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

not sure when this video was made, but fulltilt added a auto-topoff function, and its the best thing ever for compulsive reloaders(I was, and it seems you have that trait too, reload ahead of time just in case)

good video, not a huge fan of the 1table showing, 3hidden mode seemed choppier than the more standard show them all, the poker content was very good

I had to figure out exactly what was the best way to go about making a fullring live video. With less than 4 tables running it would probably be full of tons of dead space (lol nitaments obv), but I also wanted to keep it 1-table size for the ipod users. I think next week I'll make it just a 4-table fullsize video. But I'd like to hear yall's opinions on that: would you rather have more like this, or a full 4 tables on the screen?

Also, people, keep sending me fullring hands for the bonus ep: djsensei@deucescracked.com

About the format, I would prefer 4 tables showing at all times.

About the content, I think it was very solid, got some 1 and a half pages of bullet point facts to think about and revise...no big folds no thin calls. Good stuff.

It was funny how Dan seemed outright embarrassed playing 50NL in the beginning but I think he warmed to it a bit at least towards the end and got into some situations that seemed to be tricky. LOL at limpraising AA UTG - now you know it is doomed to end horribly wrong at 50NL! And you can never be sure of NOT seeing big hands in showdown at these stakes.

So in brief, I think I got a lot from this episode and almost think me moving up to 100NL is a matter of BR (soon).

You referred to JTo as being a reverse implied odds hand.

I guess I need some straightening out on the concept.

Every straight that can be made with JT is a nut straight. That seems to me to be a rather positive implied odds feature of the hand. And JT can make a lot of straights.

Admittedly, flopping a pair may be dangerous, but is one pair EVER positive implied odds? I thought even top pair top kicker was a reverse implied odds hand.

And, although it can be quite nice to have a suited connector for a redraw to a flush, it seems to me that the suitedness of a middle connector can be a reverse implied odds feature as one can easily be up against a better flush draw.

I'm confused. Please clarify for me why JTo is a reverse implied odds hand and why you only recommend playing suited connectors and not unsuited connectors in your starting hands chart.

Hi DJ Sensei,

Sorry to be a pest, but just wondering if you posted your HUD layout on the forums yet. THANKS

Well JTo is a fine hand in some situations (namely when you're in late position and its unopened to you. But against an early position raise, its pretty much bad news all around.

Anytime you're up against a very strong range, you need to play hands that can beat very strong hands (and hopefully can do so before putting a lot of money in the pot.) JT being suited adds a lot of value in that regard, because it can make flushes, and flushes are pretty good at beating big pairs.

Regarding RIO's: The problem with hitting top pair with a hand like JTo is that not only do you stand to lose a good amount to a higher pair (or a higher kicker) but you probably won't make much money from worse one pair (or no pair) hands. If you have AK and make a one pair hand, you'll quite often be against a worse one that will pay you off (most likely a top pair worse kicker). Also, making a hand better than one pair (well actually, more like making it early enough that you can play it in a +EV manner with stacks behind) is pretty unlikely with JTo. I wouldn't worry too much about flush over flush until we're much deeper than 100x. Though I might also be more likely to play JTo if we're that deep because we stand to win a lot more when we make the nuts against a strong second-best hand.

Hi DJ Sensei,

Sorry to be a pest, but just wondering if you posted your HUD layout on the forums yet. THANKS

ooh good point, thanks for the pestilence. It's posted here, on my blog. I'll try to get the Stars version up sometime soon too.

Thanks DJ, much appreciated!

g

Hi DJ Sensei, enjoyed your video alot, i noticed you folded QQ to an over card on the board... the guy was bluffing with 88, or finding out where he was... I did the same on this hand.. my thinking ws he flopped trips or had AA KK, he raised the BB by 5 times... didnt have much read on the opponent but he was quite loose, but in the end i folded. was this wrong?

ull Tilt Poker $0.05/$0.10 Pot Limit Hold'em - 9 players
The Official DeucesCracked.com Hand History Converter

BTN: $15.80
SB: $7.75
BB: $10.00
UTG: $2.05
UTG+1: $5.05
UTG+2: $3.65
MP1: $3.95
MP2: $8.00
Hero (CO): $8.45

Pre Flop: Hero is CO with Q Q
UTG raises to $0.20, UTG+1 raises to $0.50, 3 folds, Hero calls $0.50, 3 folds, UTG calls $0.30

Flop: ($1.65) T 8 J (3 players)
UTG checks, UTG+1 bets $1.10, Hero folds, UTG folds

Because he's only playing half a stack (and the other guy is even shorter), I probably would shove here. If he was deeper I might call one barrel and give up if he keeps coming.

