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

3mins50sec-4min50sec

"For what? he says. Cosyourlinedoesntmakesensefool"

epic

def add to the still in the works DC highlight reel

man such a calling station!

Time Link to 00:30:27

wow .. amazing call .. same as the A9o at the begining of the video ... i think u need to do a theory segment to explain how to recognize those spots ...
couse every time i try to make a hero call like that i loose


great video btw ..

make this a 16 video series instead of 8
and stick to nl25 for 1 more video plz


couse ur line doesnt make sense fool <---- i loled

just noticed my commentary here around minute 42 was a bit nonsensical. what i meant to say was that his VALUE range is very narrow here so it doesn't make sense for him to really be c/r that flop often, and since i just paid off his value bet, it is even less likely that he would now attempt to bluff. therefore he probably just had KQ/44 or something and is valuetowning my fishy ass.

the key to making all of these light calldowns is the fact that microstakes players do not valuebet thinly enough most of the time, esp fish. their ranges therefore become polarized (as in polar opposites) to either bluffs or nut-like hands. in the spots where i make light calls in the vid, the board is consistently very dry and therefor his value range is quite small, meaning he doesn't have to bluff very often at all for a call to be profitable.

http://www.deucescracked.com/videos/1168-Episode-Five?seek=2486

if we consider that 77 vs. AQ hand @ about 41 min above, now that we know he would play AQ this way (and lets assume KQ is the only other Qx he would have there) we can do a little math.

there are 12 combos left of each AQ and KQ, and 3 combos of pocket 3s rivering a boat, for 27 total definite valuebetting hands. we will assume that with AA/KK he'd valuebet the turn since most people will go for 3 streets with overpairs.

pot odds: 6.50 + 4.50 / 4.50 = 2.5-1 (rounded from 2.44-1 to make it simpler)

to figure out how many combos of bluffs this translates into, we take a simple proportion:

1 / 2.5 = x / 27

27 / 2.5 = x

10.8 = x


this sounds low, but to take a deeper look now we need to look at how many combos are in his overall range. let us do a sort of worst-case scenario and consider a fairly nitty (10.7% overall) preflop range of AJ/KQ/22+. we are assuming he would valuebet the turn with KK+ (including boats) and check everything else.

the only really easy way to count these is to group the hands by type and practice it a lot til you start memorizing things a little. again, this is the range we are putting him on after he checks the turn. so here goes, we'll go in order of most to least combos:

Unpaired hands (AK/AJ): 16 * 2 = 32 combos
Top pair (AQ/KQ): 12 * 2 = 24 combos
Middle PP (JJ-88): 6 * 4 = 24 combos
Missed low PP (44, 22): 6 + 6 = 12 combos
Rivered boat (33): 3 combos

FWIW I ignored pocket 7s since it won't really affect the equity and will make the math easier.

Total combos: 32 + 24 + 24 + 12 +3 = 95
Combos we beat: 32 + 12 = 44
Combos that beat us: 24 + 24 + 3 = 51
Combos that valuebet the river: 27
Combos he needs to bluff with: 10.8

so there's the breakdown. we can see that he is this nitty, he needs to bluff the river 10.8 / 44 = 24% of the time with his ace high hands.

from here, we simply need to decide if he would bluff that often. i think against a relative unknown early in the session that calling is fine, although certainly not quite the fist-pump i made it out to be in the video. keeping in mind that we have made a lot of assumptions about the guy playing pretty nitty and he still only has to bluff his ace-high 1/4 of the time, against a guy with slightly wider preflop ranges and a similar valuebetting range, calling is clearly better.

p.s. i've been suffering from quite a bit of insomnia lately and have been up since about 4am, so cut me some slack if i screwed anything up in that post.

Time Link to 00:03:48

Nice hand , i think i would have failed in calling the river bet with ace high , id of put him on a J or 99 type hand , i guess a line with 99 doesnt make much sense but this is one of those spots where id be unsure so rather than call it off id fold , this is a nice hand to along with the variance tread been talked about in the general forum.

http://www.deucescracked.com/forums/4-General-Discussion/topics/29987-Is-avoiding-Veriance-neg-?page=1&per_page=15#posts-226612

I mentioned why the reason spots like this are marginal is because i dont know what villian could have here or his nuts:bluff . But i guesss it also shows why calling in marginal spots can does lead to less variance and better winrate.

the intro music to this series is amazing

good video steve,

i just wanted to comment on the 77 hand early on when you bet the river for 2$ into like $3.67 on TT6xT and said that you would have bet a bit bigger with JJ. I don't think changing your bet sizing on the river in this spot is good because his range is so clearly weak and the only hands that he can have that it really makes a difference is 88 or 99 which I would think will be much rarer than the times he has Ax

Time Link to 00:41:31

Dunno about you but micro stakes 12/ to 3/4 pot River bets are always for value these days.
An ALL IN shove is different - it will include busted draws etc.

