---

Poker Video: No Limit Hold'Em by livebikebart (High Stakes)

first been waiting for this, if its anything like deuce plays it will be excellent

Time Link to 00:30:10

Dont you want to get heads-up or in pot with max 2 people with your aces ?
With 5 people in the pot, your equity goes way down.

sik title

Time Link to 00:31:55

Why would Asian lady of made a preflop mistake if she had a 7?

Surely as she has a raise and 2 callers in-front of her and she has a suited connector they go way up in value. Even given her short-ish stack size.

I dont think it is a mistake for her to show up with a suited connector or A7s.

You also said that they are likely to be playing less than 20% of hands and mainly have pocket pairs and big suited cards. They will also show up with suited connectors a good % of the time. Making it a mistake for you to discount the 7x hands she has in her range.

Time Link to 01:00:44

I'd rather make the flop raise size about $150 or so. The main reason is because the guy is not full stacked so I want to leave as much money behind to make big "scary" bets to move him off the hand later on. We can keep firing the turn like you suggested and he'll lay down those marginal 1 pair hands on the turn or river anyway so I don't see a reason to risk a lot of money on the flop in case he has a big hand.

Bart touched on one of the keys to this hand; If the villain has a set/straight/two pair and leads out, and then gets raised...he is almost ALWAYS 3-betting the flop back. He isn't going to smooth call the raise OOP because a) he is so excited he hit his hand AND has gotten action he'll just get the money in and b) he's afraid to get outdrawn so he'll sacrifice value and instead get his chips in right away. If he just smooth calls the raise, that almost certainly means he has a marginal 1 pair type hand which we can frequently barrel him off later on. So by making a slightly smaller flop raise, we risk the minimum when we're up against a monster, and also allow us maximum stack leverage to put pressure on him when he has a marginal hand.

Great video, can't wait for next week.

Hey Bart! Love the video. In an unrelated question, any thoughts of continuing on with the O8 series, first episode was excellent.

Oh sweet. I knew from the title it was live poker, and figured from the name it had to be Bart Hanson. Thanks Bart, will absolutely watch this series!

Great video. I am primarily a live player and love your "hands from a cash game" podcasts and this replayer makes it even better.
Thanks; this will now be my favorite series.

Time Link to 00:04:58

couldn't you bet more in this spot? against 4 opponents who are never folding when they hit something you can easily bet pot or more, I think. Another reason to bet more here is that there's really no need for deception against live loose passive, at least that's what I've noticed from my casino experience. Even if they realize you're betting bigger with bigger hands, they're still not gonna lay down toppair or a draw.

ok sorry i see you're betting practically pot on the turn

I love the player names in this video so much.

Time Link to 00:32:38

It makes sense to keep your bets small here because of her stack size and to keep her range wide, but do you think there is some merit to betting bigger on flop and trying to get most of the money in the turn? If someone has a hand like 88, 99, TT, there are going to be a lot of cards that might potentially kill our action on the turn or river.

Time Link to 00:14:48

What is the Drunk Guy drinking? I like whiskey myself.

Time Link to 00:50:20

I think this is definitely true. I don't know if I've ever really thought about why until now, and I've definitely done the opposite before without success. The reasons you mention make a lot of sense and I'll be sure to keep this in mind when I'm deciding whether to loosen or tighten up.

Really good job on this series, looking forward to more of the videos. Great explanation of live concepts and hand reading.

Time Link to 00:42:39

Excellent video Bart ... just like the podcast, only better!

You also do a great job of keeping interest in the series ... I'm looking forward to 'Drunk Bart's hand analysis' ... it could be like the non-cartoon version of the Micros for the week!

Dont you want to get heads-up or in pot with max 2 people with your aces ?
With 5 people in the pot, your equity goes way down.

My immediate value does indeed go down but I am more interested in what I like to call "future value". I think that it is more important to let in the dominated broadway hands and extract multiple streets of value from an inferior top pair. Also, preflop, I would rather have 40% equity in a pot of $175 rather than 85% equity in a pot of $75. I think that your argument holds more validity in a tournament where the immediate value of accumulating chips with less risk means so much more.

Why would Asian lady of made a preflop mistake if she had a 7?

Surely as she has a raise and 2 callers in-front of her and she has a suited connector they go way up in value. Even given her short-ish stack size.

I dont think it is a mistake for her to show up with a suited connector or A7s.

You also said that they are likely to be playing less than 20% of hands and mainly have pocket pairs and big suited cards. They will also show up with suited connectors a good % of the time. Making it a mistake for you to discount the 7x hands she has in her range.

I think it is very close but you're probably right, with the two callers in between she may correctly show up here with a 7. However, with our stack sizes and the propensity for her to shove overpairs "to protect" on the turn I am never folding.

I'd rather make the flop raise size about $150 or so. The main reason is because the guy is not full stacked so I want to leave as much money behind to make big "scary" bets to move him off the hand later on. We can keep firing the turn like you suggested and he'll lay down those marginal 1 pair hands on the turn or river anyway so I don't see a reason to risk a lot of money on the flop in case he has a big hand.

Bart touched on one of the keys to this hand; If the villain has a set/straight/two pair and leads out, and then gets raised...he is almost ALWAYS 3-betting the flop back. He isn't going to smooth call the raise OOP because a) he is so excited he hit his hand AND has gotten action he'll just get the money in and b) he's afraid to get outdrawn so he'll sacrifice value and instead get his chips in right away. If he just smooth calls the raise, that almost certainly means he has a marginal 1 pair type hand which we can frequently barrel him off later on. So by making a slightly smaller flop raise, we risk the minimum when we're up against a monster, and also allow us maximum stack leverage to put pressure on him when he has a marginal hand.

Great video, can't wait for next week.

