs wider ranges. They are also nicer with a higher SPR so we can put pressure on our opponents with our draws to get some FE, and get money in when we happen to hit big hands. Thus, this hand prefers to call if it can see the flop a high % of the time given a likely wide range and medium SPR. If the SS'er is enough of a squeezer than we don't see the flop as much, then we can't profitably call so we decide between 3-betting and folding.

On choosing 3-bet bluffing hands.... If we're going to 3-bet bluff we'd rather 3-bet with something that can have some ability to out-flop our opponent when he calls. That means a high-card is nice. So I like 3-betting something like K5s here. It still has the suitedness, but it at least has a hope vs 99. 75s is going to struggle vs 99 unless we can get it to fold at some point. If we can get it to fold with 75s (because we flop a lot of draws) the same can be said for K5s (we flop draws with that hand too - just not as many). Maybe our post-flop steal equity isn't as good with K5s, but it also is slightly better pre (blocker value) and we have some showdown equity value as well.

Maybe weird, but just a thought.

But is he maybe more likely to call because you waited relatively long for shoving and with a strong hand he expects you to shove quicker? I know fish don't think that much about timing tells etc., but maybe it seems like you were hesitating (from his point of view)?

Also, you really think min 3b are weak that often? Then it makes more sense to call the 3b with AJo and play a smaller pot in position and go from there. My experience is that fishy players call 4b pretty wide, and are sticky post with medium pocket pairs, top pair and medium pair.

Yeah, I think that's possible. It seems like I'm weak when I take a really long time.

To the min 3-bet: Yeah, I definitely find them to on average be good but not great hands. Therefore AJo does pretty well when we regain the initiation and the corresponding post-flop FE it gives us. I think you'd be surprised how often they end up folding later on because they just miss. Furthermore, them being sticking with mid-pairs is pretty good for your AJ. That means you get multiple bets when you out-flop them. That's good implied odds.

Sure, he looks tight, but we only have 20 hands on him. We can guess he's tight, but we don't know whether he's opening 5% of his hands... or 60%. He's OTB, after all. So, we can ask "what % of hands does a tight player open OTB?" That's the best question we can ask now. He's probably opening at least 30%. 75s plays well vs a 30% range because a 30% range rarely has anything, so we can play our draws aggressively as bluffs, and our medium pairs make for good bluff catchers. These hands are good to play vs wider ranges. They are also nicer with a higher SPR so we can put pressure on our opponents with our draws to get some FE, and get money in when we happen to hit big hands. Thus, this hand prefers to call if it can see the flop a high % of the time given a likely wide range and medium SPR. If the SS'er is enough of a squeezer than we don't see the flop as much, then we can't profitably call so we decide between 3-betting and folding.

On choosing 3-bet bluffing hands.... If we're going to 3-bet bluff we'd rather 3-bet with something that can have some ability to out-flop our opponent when he calls. That means a high-card is nice. So I like 3-betting something like K5s here. It still has the suitedness, but it at least has a hope vs 99. 75s is going to struggle vs 99 unless we can get it to fold at some point. If we can get it to fold with 75s (because we flop a lot of draws) the same can be said for K5s (we flop draws with that hand too - just not as many). Maybe our post-flop steal equity isn't as good with K5s, but it also is slightly better pre (blocker value) and we have some showdown equity value as well.

Yeah, I saw more theory / math on calling vs. 3-betting with suited (gap) connectors a few episodes later. Interesting stuff. But for the most part, we only want to flat button vs. blind situations right, because from the CO his range is tighter and therefore calling is less profitable?

I definitely agree with you on the part of 3-betting as a bluff. It is just I've the feeling it is hard to play postflop when I call SC from that spot, flopping marginal, being OOP, facing high bluffing/aggression frequency and no initiative. On the other hand, it makes your much harder to play against as you now can have those hands where villain don't put you on.

Yeah, I think that's possible. It seems like I'm weak when I take a really long time.

To the min 3-bet: Yeah, I definitely find them to on average be good but not great hands. Therefore AJo does pretty well when we regain the initiation and the corresponding post-flop FE it gives us. I think you'd be surprised how often they end up folding later on because they just miss. Furthermore, them being sticking with mid-pairs is pretty good for your AJ. That means you get multiple bets when you out-flop them. That's good implied odds.

Hm yeah it is probably better to 4b and have the initiative, because fish do tend to play relatively straight forward in 3b/4b pot when they don't hit.

Yeah, I saw more theory / math on calling vs. 3-betting with suited (gap) connectors a few episodes later. Interesting stuff. But for the most part, we only want to flat button vs. blind situations right, because from the CO his range is tighter and therefore calling is less profitable?

I definitely agree with you on the part of 3-betting as a bluff. It is just I've the feeling it is hard to play postflop when I call SC from that spot, flopping marginal, being OOP, facing high bluffing/aggression frequency and no initiative. On the other hand, it makes your much harder to play against as you now can have those hands where villain don't put you on.

I'd often be calling still vs CO with a lot of stuff like that, but I'd fold the 64s/75s type of stuff. I'd still call with stuff like 98s, though.

A lot of guys really worry about playing OOP, so they start 3-betting hands that they should be calling with because "we are OOP". You're going to be OOP regardless. Would you rather be OOP in a small pot vs a 30% range, or OOP in a big pot vs a 10% range? Give me the 30% every time if I have a hand that can play back often enough. If I can't play back post-flop often enough, I'll play back vs the 30% pre, and then get back in line when he calls.

Playing OOP isn't too bad if you know your opponent is unlikely to have anything good. Most TAGs c-bet with reckless abandon and while starting with a weak range, so chances are they don't have anything good when they c-bet. Another problem with playing OOP is not knowing what your opponent is going to do. However, you know what your opponent is going to do when you look at a lot of flops. You can pretty much pick out the flop he'll bet, right? "I check and he's going to... oh look he bet! Shocker!" So, our position isn't as bad as it seems, we have a stronger range than our opponent, and we can often have a good idea of what he'll do when we check. That's a good situation for us. It's not as hard as it seems. Just realize he doesn't have anything and as long as he keeps c-betting with nothing all the time that will be true. If he folds his nothing to pressure, bluff him. If he plays back at his nothing to pressure because he thinks your full of it then he's putting a lot of money in the pot with nothing. That's easy to beat. Just value him thin. He can't keep putting money in with nothing, vs something, and hope to come out ahead as long as you realize that you have to stop folding.

As far a 3-betting goes... When you 3-bet you pick up the pot, when is a fine result, but when you get called you just flipped it around. Now you're OOP and your opponent likely has a stronger range than you. That sucks for us. Most guys will tend to play alright in this spot. Fundamentally, this isn't that great for us. We can be compensated for this fact by getting some folds pre-flop which is the idea of the 3-bet bluff in and of itself. So, now we are OOP, but don't know as much what our opponent will do, and he has a stronger range that us. This is not a great situation for us.


It's easy to say "ok I want to 3-bet because playing OOP sucks". Wellll.... you're OOP either way! Obviously it's not as if 3-betting puts you IP. It just gives you immediate fold equity. You want to think about which situation your hand does better in. Some hands can't take advantage of the calling situation, so you have to 3-bet them, and then when you get called you have to try to climb back up hill (unless of course your opponent plays really bad in 3-bet pots). However, 3-betting a ton in these spots really isn't going to crush your opponent if he is going to deal with it all. It's fairly easy to respond to a really out of balance bluff-heavy 3-bet range. Just stop folding.

Great post, super interesting, definitely going to experiment with it. Thanks!