Steve this series has been great. I have enjoyed every episode so far. Thanks.

Dunno about you but micro stakes 12/ to 3/4 pot River bets are always for value these days.
An ALL IN shove is different - it will include busted draws etc.

Did you see the hand where the guy bet w/ his missed fd about 4 min in? Clearly they are not all for value.

Hey tuba, good video. I think this vid really reflects the dynamic you have to work with a lot at these stakes, namely that you're going to be playing with a mix of LP fish, some supernits, and some loose fish that are very sticky and give you fits! The third kind, like the guy on table 2, are what I have trouble dealing with. They do a lot of limp/calling and get really sticky postflop and drive me crazy when I raise their limps with say AQ, get a dry low flop, they check/call to the river and always show up with a random pair.

I agree you shouldn't be thinking, "Man, I keep losing to this fish and he sloughs it all off to everyone else!" But those thoughts are hard to block! I guess you're just gonna run bad against fish sometimes, but it sucks.

Really like the 2 table configuration. It seems to allow you to discuss the hands in much more depth and helped me get a much deeper understanding of each making me feel better about knowing when to generalize each to other situations as well as when not to. Huge improvement. Plus some of us new players gain a lot of value from watching other's note taking.

Let me start out by saying that I enjoyed the video and awesome calls BTW.
Okay this is about the AQ 77 hand(as if you haven't beat that horse to death yet). I like your combo breakdown. However, combo breakdowns analysis can only be a valuable if you have a roughly correct idea of how your opponent will play certain combinations. I think you are assigning some basic premises about your opponents play that are flawed. For example you need him to bluff his Ace highs about a fourth of the time? I highly doubt that amateurs (especially a nitty one) at these stakes would turn an Ace high and potentially the best hand into a bluff on the river after having shown weakness on the turn. I think here is the frame of mind of an average nit player with ace high on the river in that situation: okay well my opponent checked and I dint bet the river so I have already shown weakness and there is a good chance my opponent might have been drawing with 78 or even 34 I check! So realistically I think in that situation the player is checking down ace high near 90-100% of the time making a call clearly incorrect.

Another thing. You criticized his play when he checked the turn? I understand the name of the game is Value Value Value but here is what I think are the pros and cons of betting and checking. Betting pros: you extract value from any stubborn pocket pair or 6 that your opponent might be having. A good majority of the time, however, those hands will not call a decent size river bet. Betting cons: lose money in the case that your opponent flopped trips and you fail to induce bluffs from any kind of drawing hands on the river.

Now checking pros and cons. checking cons: you might well be missing out on a street of value especially from those stubborn mid pairs that will call you down the whole way. You are also letting your opponent get a free card allowing him to hit a possible 2 outer in witch case he most likely leads out on the river and we call. checking pros: Induce river bluffs from 78, 34, and maybe even an ace high that was hanging on. You almost always will confuse your opponent and ensure a river call from basically any pair(given that the river blanks off). You also save money anytime your opponent has flopped trips.

Having AQ in this situation, I think betting the turn or not depends on the dynamic I have with that player. I think both plays are fine in this situation and dont think checking should have recieved the amount of critisism that it did.

thanks for reading please let me know what you think
Dissent with respect,
-DDP

Tubasteve,

Thanks for another great video. Also thanks for offering up a free coaching session to the quiz winner, thats great incentive to get over to the HQ forums and take the quiz.

Hi bezzer,

Two things. First keep in mind the analysis I did was a worst case scenario. Given that at the time of hte hand he is a random 25nl unknown to me, I have to assume he is capable of showing up with more hands. You may be right that a truly nitty player would nearly always check behind with A high and/or a small pair, but the point of my analysis is to show that if even a guy that nitty only has to be bluffing 1/4 of hte time that we are ahead, then against other people we definitely should call.