Reads on his play make a bigggg difference though, if he's 10/2 over a large sample you can snapfold it, if he's 40/30 over any decent sample you should stack it off.

Thanks for that DJ... need better stat software, but with an imac only macpokerpro...waiting for PT3 to launch on mac, one day!!!

I thought the format of moving the screen was fine. It's a trade off in not seeing folded hands on the other screens, but being able to concentrate on the important hand at the moment was nice.

Format seemed fine.

As said it is a trade off.
The advantage 4 tables have is we can see easily what hands your folding.
The advantage 1 table at a time up on the screen as is we can see the hands you decide to play easily.

As for the poker.

Doesn't this drive you mad when you go card dead, still I am learning how to tread water quite nicely when it happens. Sometimes its like I get quite a few hands to play with when playing 4 tables and hands that I am playing are hitting nicely, other times its virtually nothing for two hours and when I finally get a hand it falls over at the very sight of the flop.

Patience, Action, Discipline is what I have to keep saying to myself, we are running a marathon here not a 100 meter sprint.

Well I think I'm a pretty patient person to begin with, so I don't have that much trouble folding and folding and folding. But here are some things you can try if you aren't so lucky:

1) Add more tables. Only do this if you feel that the quality of your gameplay has not decreased significantly, though.
2) Strictly adhere to a preflop strategy, and don't decide to play a hand that isn't on the list "just this one time". Not to say there aren't situations where you should make exceptions now and again, but in fullring games the vast majority of your preflop decisions can be mechanical.
3) When you do finally get a hand, don't overplay it just because you haven't gotten one lately. People may have noticed you folding so much, so when you finally do wake up with something and happen to face some heat postflop, well your small overpair may not be as good as it looks, dig?

Hey DJ!

What about profit in full ring games compared to 6max?

I know you said variance is lower in FR, but what about profit?


BTW great videos!

I think I enjoyed your advice in the last two minutes, than everything else in the whole. Not saying that the video was bad, on the contrary. But it was the last piece about the grind that really helped me understand the thought process of playing at these stakes. Out of curiosity [and if you don't mind answering], how long did you grind at these or lower stakes before deciding to move up in limits, and what was your bankroll when you did?

Thanks and great video yet again, looking for the next two in the series!

sudic: FR is probably less profitable than 6max if you're equally skilled at both. But not everyone is that way. Some folks just prefer to play fullring, and others find that it suits their skillset better. The key of course is to play the game that is most profitable for you.

PJHutch: I don't recall exact numbers, but I made my move through the ranks back in the pre-UIGEA party days when games were super soft (though I think I also played a lot on pokerroom up until 2/4). I tended to use roughly a 20-30 buyin bankroll requirement and moved up from nl25 to nl200 within a few months, probably not spending more than 20k hands at each level, if even that many. I was winning pretty consistently at 8-10 ptbb/100. I wouldn't recommend the same haste to anybody moving up the ranks nowadays, as I imagine the path is a lot tougher.

I had to figure out exactly what was the best way to go about making a fullring live video. With less than 4 tables running it would probably be full of tons of dead space (lol nitaments obv), but I also wanted to keep it 1-table size for the ipod users. I think next week I'll make it just a 4-table fullsize video. But I'd like to hear yall's opinions on that: would you rather have more like this, or a full 4 tables on the screen?

Also, people, keep sending me fullring hands for the bonus ep: djsensei@deucescracked.com

I also prefer four tables, although like you said this would be nice for ipods. However, it just feels too much of a mess switching tables in and out and its hard to follow table dynamics.

Hi,
I have already watched 1/2 of the 2nd episode, but had to go somewhere. Is there anyway to pick up where I left off without having to start over?

Hi,
I have already watched 1/2 of the 2nd episode, but had to go somewhere. Is there anyway to pick up where I left off without having to start over?