I like your thought of raising smaller on the flop to keep more money behind in theory, however in practice I find that people feel more committed to staying in the pot once they make that flop call. By immediately raising a little bigger I feel that it is more intimidating as he knows that he most likely will have to play for all of his chips at some point during the hand. I can definitely see guys peeling the flops with 7s or 8s vs a $150 raise where $220 significantly increases the chance that the hand ends right here.

It makes sense to keep your bets small here because of her stack size and to keep her range wide, but do you think there is some merit to betting bigger on flop and trying to get most of the money in the turn? If someone has a hand like 88, 99, TT, there are going to be a lot of cards that might potentially kill our action on the turn or river.

Your thought definitely has merit but I would rather take the chance in betting smaller so that I can at least get a light flop call. Then they have chips in the pot and feel more committed on future streets. If I can bet $70 and get a call from 3s 5s or 6s, really I think the only bad cards for me on the turn are As and Ks. Then I can bet $100-$150, and suddenly my opponent feels compelled to call any river.

i feel stupid now for thinking that this live series would be filmed live... but was i the only one thinking that? obviously it makes no sense and wouldn't work technically. oh well

i feel stupid now for thinking that this live series would be filmed live... but was i the only one thinking that? obviously it makes no sense and wouldn't work technically. oh well

Bart said some of it would be, from Live at the Bike.
But yes ... its a bit more involved technically than just doing stuff in a hand replayer

Exceedingly brilliant title!

hahaha that tittle.. Jesus... just lost his pants

i feel stupid now for thinking that this live series would be filmed live... but was i the only one thinking that? obviously it makes no sense and wouldn't work technically. oh well

Actually, it is in the plans to have one or two episodes come from nights where I play on Live at the Bike.

Actually, it is in the plans to have one or two episodes come from nights where I play on Live at the Bike.

That will be quite good.

Cheers for the reply btw.

Really , really entertaining, even for an online PLO player.
Why don't you bring in limon for an episode or two?
He's always fun too and judging from your collective podcasts , you two make a good team...

Great video.
I am a live 5/10 player as well, but not in LA .

In the first hand, the over limp with the 22, is interesting. If 22 is a limp, what hands would you be raising in that spot? Would you open raise 22?

Although I agree that raising in that spot purely to isolate is probably a mistake, we have other reasons to raise other than just purely for isolation. If the two shorter stacks were closer to the 50bb range would you then be leaning a bit more towards a raise?

I wonder how we could calculate the benefits of isolating and c-betting the flop versus the implied odds of hitting a set and winning a big pot.

What would you say your default VPiP PFR and 3B (i.e. when you first sit down in a game)?

Also, if you have an Android phone, you could use the application I'm working on to help you track hands. Although I don't have a feature built in yet to export the hands in a universal format you can record the basic action of the hands and view them in an HTML format. Plus a bunch of other stuff.
Check it out at
http://nuancesys.trickel.com

It's currently in beta and free, but it will cost money in the future.

Looking forward to the rest of the series.

Why don't you bring in limon for an episode or two?
He's always fun too and judging from your collective podcasts , you two make a good team...

+1
Although the first video is excellent as it stands.

Great first video Bart. I second the Limon suggestion. In one hand you mentioned he was at the table and I also saw citizen James. I instantly thought that a commentary on a hand that you were involved in with those players (either multiway or heads up) might actually be pretty interesting from multiple view points given your different approaches to live poker and how well you interact with them on the podcast... for entertainment value maybe even the sober and drunk version

Seriously though I did have a question about your set mining requirements.

In Professional No Limit Holdem they suggest that you should be able to win at least 12X the raise when purely set mining. Which implies not only the villains stack size but also their range and their willingness to stack off in various situations. Harrington in HOC suggests a huge 25X for set mining. Frequently in Low Stakes 100bb or 150bb capped games where standard opens are 6-8bbs or more you often cannot get 25X and many times barely 12x which means you either would be dumping a lot of PPs or must play them other than for set value which can be difficult in the "no-foldem" low stakes games.

I had seen an extensive analysis of online data that suggested somewhere in the range between 11 and 12. You frequently cite 10X which is much more achievable than Harrington and often right on the margins in these lowstakes games. But is this really enough to make pure set mining profitable?

There has been some raging debate in the LLSNL forums at 2+2 about this subject and I would like to hear your views a bit further.

Thanks again and looking forward to the next video.

Are you seriously going to be able to get 200bbs+ with a set vs a competent player?

Obviously rules like this will vary depending on player type, if it's multiway or not, if you're in position or not, how likely villain is to fold on certain board textures where you can rep and turn your hand into a bluff, etc etc.

I use a very simple ratio of bbsize call per 100bb stack depth (which effectively is an SPR type ratio), but even this doesn't really capture all the variables; it's just a guideline to be aware of when deciding.

Oh and Bart... Excellent video. Two words for it: I came

Bart this is the best full ring video I've seen since Nolan, and I play both online and live.

Next video can you please address some more barreling opportunities on wetter boards (more two tone) in both limped and raised pots, and value barreling bluffing opponents you put on draws? I find the J 2 is a tougher sell in those limped pots on two diamond flops.

Edit Don't forget the extra colon kids. Otherwise the diamond makes a smiley face.

Quote: I had seen an extensive analysis of online data that suggested somewhere in the range between 11 and 12. You frequently cite 10X which is much more achievable than Harrington and often right on the margins in these lowstakes games. But is this really enough to make pure set mining profitable?

There has been some raging debate in the LLSNL forums at 2+2 about this subject and I would like to hear your views a bit further.

Thanks again and looking forward to the next video.

10x is fine. Sometimes I go as low as 7x just to crush a short stack's soul.