Second, as far as him playing AQ by checking the turn; I can see merit to your idea but I think checking should definitely not be the standard play. Based on the way the games play, and given that he shouldn't have had much of a read on me, he has to assume that I am some sort of loose-passive that will not be capable of folding a medium pair very often on a Q turn. Guys at these stakes will call down all day long with 77-99/A5/worse queens that floated the flop in a spot like this. If I were villain, I would at least bet something like 1/2 pot on the turn to try and induce light peels. The biggest problem with checking the turn is that it doesn't let you ever win a big pot on the river. Even if we expect him to often fold the turn it's probably worth it to try and get in 3 streets.

Even if he did have a read that I was a good player, he should be betting this turn for balance purposes. It is a great 2-barrel card, and if he thinks I know that, he also needs to be 2-barreling VERY wide for value. The wider your value range is in a given spot, the more you can and should bluff, because you're repping more plausible hands in that spot and it will be hard for your opponent to make a light call. The narrower it is, the less you should bluff, or else your frequencies will be obviously out of whack to a good hand reader.

Hi bezzer,

Two things. First keep in mind the analysis I did was a worst case scenario. Given that at the time of hte hand he is a random 25nl unknown to me, I have to assume he is capable of showing up with more hands. You may be right that a truly nitty player would nearly always check behind with A high and/or a small pair, but the point of my analysis is to show that if even a guy that nitty only has to be bluffing 1/4 of hte time that we are ahead, then against other people we definitely should call.

Second, as far as him playing AQ by checking the turn; I can see merit to your idea but I think checking should definitely not be the standard play. Based on the way the games play, and given that he shouldn't have had much of a read on me, he has to assume that I am some sort of loose-passive that will not be capable of folding a medium pair very often on a Q turn. Guys at these stakes will call down all day long with 77-99/A5/worse queens that floated the flop in a spot like this. If I were villain, I would at least bet something like 1/2 pot on the turn to try and induce light peels. The biggest problem with checking the turn is that it doesn't let you ever win a big pot on the river. Even if we expect him to often fold the turn it's probably worth it to try and get in 3 streets.

Even if he did have a read that I was a good player, he should be betting this turn for balance purposes. It is a great 2-barrel card, and if he thinks I know that, he also needs to be 2-barreling VERY wide for value. The wider your value range is in a given spot, the more you can and should bluff, because you're repping more plausible hands in that spot and it will be hard for your opponent to make a light call. The narrower it is, the less you should bluff, or else your frequencies will be obviously out of whack to a good hand reader.

Great post , and good video , nice work Tuba look forward to next weeks video

is there anyway we can get our hands on that mod? most specifically the podium mods?

do tell.....

Hi Tubasteve,

Thanx for responding. I agree with you now that betting is the more standard play. I was just assuming people might fold their mid pairs to a 2 barrel in that spot and now that I think about it, you may be right, a good majority might just hang with their pair for all 3 barrels.
looking forward to the next one thanx again.
-DDP

Did you see the hand where the guy bet w/ his missed fd about 4 min in? Clearly they are not all for value.

Did you see the hand where the guy bet w/ his missed fd about 4 min in? Clearly they are not all for value

Ok - yeah. But it was close to half than 3/4. My point is for simplicity at micro-stakes it best to fold to 3/4 pot bet.

about the hero call with the A9:
even though the call itself is good, it is more something you should show when you make video's about mid stakes rather than doing it on micro stakes when you are teaching mostly newcomers and inexperienced people. The biggest thing about winning on micro's is playing solid ABC poker without getting into marginal spots. calling 8$ (32BB) just because a guy's line doesnt make sense is i think not good to show people, because a) the players watching it will often misuse this example to make bad calls and b) u do'nt beat much even if they missed, for all you know he could have made some pair, bluffing with a low pair or whatever. the point is there is no need to put that much money in just to call a complete and utter bluff that you can still beat

btw, i like the show, im kinda waiting till you get to nl50 since thats what i play but the nl25 part has been educational thus far.

edit: about the other hand where villain bets 5$ into 13ish on the river when you have top pair vs a 4flush board, there is no need to discuss the option to raise just because it looks like a block bet, simply because almost never do players on nl25 make or even KNOW what block bets are. their betsize is more dependant on the strength of their hand, mostly what comes to mind there is (i have the nuts so i will bet small and hope he calls lighter than he should or even tries to raise me). glad you folded though

