---

Poker Video: No Limit Hold'Em by threads13 (Micro/Small Stakes)

really like this.

shea seems like a decent player, surprised at the PTR stats (especially on Full Tilt). Must be running bad, here's hoping for some rungood! gl gl

Time Link to 00:26:15

Jacob, why would we fold 55 here vs. the UTG raiser in the Hi-Jack and not the co/btn? Unless the co/btn are gonna squeeze a bunch why not call? It can still go multi-way which is fine, admittedly we might a lil' less profit by not having absolute position if it goes Multi-Way. If we flat call this on the button vs. the UTG opener we still have the disadvantage of low FE post vs. his tight range. If it goes MW we have almost no steal equity post, but we are compensated by a MW pot with a set....

Time Link to 00:28:21

Hahahaha, so much for bluffing with 89s, flopped the JOINT.

Time Link to 00:30:26

hahaha, he used the phrase "Pot Control", and immediately your voice became depressed.

Jacob, why would we fold 55 here vs. the UTG raiser in the Hi-Jack and not the co/btn? Unless the co/btn are gonna squeeze a bunch why not call? It can still go multi-way which is fine, admittedly we might a lil' less profit by not having absolute position if it goes Multi-Way. If we flat call this on the button vs. the UTG opener we still have the disadvantage of low FE post vs. his tight range. If it goes MW we have almost no steal equity post, but we are compensated by a MW pot with a set....

The problem is there's no guarantee that we'll have position. As you move to the BTN you can really start calling a lot more because you'll be IP so much more often and that means you'll get to win a pot outside of hitting a set. In fact, if I were closing the action with no callers in the BB - I'd just fold. When you're in the HJ and earlier I think the probability of someone else flatting or 3-betting is really making it a losing call. Player's don't 3-bet a lot, but if you put 4 of them behind you, you'll get 3-bet a good 10-20% of the time. When that happens you have a sunk cost pretty frequently. You will also often have that same positional disadvantage from the blinds. I think the value of hitting a set of 5's in a multiway pot, when everyone else is trying to hit sets a lot as well, is pretty low.

You could make a case for flatting when there's a loose player who can come in behind you. He's much more likely to pay off than a TAG who will mostly be trying to out-flop the PFR just like you are. It's hard to win money with small sets when the other players are trying to hits sets too.

Time Link to 00:44:33

I like this cold 4 bet bluff spot, and this is something I would like to do more often.

I guess, standard value range would be AA and KK here obviously, QQ is probably vilain dependent.

How often, or how wide should be our bluffing range in this spot (as a starting point obviously)? Normally a cold 4 bet from this spot gets a lot of respect. I would do this vs a guy that 3 bet probably more than 5% and fold a lot to 4 bet (above 50%). Sounds good?

AK should be ranked as a semi bluff in this spot? I like to do it a lot with AK there.

So, if we do the same with AJs, what about having ATs to AQs as our cold 4 bet bluffing range (considering PFR is not coming from EP and 3 bet from LP)?

I like this cold 4 bet bluff spot, and this is something I would like to do more often.

I guess, standard value range would be AA and KK here obviously, QQ is probably vilain dependent.

How often, or how wide should be our bluffing range in this spot (as a starting point obviously)? Normally a cold 4 bet from this spot gets a lot of respect. I would do this vs a guy that 3 bet probably more than 5% and fold a lot to 4 bet (above 50%). Sounds good?

AK should be ranked as a semi bluff in this spot? I like to do it a lot with AK there.

So, if we do the same with AJs, what about having ATs to AQs as our cold 4 bet bluffing range (considering PFR is not coming from EP and 3 bet from LP)?

I'd often be 3-betting JJ+,AK and getting it in this specific situation unless I had a reason to do otherwise. I often have a pretty active image, so that means my value range can and should be wider than KK+.

AQ-AT will often be more obvious 4-bet/folds. I often will choose any Ax or Kx hand if my image is really clean and I think it's likely to work. I don't try to set out a specific range for this as I try to adjust my range to individual situation.

I wouldn't rely on stats in this spot. The stats (especially the 3-bet stat) is just an indication. If you're playing vs a TAG you can see the hand through his eyes and use all your clues to estimate if he has a wide 3-betting range. If that's the case, pull the trigger with a wide range.

Time Link to 00:10:46

Do you call TT/99/88 in the BB on the flop vs a cbet here with a player left to act ? In heros spot i would be playing it the same thinking BB folds those hands on the flop and i wouldnt intend on barreling , however that now looks like a solid reason to call with them since i think most players think this way

Do you call TT/99/88 in the BB on the flop vs a cbet here with a player left to act ? In heros spot i would be playing it the same thinking BB folds those hands on the flop and i wouldnt intend on barreling , however that now looks like a solid reason to call with them since i think most players think this way

Well, it's hard because I wouldn't show up with TT here. I'd 4-bet that pre. The more I think about it the more I have trouble suggesting flatting 3-bets cold in this spot. It seems really unbalanced. It's obvious we have a solid bluff catcher, medium value, sort of hand. Unless villain is insane he won't often go crazy trying to barrel us in spots that are good for us, and if he's that insane we can 4-bet for value pre. The flip side is you could try to balance by flatting a wider range and bluffing with them post. That might be a little too crazy, but if someone told me that it works often enough (from experience) I could get behind it.