Hey Bart, just thought of some more material for your series, and some stuff not frequently covered in those twoplustwo live forums. I think you could make a whole episode just on c-betting, and various flop textures and barrels. For example, it can get tricky with A23 rainbow against some opponents peeling with 7's, when we're not sure if they have an Ace, and whether we should triple barrel, or make a delayed c-bet. Would like to see your c-bets, sizing, barrels, delayed c-bets, and other stuff
Awesome first episode by the way!

31:30 do u think there is value in checking the flop?

55:00 what do you do if he bets the turn? do u bluff-raise or just fold?

55:00 what do you do if he bets the turn? do u bluff-raise or just fold?

Please leave a linked time-stamp, watch this short video, to leave a time link!

That will be much easier for the coaches to find the hand and answer your questions, thanks.

Why would Asian lady of made a preflop mistake if she had a 7?

Surely as she has a raise and 2 callers in-front of her and she has a suited connector they go way up in value. Even given her short-ish stack size.

I dont think it is a mistake for her to show up with a suited connector or A7s.

You also said that they are likely to be playing less than 20% of hands and mainly have pocket pairs and big suited cards. They will also show up with suited connectors a good % of the time. Making it a mistake for you to discount the 7x hands she has in her range.

I'd like to discuss this further. Here's my thoughts on it:

I see players make calls crying "pot odds" all the time with suited connectors. Problem is, they don't flop good that often, and pre-flop pot odds aren't as important when the stacks are deep. What's more important is post-flop play. When you have a short stack like villain in this hand, and a lot of money goes in pre-flop (read: raised multiway pots) the SPR gets really low. Take this example, her SPR is a little over 1. Any c-bet she faces will probably be at least 1/3 of her stack, giving her 4:1 stack odds. It becomes unprofitable to draw (although there's enough money in the pot to shove), but now we are calling pre to get into a lot of spots where we are 30-40% equity AI for our stack, which is actually REVERSE implied odds.

The only way implied odds go up here is for the flopping two-pair+ portion of her range. SCs only do this ~3% of the time. So, you would need about 33:1 implied odds to make this call if that were your only profit source. Your stack odds are ~20:1. So, they aren't profitable in that right.

Other than that they flop a lot of draws. The drawing ability of the hand is kind of worthless when the SPR gets so low as you won't be able to draw profitably since bets will now be bigger, and thus cut your implied odds. We should devolve into a shove and pray situation which doesn't seem to be extremely +EV.

The other way we might make money is stealing, but that's going to be pretty rough with an SPR of 1 and a 4-way pot, vs a good players EP raise.

Time Link to 00:09:58

This is pretty interesting. I definitely agree and see where you're coming from with this limp giving table dynamics. I'm just curious to what you think about how the different variables affect these sort of decisions.

The games I've been playing in have a max BI of 100bb. What would be the bottom of your over-limping range 100bb deep in the same sort of situation? What about MP? Along the same lines, what would be the bottom of your raising range?

I assume we prefer stuff like big suited cards before SCs because they have the ability to flop, and stack, bigger flushes?

I find myself in these spots a lot (every hand?) and it's something that just hasn't came up online, obviously. I can totally get behind over-limping a lot of hands in LP, but I have trouble seeing the profit source by limping SCs and stuff in EP/MP, unless the limper is really bad. I could totally be wrong though and would love to hear your thoughts.

Threads on the subject of bigger flushes, I'm sure Bart will elaborate on it later in this series, but a lot of good live regs like limping ace rag suited hands unless they're getting punished for limping, because it keeps J 7 suited and 7 3 suited to limp in the hand as well, and the morons only play those hands for making a flush (not aggro with draw) value. They almost never fold postflop when they hit.

Hey Bart,

As an online (sng/mtt) pro who was forced to play live poker after Black Friday I really appreciate this series. I like the concept of the series and this first video was done very well. I wish this had come out sooner as I already cost myself a bit of equity learning some of the things you talk about in this video.
Looking forward to the others. Can't wait.

Threads on the subject of bigger flushes, I'm sure Bart will elaborate on it later in this series, but a lot of good live regs like limping ace rag suited hands unless they're getting punished for limping, because it keeps J 7 suited and 7 3 suited to limp in the hand as well, and the morons only play those hands for making a flush (not aggro with draw) value. They almost never fold postflop when they hit.

Right, that's what I've been doing that seemed to make sense in those lower limit live games

Time Link to 00:05:10

hand 1, 22 set on the flop, I think this bet should be full pot, for the same reasons you bet ~pot on the turn. Pretend he has K5s and is gonna c/c 3 times and we pot on every street compared to betting $35 and then potting turn/river... We put in $15 more, he calls $15 more, so the pot is $30 larger on the turn. We bet $30 more there as a result, which he calls too, so the pot is $90 larger. The same thing goes for the river and the pot you win ends up being $270 larger, $145 of which was his.

And another reason for betting larger on the earlier street is because fish might look at the bets absolute value rather than relative.

Time Link to 00:11:59

I understand that we have good equity with the K5s, but you've pegged the initial bettor as a "passive" type -- therefore I'd expect him to have a hand with some kind of strength. Sure, you're essentially coin flipping with sets and two-pair type hands.

However, is there another reason for the flop raise? Does flat-calling give away your hand as a draw? Is it because your stacks are so deep that you need raise just to build a much bigger pot?

You hit the turn obv, but would you bet unimproved on the turn to try to knock him off a medium pair?

Great video.
I am a live 5/10 player as well, but not in LA .

In the first hand, the over limp with the 22, is interesting. If 22 is a limp, what hands would you be raising in that spot? Would you open raise 22?

Although I agree that raising in that spot purely to isolate is probably a mistake, we have other reasons to raise other than just purely for isolation. If the two shorter stacks were closer to the 50bb range would you then be leaning a bit more towards a raise?

I wonder how we could calculate the benefits of isolating and c-betting the flop versus the implied odds of hitting a set and winning a big pot.

What would you say your default VPiP PFR and 3B (i.e. when you first sit down in a game)?