The purpose of this series is to get away from playing ABC's at the micros, but point taken. BTW I didn't just call with the A9 because his line didn't make sense, I thought that he had a missed flush draw. I said his line doesn't make sense for a made hand, but does for a missed draw.

edit: about the other hand where villain bets 5$ into 13ish on the river when you have top pair vs a 4flush board, there is no need to discuss the option to raise just because it looks like a block bet, simply because almost never do players on nl25 make or even KNOW what block bets are. their betsize is more dependant on the strength of their hand, mostly what comes to mind there is (i have the nuts so i will bet small and hope he calls lighter than he should or even tries to raise me). glad you folded though

I've seen plenty of guys that play the exact opposite way at 25NL.

Really looking forward to next week, been trying to move up from 25 to 50 nl on FullTilt and slightly failing, the aggression and massive amounts of regulars are a killer.

Anyway great series tubasteve, your teaching on micro and small stakes is enlightening!

This has been a great series tuba, with some really good insight and info, all the way through.

One question though - any chance you can upload your HUD config somewhere? I like the split stats setup and thought I could use it!

Again, quality series for us micro players.

Time Link to 00:42:00

Tuba - in the villains spot here, as PFR, we should be betting the turn here with everything we have for value? For instance, when we get c/c on 655r, if we have 99+/Qx on this turn, we should be betting, to get calls from 78/6x/44/77. That is, we should be betting without a Q but with a decent pair and some overcard type hands.

Meh, that is gobbledygook. Ok, try again.

In the PFR's spot what should our range be for betting the turn? My thinking was 88+/Qx/some % of overcards (Ax/KJ etc) that want a fold from a small pair? Against the blinds range here, we can comfortably bet/fold 1 pair hands, imo but we don't mind them folding 78/6x etc, because they only call the river improved anyway.

Pretty convoluted post but hopefully you see what I am getting at....

Time Link to 00:02:41

gee, i have a number after my name...hmmmm..

:-)

Time Link to 00:27:49

Is there anything you can really infer from the UTG on table one posting his BB bringing 60 BB's?

Is there anything you can really infer from the UTG on table one posting his BB bringing 60 BB's?

I think he limps, not posts. And yeah we can infer something, he's %99.99999999 sure to be a bad play.

Tuba - in the villains spot here, as PFR, we should be betting the turn here with everything we have for value? For instance, when we get c/c on 655r, if we have 99+/Qx on this turn, we should be betting, to get calls from 78/6x/44/77. That is, we should be betting without a Q but with a decent pair and some overcard type hands.

Meh, that is gobbledygook. Ok, try again.

In the PFR's spot what should our range be for betting the turn? My thinking was 88+/Qx/some % of overcards (Ax/KJ etc) that want a fold from a small pair? Against the blinds range here, we can comfortably bet/fold 1 pair hands, imo but we don't mind them folding 78/6x etc, because they only call the river improved anyway.

Pretty convoluted post but hopefully you see what I am getting at....

Hands I would always bet for value: Any TP or better
Hands I would sometimes bet for value: 99-JJ
Hands I would bet as a bluff/semi-bluff: AK/AJ/22/78o/89s/JTo/etc....

So yeah, he should basically be betting a very wide range here with lots of bluffs. I should mention I'm more likely to bet the turn with something that has equity (i.e. overs or straight draw), but my range there is very wide for betting b/c its simply so tough to call.

I would have folded 77 there to a bet 100% of the time probably, so betting as a bluff would have been a really awesome play. In reality he has to assume I'm a typical loose-passive there since he didn't have much info on me, so despite the fact that I would have made the correct decision he still should have bet in order to maximize against my range.


About adjustments vs. thinking players:

I think his check is actually good on the turn if he knows who I am and there is no history; but once I see him check that turn with AQ, the next level of thinking would then have him betting AQ next time. After the first hand I then will think his turn betting range is polarized to nuts or air, and he can get me to call down light. If he's really good he'll balance this range so that no matter what I do his turn bet is inexploitable, which is why playing OOP is so damn hard.

If I didn't explain anything well in that last post let me know, I feel a bit incoherent this afternoon.

If I didn't explain anything well in that last post let me know, I feel a bit incoherent this afternoon.