If I were to get here it's honestly a pretty tough spot, which kinda gets back to why I think pre is better to 4-bet.

I think a bet on the flop is pretty reasonable, but I don't know if TT snap-folds... especially vs me. If you think you have a super clean image, it may be a really great c-bet to bluff off TT type hands.

Time Link to 00:49:33

Correct me if I'm wrong: you suggest to 4b shove with every pair 22-99 vs this kind of players squeeze?
Isn't that obvious that we doing it with this such of a hands and this player will call us very often?

On the other hand shouldn't we flat/4b shove big pairs to balance that range?

Thx for replying in advance.

Correct me if I'm wrong: you suggest to 4b shove with every pair 22-99 vs this kind of players squeeze?
Isn't that obvious that we doing it with this such of a hands and this player will call us very often?

On the other hand shouldn't we flat/4b shove big pairs to balance that range?

Thx for replying in advance.

Right, we also would have AA/KK in our range from time to time - especially if we think villain is perceptive enough to realize that we are taking this line with a wide range. In the video I was more referring to this hand in a vacuum when we have no image for this spot. It really only becomes a problem to shove all PPs if he starts 3-betting/calling something like QJ. If his squeezing range is really wide and he's 3-bet/folding stuff like QJ,KQ, AT, A5s, etc then it kind of becomes hard for a shove not to be +EV. In this case 22 often is the same as 99.

Also, If he starts 3-bet/calling stuff like 66 then we definitely become less likely to shove 22, although I wouldn't be surprised if 22 is still +EV to shove if his squeeze range is fairly wide and he's still folding weak broadways.

The problem is there's no guarantee that we'll have position. As you move to the BTN you can really start calling a lot more because you'll be IP so much more often and that means you'll get to win a pot outside of hitting a set. In fact, if I were closing the action with no callers in the BB - I'd just fold. When you're in the HJ and earlier I think the probability of someone else flatting or 3-betting is really making it a losing call. Player's don't 3-bet a lot, but if you put 4 of them behind you, you'll get 3-bet a good 10-20% of the time. When that happens you have a sunk cost pretty frequently. You will also often have that same positional disadvantage from the blinds. I think the value of hitting a set of 5's in a multiway pot, when everyone else is trying to hit sets a lot as well, is pretty low.

You could make a case for flatting when there's a loose player who can come in behind you. He's much more likely to pay off than a TAG who will mostly be trying to out-flop the PFR just like you are. It's hard to win money with small sets when the other players are trying to hits sets too.

Thanks for the response, I wasn't taking the position issue into high enough consideration :-)

Hi, very nice video to begin with but i would like to comment on the AQ hand the end. I think our turn raise there for value is the worst possible decicion EV wise. Its not the raise that is bad it is the amount. I mean if a good amount of his range is the flush draw, cause in my experience when a fish bets small alot of the times he is trying to price himself, then why mini raise and give him direct odds to make a correct call? On the other hand if he has a medium strength hand like second pair or a worse queen then again a bigger raise is better cause he is not folding anyways. But if we believe he is bluffing or has an inferior pair than us then better than mini raising is just call and let him bluff again on the river. So, i feel the mini raise is the worst possible action here.

Thnx

Hi, very nice video to begin with but i would like to comment on the AQ hand the end. I think our turn raise there for value is the worst possible decicion EV wise. Its not the raise that is bad it is the amount. I mean if a good amount of his range is the flush draw, cause in my experience when a fish bets small alot of the times he is trying to price himself, then why mini raise and give him direct odds to make a correct call? On the other hand if he has a medium strength hand like second pair or a worse queen then again a bigger raise is better cause he is not folding anyways. But if we believe he is bluffing or has an inferior pair than us then better than mini raising is just call and let him bluff again on the river. So, i feel the mini raise is the worst possible action here.

Thnx

I feel he doesn't have a lot of draws in his range, so I wouldn't be worried about pricing them in. However, if he has less than TP I don't imagine he's calling a really big raise. I do agree we can probably raise a little bigger and still get called though. I still wouldn't pot it or anything though. Maybe something like 30 to go.

I'm not sure how min-raise is worse than calling though. If we think the raise is for value, min raising is better than calling. So, min-raise can't be literally the worst option. Folding is. Then calling. Then moving all in. Then min-raising.