Also, if you have an Android phone, you could use the application I'm working on to help you track hands. Although I don't have a feature built in yet to export the hands in a universal format you can record the basic action of the hands and view them in an HTML format. Plus a bunch of other stuff.
Check it out at
http://nuancesys.trickel.com

It's currently in beta and free, but it will cost money in the future.

Looking forward to the rest of the series.

I really lean towards not iso raising with small pocket pairs. I understand that if they limp call and miss we can make a profit--but really I have no problem building a pot up post flop and I steal a lot of limp pots or fire multiple barrels when checked to me.

In terms of my stats--I play a lot of hands. I'm probably 28/20/5

Great first video Bart. I second the Limon suggestion. In one hand you mentioned he was at the table and I also saw citizen James. I instantly thought that a commentary on a hand that you were involved in with those players (either multiway or heads up) might actually be pretty interesting from multiple view points given your different approaches to live poker and how well you interact with them on the podcast... for entertainment value maybe even the sober and drunk version

Seriously though I did have a question about your set mining requirements.

In Professional No Limit Holdem they suggest that you should be able to win at least 12X the raise when purely set mining. Which implies not only the villains stack size but also their range and their willingness to stack off in various situations. Harrington in HOC suggests a huge 25X for set mining. Frequently in Low Stakes 100bb or 150bb capped games where standard opens are 6-8bbs or more you often cannot get 25X and many times barely 12x which means you either would be dumping a lot of PPs or must play them other than for set value which can be difficult in the "no-foldem" low stakes games.

I had seen an extensive analysis of online data that suggested somewhere in the range between 11 and 12. You frequently cite 10X which is much more achievable than Harrington and often right on the margins in these lowstakes games. But is this really enough to make pure set mining profitable?

There has been some raging debate in the LLSNL forums at 2+2 about this subject and I would like to hear your views a bit further.

Thanks again and looking forward to the next video.

It may be slightly higher than ten times I just find that that that is a really easy number for people to evaluate versus raise size. I think an equally important number is 20x for suited connectors, 25x for gap suited connectors and like 30 for 2 gap suited connectors.

Hey Bart, just thought of some more material for your series, and some stuff not frequently covered in those twoplustwo live forums. I think you could make a whole episode just on c-betting, and various flop textures and barrels. For example, it can get tricky with A23 rainbow against some opponents peeling with 7's, when we're not sure if they have an Ace, and whether we should triple barrel, or make a delayed c-bet. Would like to see your c-bets, sizing, barrels, delayed c-bets, and other stuff
Awesome first episode by the way!

Good idea. I'll definitely incorporate some cbet texture and delayed cbet/multiple barrel situations in a future video.

31:30 do u think there is value in checking the flop?

AA on 772 4 ways---I think that there is too much value in checking through here especially with my laggy image. I want to start building a bit of a pot now so scare cards won't come on later streets and opponents won't feel that the pot is too small to fight for.

55:00 what do you do if he bets the turn? do u bluff-raise or just fold?

I would never bluff raise after get led into here on the turn. This bet would almost always represent a big pocket pair with a heart and once that amount of money is committed by villain I think he is never folding to a raise.

This is pretty interesting. I definitely agree and see where you're coming from with this limp giving table dynamics. I'm just curious to what you think about how the different variables affect these sort of decisions.

The games I've been playing in have a max BI of 100bb. What would be the bottom of your over-limping range 100bb deep in the same sort of situation? What about MP? Along the same lines, what would be the bottom of your raising range?

I assume we prefer stuff like big suited cards before SCs because they have the ability to flop, and stack, bigger flushes?

I over limp with a lot of hands, but, see the J2dd hand, I will fight for and bluff in limped pots. If you are talking strictly for value I think that people can over limp a lot more than they actually do. Hands like 76os, 8Tos, all have value if you can properly build a pot up and get paid post flop. Most live players slowplay way too much in limped pots and have no idea how to extract max value vs second best hands. I won a $500 limped pot with J8s the other day on an 84425 knowing that the guy had a weaker 8. People don't properly put their opponents on hand ranges and do not bet anywhere near enough for value on the river.
I find myself in these spots a lot (every hand?) and it's something that just hasn't came up online, obviously. I can totally get behind over-limping a lot of hands in LP, but I have trouble seeing the profit source by limping SCs and stuff in EP/MP, unless the limper is really bad. I could totally be wrong though and would love to hear your thoughts.

I understand that we have good equity with the K5s, but you've pegged the initial bettor as a "passive" type -- therefore I'd expect him to have a hand with some kind of strength. Sure, you're essentially coin flipping with sets and two-pair type hands.

However, is there another reason for the flop raise? Does flat-calling give away your hand as a draw? Is it because your stacks are so deep that you need raise just to build a much bigger pot?

You hit the turn obv, but would you bet unimproved on the turn to try to knock him off a medium pair?

You must raise the flop here to build a pot with a hand that draws so strongly to the nuts. The hand was limped so the SPR is super high. The turn play really depends on what cards come out--if a JQKos fall i'd probably bet. It would be close whether or not I would bet the one liners and I would definitely check back all board pairing cards.

Did the forums eat your response to my quoted text?

Edit: Nope, I just having reading comprehension problems apparently. My bad

Very good video and most helpful as I am just starting from the bottom live again while coming from a mostly mixed online background. I am wondering if you can discuss some limping/opening/3betting/overlimping ranges from different opponents. I would have to say that I feel I am learning somewhat, but I have also lost a couple decent sized pots to old guys open-limping AA and then noticing them start to get aggressive after the flop. Both times something definitely felt wrong with my tptk type hand, but I really had a hard time putting them on a legit hand. I guess that would lead to another possible discussion of when different opponents' bets are scary or not which you did touch on already in certain spots. ie sizing, c/ring, etc...