Unfortunately there's no way to do this in the flash videos -- those are best for one time streams. The downloadable options are great for picking up a few times.

Rob

Hi,
I have already watched 1/2 of the 2nd episode, but had to go somewhere. Is there anyway to pick up where I left off without having to start over?

Well if you take note of when you quit watching, then you can come back later and start loading it and just pause, then when its loaded up past the part you stopped you can skip right to it. Not the easiest or quickest way to do it, but its not too bad. Kinda like VHS tapes

I had to figure out exactly what was the best way to go about making a fullring live video. With less than 4 tables running it would probably be full of tons of dead space (lol nitaments obv), but I also wanted to keep it 1-table size for the ipod users. I think next week I'll make it just a 4-table fullsize video. But I'd like to hear yall's opinions on that: would you rather have more like this, or a full 4 tables on the screen?

Also, people, keep sending me fullring hands for the bonus ep: djsensei@deucescracked.com

Very good work/explaination on the videos, I am up to #2 right now, but I think doing a video with 4 tables at once is good but making it 1 tables I prefer because I can see the cards better for one and 2nd I can see the stats #'s on the opponents your are making your moves on.

I tried watching the coaching lesson videos were they were sweating a session with a 22cracked fellow playing 4tables of 6max, and I was lost and confused. They used some format to display stats that the whole tables had #'s, then it was difficult to follow the action and because so much action was going on I couldn't understand what either coach/player was saying on what tables.

This series is very good with big tables big cards & stats that I can see...lol

thank you

Hope you are going to make more full ring videos at 50NL & 100NL.

In one of your posts you mentioned you will be putting up the stars version of your hud stats. Do you have a link for this?

Going to practice this style and then watch the video again (plus the others) before I ask you any questions.

my stars HUD is up on my blog along with the FTP one: http://www.senseipoker.com/?p=28

Hey DJ,
Do you recommend playing FR at the lower limits, then switching to 6max as you move up? Or should you stick to 6max the whole time. I've heard such a push to play 6 max

It depends on your style (I expound upon this in episode one if you haven't seen it already). I started at FR and switched to 6max as I moved up, and it worked out pretty well for me, but if you're naturally looser and more aggressive then you may be better off just getting right to the 6max.

Hi!

Why you limp-reraised with aces? I think in this table its better to raise because there were 3 short-stacks. Just raise and hope that other big stacks cold call and then one shortie go over the top and you can trap more money. Also NL50 is very passive. So there is chance they all limp around and no-one raise.

Otherwise nice video.

And I love this site

Great video. Also very good narrative.

Nice work DJ Sensei.

'Late to the party. Sorry. About 16 minutes in you comment on this opponent who posts under the gun, a sign as you say, "here's almost a surefire sign that here's a guy itchin' for some action (and probably not a very good player)". And I see your point. As an extension, wouldn't that be a good cheap off kilter counter-tell that you were horny for some action and just can't seem keep your chips in front of you?

Table image is so difficult to buy or sell online, and if I can trip someone up, if only for like twenty minutes that I like to get and give, for the cost of a big blind - that sounds pretty good as investments go.

'Late to the party. Sorry. About 16 minutes in you comment on this opponent who posts under the gun, a sign as you say, "here's almost a surefire sign that here's a guy itchin' for some action (and probably not a very good player)". And I see your point. As an extension, wouldn't that be a good cheap off kilter counter-tell that you were horny for some action and just can't seem keep your chips in front of you?

Table image is so difficult to buy or sell online, and if I can trip someone up, if only for like twenty minutes that I like to get and give, for the cost of a big blind - that sounds pretty good as investments go.

If I was playing under a new screen name against regulars who I knew were capable of making that read, I might do it sometime, but I think most of the time the potential gain to your image is not worth it, even though its just one BB. People are quick enough to catch on that I'm not a fish, especially if they have a HUD running. I like the way you think though! There are more situations in live play than online where things like this can be exploited as reverse tells.

great video DJ. Just watched the first two and you explain things very well. I actually like showing only one table because I watch it on my ipod and can't see the bets if it's any smaller.
Thanks!

Time Link to 01:01:00

So here is my question: Since his stats are light, how do you know whether he made a crying call with his 9s, or called because he had you 3-barrel bluffing?