Makes sense sir. Reason I ask is I see so villains often taking lines where they cbet stuff like villains opens from MP, BTN calls and BB calls. Villain cbets a 337r flop into 2 players, checks turn J when called and bets river with a Jx hand.

I guess we take scrupulous notes when noticing a villain take this line, as we can call once and try to get to showdown and fold to river bets comfortably, knowing pretty much exactly what they have.

Thanks for the response tuba

Video fails for me at about 42 minutes every time. Ive tried it multiple times - just freezes.

Video fails for me at about 42 minutes every time. Ive tried it multiple times - just freezes.

How are you trying to watch it, and which version? I just watched the Flash/MP4 versions and both are playing fine after the 42 minute mark, no issues at all.

Rob

Between 9 and 9:30 minutes of the movie you say that "when the stacks get deeper our opponents are going to stack lighter" isn't it the opposite?

Hey Steve, really getting into playing 25NL now , watching your videos and doing some other stuff on poker. Great job, fantastic that you're sharing all this info with us. It gets to me more and more how poker strategy isn't just ABC, but in the end a game of adjusting, pure logic and math.
In your Baby Steps series I believe you first said that for beginners it would be fine to raise 4x in 25NL Pre most the time. Thing is obv. that when you're raising from pretty much other than UTG or maybe MP you're stealing pretty often against tighter players, which should cause you to adjust your steal size, make it cheaper if we get 3bet or something or if we play against smaller stacks. (make it like 3x e.g. depending on how players react to it). Thing is if you're like raising 3x from co/button to steal shouldn't you be 3x all the time to keep some sorta consistency in your betting pattern ? I mean not like many at 25NL will even recognize it but still.

Hey Steve, really getting into playing 25NL now , watching your videos and doing some other stuff on poker. Great job, fantastic that you're sharing all this info with us. It gets to me more and more how poker strategy isn't just ABC, but in the end a game of adjusting, pure logic and math.
In your Baby Steps series I believe you first said that for beginners it would be fine to raise 4x in 25NL Pre most the time. Thing is obv. that when you're raising from pretty much other than UTG or maybe MP you're stealing pretty often against tighter players, which should cause you to adjust your steal size, make it cheaper if we get 3bet or something or if we play against smaller stacks. (make it like 3x e.g. depending on how players react to it). Thing is if you're like raising 3x from co/button to steal shouldn't you be 3x all the time to keep some sorta consistency in your betting pattern ? I mean not like many at 25NL will even recognize it but still.

As stated, most will not recognize the bet-sizing adjustments you are making. However, if they are good enough to recognize the adjustments, they will also likely be good enough to realize you are adjusting based on your position and not your cards. Therefore they won't be able to obtain an edge by figuring out the strength of your hand based on your sizing.

That's a good point that you mention there, makes sense. Thanks!

Hey tuba, good video. I think this vid really reflects the dynamic you have to work with a lot at these stakes, namely that you're going to be playing with a mix of LP fish, some supernits, and some loose fish that are very sticky and give you fits! The third kind, like the guy on table 2, are what I have trouble dealing with. They do a lot of limp/calling and get really sticky postflop and drive me crazy when I raise their limps with say AQ, get a dry low flop, they check/call to the river and always show up with a random pair.

I agree you shouldn't be thinking, "Man, I keep losing to this fish and he sloughs it all off to everyone else!" But those thoughts are hard to block! I guess you're just gonna run bad against fish sometimes, but it sucks.

+1

Time Link to 00:19:33

Question: This hand AJ vs 55
Would you call if he donk shove on flop? What would be his range?

Also, what's the worst hand you'd call with?(when he donk shoves)

The purpose of this series is to get away from playing ABC's at the micros, but point taken. BTW I didn't just call with the A9 because his line didn't make sense, I thought that he had a missed flush draw. I said his line doesn't make sense for a made hand, but does for a missed draw.

Very interesting. Could you please give some further explanations on that call. I've seen people playing monster hands the same way Villain did with his missed draw. Why did it look like a missed draw to you? TY

Time Link to 00:09:28

What do you mean by "giving yourself room" here? Does that mean raising smaller in position to keep your perceived range wide while not overly committing to the pot?

BTW, these are my favorite vids on Deuces. I find them to be so helpful at developing controlled aggression at Micro. Thanks so much Tuba!