Most of all, good work as expected from listening to your podcasts over the past few years!

Excellent video. Can't wait for the rest of the series. Totally agree with the suggestion of adding Limon into one of the episodes. He has so much wisdom to offer. The two of you are a great team.

Would you further explain the thinking behind using a white chip so that your opponents can more easily see the size of the pot. I remember you talking about that concept in one of your podcasts and I didn't really understand why making the pot easy for your opponent to calculate works in your favor. Is it because they can more easily calculate their pot odds and the bigger the pot the harder it is for them to get away from their hand?

Would you further explain the thinking behind using a white chip so that your opponents can more easily see the size of the pot. I remember you talking about that concept in one of your podcasts and I didn't really understand why making the pot easy for your opponent to calculate works in your favor. Is it because they can more easily calculate their pot odds and the bigger the pot the harder it is for them to get away from their hand?

Bart, Would you ever avoid using white chips when bluffing?

Excellent video. Can't wait for the rest of the series. Totally agree with the suggestion of adding Limon into one of the episodes. He has so much wisdom to offer. The two of you are a great team.

Would you further explain the thinking behind using a white chip so that your opponents can more easily see the size of the pot. I remember you talking about that concept in one of your podcasts and I didn't really understand why making the pot easy for your opponent to calculate works in your favor. Is it because they can more easily calculate their pot odds and the bigger the pot the harder it is for them to get away from their hand?

Yes that is exactly it. If there are 7 white chips in the pot I can bet 5 or $600 and get called. If the pot is just a massive clump of yellow recreational players have no clue what the pot size is and don't know that I am actually betting under the pot.

Bart, Would you ever avoid using white chips when bluffing?

Absolutely. I do that all the time. I also put $5 chips into the pot what I am calling with a medium strength hand that may not be good or I am bluff catching. This leads my opponent to smaller bets on later streets.

Time Link to 00:13:59

Hey Bart, I love the podcast and am excited about this video series. You mention in this hand a concept which I've heard you bring up a lot on the podcast: that you should have raised more so the pot would be bigger and you can make a pot-sized shove on the river. But you also often say that live players don't understand the size of the pot. Now, I understand that you have put white chips in for your bets to help your opponent understand the pot size, but you also said he's been putting in yellows, and I'd imagine that this pot still has that ridiculous cluster effect you talk about despite your best efforts. Also, when you get to the river, I feel like- assuming it's not a giant overbet- people are more analyzing whether to call the concept of an all-in bet rather than a 2000 chip bet that happens to put you all in. In other words, they're thinking, "Oh he has an all in hand" not "He has a 2095 dollar hand." I don't know if that last thought made sense, but my base point is still, would not betting those extra 200 dollars on the turn really stop you from going all in on the river? I can think of a handful of other reasons why your bet sizing should be bigger on the turn, but I am just curious if live players don't get pot size why you give yourself the extra restriction of making your bets constrained by the size of the pot?

I really lean towards not iso raising with small pocket pairs. I understand that if they limp call and miss we can make a profit--but really I have no problem building a pot up post flop and I steal a lot of limp pots or fire multiple barrels when checked to me.

In terms of my stats--I play a lot of hands. I'm probably 28/20/5

Bart I would definitely like to see a 3-bet part of the series as well. 5 percent would mean you're averaging 3-betting every other round at a 10-handed game, however, I believe you've often advocated not overplaying AK pre in live?

Hey Bart, I love the podcast and am excited about this video series. You mention in this hand a concept which I've heard you bring up a lot on the podcast: that you should have raised more so the pot would be bigger and you can make a pot-sized shove on the river. But you also often say that live players don't understand the size of the pot. Now, I understand that you have put white chips in for your bets to help your opponent understand the pot size, but you also said he's been putting in yellows, and I'd imagine that this pot still has that ridiculous cluster effect you talk about despite your best efforts. Also, when you get to the river, I feel like- assuming it's not a giant overbet- people are more analyzing whether to call the concept of an all-in bet rather than a 2000 chip bet that happens to put you all in. In other words, they're thinking, "Oh he has an all in hand" not "He has a 2095 dollar hand." I don't know if that last thought made sense, but my base point is still, would not betting those extra 200 dollars on the turn really stop you from going all in on the river? I can think of a handful of other reasons why your bet sizing should be bigger on the turn, but I am just curious if live players don't get pot size why you give yourself the extra restriction of making your bets constrained by the size of the pot?

I've found that all in bets are more intimidating on the river, especially if they are over pot size. That's why I want to spike the pot up on earlier streets so that my opponent can realize that my all in on the river is less than pot.

Bart I would definitely like to see a 3-bet part of the series as well. 5 percent would mean you're averaging 3-betting every other round at a 10-handed game, however, I believe you've often advocated not overplaying AK pre in live?

I definitely do not do a lot of 3 betting in 5-10 for several of the reasons that were mentioned in the Limon "Deuce Plays" episodes. Firstly, you can always build a pot with what you know is the best hand on later streets. Sometimes you can win a big pot with second pair, top kicker, a hand that never would get to showdown in a 3 bet pot. Secondly, people are not opening all that light so 3 betting a 20/4 player is not the best way to go about doing things. Lastly, I like to flat a lot with AK to keep dominated hands in against players that cannot fold top pair.

Good episode and obviously very popular juding from all the comments. I have had a rough time trying to transition to the live game. I've been a winning player at both 25 and 50nl but have not been playing well live. While I love the hand replayer, any thoughts on maybe doing a video power point style explaining some of differences in live play vs. online. Maybe some of the pitfalls that online players get into when going to live play.

You must raise the flop here to build a pot with a hand that draws so strongly to the nuts. The hand was limped so the SPR is super high. The turn play really depends on what cards come out--if a JQKos fall i'd probably bet. It would be close whether or not I would bet the one liners and I would definitely check back all board pairing cards.

I am going to disagree here. Twice you use the words "shovel money into the pot." Are we to assume that if you get 3 bet on this flop you are going to play for stacks? You briefly mention the chance that someone behind you could pop it but don't spend much time with the "passive" kid who just led out into the whole casino. While it is true we have a high equity hand, when we escalate this limped pot from 60 bucks to 6k we are pretty much always looking at a set or 57. So, what was your plan when you make it 175 if he pops it to 750?

On another note. I agree that your river sizing was wrong and that you should jam or underbet but I don't know why you were so surprised as to call this the craziest hand you have ever seen. Maybe the passive kid is capable of rubbing 2 brain cells together. If he is then he should know that you almost always have a flush. If that is the case and he has the Ac then you have to be either running a massive multistreet bluff or are betting for value. If he concludes that you are betting for value then he has a crying call since you would almost always just shrug and turn over the Kc or Qc rather than value own yourself. Yes, he has a monster but in this spot it is still a bluff catcher.

[quote] I am going to disagree here. Twice you use the words "shovel money into the pot." Are we to assume that if you get 3 bet on this flop you are going to play for stacks? You briefly mention the chance that someone behind you could pop it but don't spend much time with the "passive" kid who just led out into the whole casino. While it is true we have a high equity hand, when we escalate this limped pot from 60 bucks to 6k we are pretty much always looking at a set or 57. So, what was your plan when you make it 175 if he pops it to 750? [/quote]

Why can't we call if he bet 3 bets the flop? I'll still have $2250 behind and players like this have a difficult time getting away from a flopped nut hand. It is highly unlikely that he plays 52ss from UTG so when he repops the flop he basically only has 57 or top set, although the ladder is unlikely. If he does have a set and a one liner comes on the turn he is always checking. If a deuce were to come and he shoved he always has 57 and I think we can make a big fold.

[quote] On another note. I agree that your river sizing was wrong and that you should jam or underbet but I don't know why you were so surprised as to call this the craziest hand you have ever seen. Maybe the passive kid is capable of rubbing 2 brain cells together. If he is then he should know that you almost always have a flush. If that is the case and he has the Ac then you have to be either running a massive multistreet bluff or are betting for value. If he concludes that you are betting for value then he has a crying call since you would almost always just shrug and turn over the Kc or Qc rather than value own yourself. Yes, he has a monster but in this spot it is still a bluff catcher. [quote]

Why would I shrug and wrap behind with the K or Q of clubs here if I put him on a made flush when he bet called the turn? I'm not sure how you deduce that the Ac is a bluff catcher here--you just give your opponent credit for always having a straight flush when there is a four liner on the river? I would always bet the King high flush here and the Queen high would be close.

Sweet video. How do you take notes? At the table, or after the session?

Sweet video. How do you take notes? At the table, or after the session?

At table with Blackberry Although I am switching to either the Iphone or Thunderbolt this week. BTW suggestions?

At table with Blackberry Although I am switching to either the Iphone or Thunderbolt this week. BTW suggestions?

In before Apple Fanboys... (MRI Shows Apple Stimulates Fan's Brain Like Religion) http://techland.time.com/2011/05/19/why-do-we-care-so-deeply-about-brands-like-twitter-and-apple/

Get the Thunderbolt.

Androids are half the price and do the same stuff with less privacy violation and are probably faster too. The only reason to go with Apple would be the semi fashion statement it makes.

At table with Blackberry Although I am switching to either the Iphone or Thunderbolt this week. BTW suggestions?

Not an Apple Fanboy but I did get an iPhone about 6months ago and aside from wanting to stick w/ Itunes for music management, I preferred the poker apps available for iPhone at the time over those available for droid. I Haven't looked recently at what's been made available for android but the two I use most are Poker Journal (poker session/profit tracker and notes) and PokerCruncher (awesome stoving app that you will love - actually better than Poker stove).

There is also a hand replayer app for notating hands called Hand History. It is pretty slick if you want to replay hands but probably not as fast as shorthand notes at the table. Hand history allows you to upload hands to there site to be viewed by others. I'm not sure how or if it could integrate with your DC hand replayer.

Why would I shrug and wrap behind with the K or Q of clubs here if I put him on a made flush when he bet called the turn? I'm not sure how you deduce that the Ac is a bluff catcher here--you just give your opponent credit for always having a straight flush when there is a four liner on the river? I would always bet the King high flush here and the Queen high would be close.

I think betting the king would be a pretty big spew and betting the queen would be an enormous spew. You think the player you described calls off a 300 BB stack with the jack? Although using the results of the hand is not supposed to be used as an argument, I think your read that he has a made flush has to be tweaked based on the fact that he did not actually have a made flush.

Great episode bart. It is very clear that you put a solid effort for this video. Would you be able to add some hands where there is a maniac( i mean a player who is willing to 3bet light pre, isnt affraid to bluff good cards and perhaps bluffs too often) at the table and how this changes your strategy?

I think betting the king would be a pretty big spew and betting the queen would be an enormous spew. You think the player you described calls off a 300 BB stack with the jack? Although using the results of the hand is not supposed to be used as an argument, I think your read that he has a made flush has to be tweaked based on the fact that he did not actually have a made flush.

Remember, he isn't calling off an entire 300BB stack, just a half pot size bet on the river. And yes, I definitely think he is calling with the queen high flush.

Great episode bart. It is very clear that you put a solid effort for this video. Would you be able to add some hands where there is a maniac( i mean a player who is willing to 3bet light pre, isnt affraid to bluff good cards and perhaps bluffs too often) at the table and how this changes your strategy?

Sure, although it is rare to run into such a player at this level. There's a guy named Hank who plays Commerce 5-10NL during the day, super aggro and crazy. But even he has toned his antics down a bit. I got into a 3bet pot with a guy who bluffed his stack off to me 150BB deep last week. I may use that hand for an upcoming episode.


Bart

Amazing Video~! Thanks so much Bart. I love your podcasts as well! You are AWESOME! That said, I do have a bit of a noob question in regards to stack size maintenance. In live games, if you find yourself at less than maximum buy in amount at any point, do you continue on playing until you build up (thru short stack play or w/e) or do you at some point refill your stack to max buy in before taking another hand?

If the latter is the case, at what point do you buy your stack back up to max buy in level. Im sorry if this is a dumb question, but Im still new to poker, and live games, and always wondered how work that.

Thanks!

PS: Also, some people asked about how you play vs maniacs, and you responded that basically there arent many at your stake level at commerce (but that youll find an example later to use). I currently play at Oceans 11 down in San Diego and I find that the 1/1 and 2/2 game at my place has a fair amount of regs who play chip bully lag bluff maniac poker, and I wonder if that is a product of just being in lower stakes (where the cost of play isnt as serious for some people to make them play more meta game)... or if is something else Im not getting.

If youve got time to answer a two parter, I d love to know your thoughts on the typical types of player pools we will experience at the various stakes (from the bottom on up to where you are now), and how you think each stake should be approached and beaten. Thanks for your help!


Sunny (Oda)

Amazing Video~! Thanks so much Bart. I love your podcasts as well! You are AWESOME! That said, I do have a bit of a noob question in regards to stack size maintenance. In live games, if you find yourself at less than maximum buy in amount at any point, do you continue on playing until you build up (thru short stack play or w/e) or do you at some point refill your stack to max buy in before taking another hand?

If the latter is the case, at what point do you buy your stack back up to max buy in level. Im sorry if this is a dumb question, but Im still new to poker, and live games, and always wondered how work that.

Thanks!

PS: Also, some people asked about how you play vs maniacs, and you responded that basically there arent many at your stake level at commerce (but that youll find an example later to use). I currently play at Oceans 11 down in San Diego and I find that the 1/1 and 2/2 game at my place has a fair amount of regs who play chip bully lag bluff maniac poker, and I wonder if that is a product of just being in lower stakes (where the cost of play isnt as serious for some people to make them play more meta game)... or if is something else Im not getting.

If youve got time to answer a two parter, I d love to know your thoughts on the typical types of player pools we will experience at the various stakes (from the bottom on up to where you are now), and how you think each stake should be approached and beaten. Thanks for your help!


Sunny (Oda)

I always top off to $1500. I usually keep some extra $100 chips in my pocket so that I can max out with ease. There just is no point in not playing up to the cap--no one scares me with their deep stacks and I never want to get into a spot where I can't make the maximum off of a big fish's stack.

In terms of maniacs it might be a thing where at the lower levels more aggressive play tends to scare guys who are recreational players who only bring 1-2 buy ins to the casino. At 5-10 the recs are usually small business owners and most of the pros have adequate bankrolls to play for stacks in thin situations.

Well said Bart. Thanks for the insight. Do you think someday you could do a podcast or instructional on how new aspiring players like us should approach and deal with chip bullies/maniacs in live play? For a beginner, hand reading a maniac who seems to be playing and opening with any 2 cards feels a bit daunting. Some tips would be very helpful. IF there is already material out there that adreses this (that you could recommend me to also) that would be much appreciated. Regardless, PLEASE keep making your vidoes. They are some of my favorite. Thanks!

Sunny

P.S: Have you ever played at the Oceans 11 down in San Diego?

Time Link to 00:25:11

Bart, what do you do with another low card on the turn like a 7 against this guy?

Time Link to 00:30:43

Sorry for the noob question... 4 SPR... What does SPR stand for?

Time Link to 00:31:19

LMAO!!! Nevermind.... Stack to Pot Ratio....

Great first video Bart. I second the Limon suggestion. In one hand you mentioned he was at the table and I also saw citizen James. I instantly thought that a commentary on a hand that you were involved in with those players (either multiway or heads up) might actually be pretty interesting from multiple view points given your different approaches to live poker and how well you interact with them on the podcast... for entertainment value maybe even the sober and drunk version

Seriously though I did have a question about your set mining requirements.

In Professional No Limit Holdem they suggest that you should be able to win at least 12X the raise when purely set mining. Which implies not only the villains stack size but also their range and their willingness to stack off in various situations. Harrington in HOC suggests a huge 25X for set mining. Frequently in Low Stakes 100bb or 150bb capped games where standard opens are 6-8bbs or more you often cannot get 25X and many times barely 12x which means you either would be dumping a lot of PPs or must play them other than for set value which can be difficult in the "no-foldem" low stakes games.

I had seen an extensive analysis of online data that suggested somewhere in the range between 11 and 12. You frequently cite 10X which is much more achievable than Harrington and often right on the margins in these lowstakes games. But is this really enough to make pure set mining profitable?

There has been some raging debate in the LLSNL forums at 2+2 about this subject and I would like to hear your views a bit further.

Thanks again and looking forward to the next video.

Agreed. If limon was at the table i want his analysis. Otherwise why even mention it?

Yes that is exactly it. If there are 7 white chips in the pot I can bet 5 or $600 and get called. If the pot is just a massive clump of yellow recreational players have no clue what the pot size is and don't know that I am actually betting under the pot.

I see your point, but do you not think that betting with oversized chips looks more intimidating and may cause players not to call with medium/weak strength hands as your bet "looks" stronger? Just pushing a load of reds out there may make them think "oh it's only a pile of reds, I can call that".

Time Link to 00:42:51

Did you ever post the supplement? Where?

Thx,
Bill

This video is sooooo awesome, that I decided NOT to blow my brains out all over my cubicle wall at work today

Did you ever post the supplement? Where?

Thx,
Bill

Maybe some of the powers that be that might be lurking can answer that question. I'll put an email into to Rusty and see if we can get the supplement in there somewhere.

Bart

Time Link to 00:42:15

Bart, I think the flip side of the point you're making about most live players not being able to turn a good hand (AQ, KQ) into a bluff in this spot, is that there are probably even fewer players that would be able to bet-fold AA/two pair in this spot. So while theoretically this is a great spot to turn AQ, KQ into a bluff, is it really +EV in practice, in these games? I mean most of the time you're not going to have a great read on whether the villain is good enough to bet-fold AA here, mostly likely he isn't. So I'm not sure if it's a matter of being good enough to employ this move, or the move not being employed more because it's -EV in this spot against 99% of the competition.

Bart, I think the flip side of the point you're making about most live players not being able to turn a good hand (AQ, KQ) into a bluff in this spot, is that there are probably even fewer players that would be able to bet-fold AA/two pair in this spot. So while theoretically this is a great spot to turn AQ, KQ into a bluff, is it really +EV in practice, in these games? I mean most of the time you're not going to have a great read on whether the villain is good enough to bet-fold AA here, mostly likely he isn't. So I'm not sure if it's a matter of being good enough to employ this move, or the move not being employed more because it's -EV in this spot against 99% of the competition.

I think the point here is that the players that are capable of betting AA for value in this spot are very few. Of those, however, I think that you could get a fair amount to fold to a raise. Typically most players will c/c the river when the board gets hairy. I am not a proponent of turning hands into bluffs after an obvious overpair checks OOP--unless the draw is incredibly obvious (front door flush) or the board gets extremely scary (4 flush or 4 straight).

Wow great video I can't wait to watch the rest! I literally just posted in the forums a couple of hours ago about advice playing live at the bike great video

Thanks for the series. Are you going to post any hands that aren't examples of awesome on your part?

Time Link to 00:29:15

very interesting concept of bet folding the river w AA on dangerous boards - didnt do the math probably EV +

Thanks for the series. Are you going to post any hands that aren't examples of awesome on your part?

See episode 7 I believe. I basically 3 bet bluff my stack off to the biggest nit on the table, Fred.

Could you do a sort of concept video? or direct me to a video or forum post where you go through your thought processes? Or any other amazingly helpful tips like bet folding that seriously changed my game so much

Could you do a sort of concept video? or direct me to a video or forum post where you go through your thought processes? Or any other amazingly helpful tips like bet folding that seriously changed my game so much

Honestly I go through my thought process when discussing every hand on my podcast. I do not do a lot of forum writing I prefer to express my thoughts orally.

Bart

Time Link to 00:46:59

Bart,

Why use 45 unseen cards instead of 47. I know you are taking into account the opponents hole cards but why? Also does this apply to multi-way or heads up?

Yes,

Taking into my opponents hole cards. 52-4-3(flop). If you are fairly certain that your opponent is not going for the same draw that you are and that your cards are live you can subtract his two from the deck.

when we are using the 10x 20x 25x rule are we evaluating what we would make on average from them or just the size of their stack behind?

also if there is a short stack raiser but it is a multiway what would be the minimum # of other player for us to call with these 10x 20x 25x hands?

Time Link to 00:44:21

wtf does 25/5 mean?

Time Link to 00:44:21

18/10/3 ???

Time Link to 00:44:21

Nice one Bart, my first ever instruct vid. Love the 10x 20x 25x 30x rule... why havnt i heard of that before? Only negative is when you assume everyone plays internet poker...

question from a newbie:
In that first hand with the LP pocket deuces, what is your preflop limping range / opening range? I am assuming you raise .5 to 1 blind more for each limper like you say in your podcast...... ??

Time Link to 00:58:33

Hi Bart,

I'm new to DC and was actually going to cancel after my 7 day trial till I found your videos because I almost only play 2/5 and 5/10 live and rarely play online.
I wanted to ask you a few questions.
1. Do you have a series that covers the basics of your live game ? Buy ins, bankrolls, opening ranges, the math u use etc...
2. In this spot I have tried to make similar moves at 2/5 and found that I was being called with QQ+ way to much can you comment on your experiences between the differences between 2/5 and 5/10 overal and how I should adjust.
3. Do you offer any coaching for live play ? I live in Canada though so not sure if it can be done.
4. My game is decent TAG and I have the ability to adjust when I'm on my A game and I have always been curious what kind of win rate a good full time live player can make at 2/5 5/10 ?? I've asked a few of the regs at my casino but you never get a straight honest answer lol
Thanks and keep up the good work I cant wait to watch this whole series.

I will save Bart some time. He touches on almost all of this stuff in the series of videos and his podcasts. If you only listen when he interviews Limon you will hear them discuss bankroll stuff and winrates which will be somewhere around 25 and 50/hr respectively if you are really good. He does coach live players and you can read about his coaching in the coaches section (livebikebart)

I will save Bart some time. He touches on almost all of this stuff in the series of videos and his podcasts. If you only listen when he interviews Limon you will hear them discuss bankroll stuff and winrates which will be somewhere around 25 and 50/hr respectively if you are really good. He does coach live players and you can read about his coaching in the coaches section (livebikebart)

Thanks

I'm new here are you talking about this video series ? and what are podcasts and how do I get them ?

Thanks

I'm new here are you talking about this video series ? and what are podcasts and how do I get them ?

Yes this series. The podcasts are him talking about poker for an hour often interviewing a guest in the process. The tabs at the top, click podcast, or

https://www.deucescracked.com/podcasts/deuceplays

thanks for this series and for deuce plays, bart. also, is there a list of deuce plays premium? haven't listened to your podcast since its been a pay only thing and i'm curious about your most recent guests and topics - i used to listen to deuce plays all the time. thanks again

I agree and she also could have 22. That is what usually happens me