So here is my question: Since his stats are light, how do you know whether he made a crying call with his 9s, or called because he had you 3-barrel bluffing?

I presume that he called because he had top pair and isn't ever going to fold top pair.

Time Link to 00:39:36

I'm interested in the AdQd in the SB on Td9d4d board.

We don't see the preflop action, but the pot is $8.80, hero has $72, villain has $17.70 behind as the hand appears.

You lead out, get raised and 3bet villain allin. I've got a few questions. How does the fact that is 50NL affect your play here?

How would you play if the villain had $25/$35/$50/$75 behind?

I'm interested in the AdQd in the SB on Td9d4d board.

We don't see the preflop action, but the pot is $8.80, hero has $72, villain has $17.70 behind as the hand appears.

You lead out, get raised and 3bet villain allin. I've got a few questions. How does the fact that is 50NL affect your play here?

How would you play if the villain had $25/$35/$50/$75 behind?

Well, the fact that its 50NL will personally make me way more likely to "gamble" because its much lower than my normal stakes, but in terms of what I think the correct strategy generally is, well, probably the same . AQdd is super strong on that board against any kind of reasonable range, so I'd 3bet shove up until he had maybe $30 behind. Above that, I'd call and play my hand somewhat straightforward.

at min 2:30
why do you raise the Turn bet? You checked the flop back with the intention to let him stab with his air. His check at the flop indicates weakness. JJ+ should cbet that board, because their are so many worse hands to call. ON the Turn I think your raise isolates you to better hands. What range do you expect him to call your raise with?

at min 2:30
why do you raise the Turn bet? You checked the flop back with the intention to let him stab with his air. His check at the flop indicates weakness. JJ+ should cbet that board, because their are so many worse hands to call. ON the Turn I think your raise isolates you to better hands. What range do you expect him to call your raise with?

I think raising the turn small is about the same as calling turn and calling river, except that:
1) we prevent him from seeing a river if he has overcards
2) he doesn't get a chance to bluff river

So if we think he's likely to bluff the river too, or he might ever 3bet the turn with a worse hand, then calling is better. If we don't think that he'll bluff river or 3bet turn light, then raising is better.

He may well call our raise with anything from AA to an underpair of some sort or even overs+flush draw, so we'd probably check back most rivers.

Time Link to 00:40:29

is it bad to raise here? if his limping range is 22-99 or somthing. we have position and maybe almost 50/50 against his range . I always raise here. is this a big leak?

is it bad to raise here? if his limping range is 22-99 or somthing. we have position and maybe almost 50/50 against his range . I always raise here. is this a big leak?

If we're confident that his limping range is weak, then raising is fine. Against a more balanced limping range including big hands as well as smaller ones, I'd probably not raise too often. The fact that he's UTG is a big factor I think, if he openlimped from MP or later I'd raise much more often.

Time Link to 01:01:10

My question is this:

When he calls with top pair there, it shows that he is only thinking about his cards and is not folding because he has top pair. lol. Is this the big difference between lower limits and higher limit games?

The lower limit games, it seems you can get in some trouble when you over think things. Where as the higher limit games, you must be thinking in depth to be profitable.

This is a big problem for me in the lower limit games. I know what the villain has, and even though I know it is not strong, ( top pair ) I cannot get him to lay it down.

Am I better just betting for value in these lower limit games and semi-bluffing when I think the villain has LESS than top pair?

When he calls with top pair there, it shows that he is only thinking about his cards and is not folding because he has top pair. lol. Is this the big difference between lower limits and higher limit games?

Yes, that is definitely one big difference between lower and higher games.

Am I better just betting for value in these lower limit games and semi-bluffing when I think the villain has LESS than top pair?

For the most part, yes, I think so. You shouldn't try to make a weak player fold a strong hand (at least not without a decent piece of equity yourself). But you should valuebet him nonstop, because he just won't stop calling!

Time Link to 00:33:03

DJ,

You mentioned that although "You may be seeing a lot of stealing from the button .... you should be thinking not in terms of stealing the blinds.... but in terms of building a pot in position..."

Would you still agree with this 4 years later? It seems that winning 1 1/2 big blinds versus blinds who do not defend enough would make this automatically profitable, and so is something to be looked for.

In a live game, with the higher rakes, and automatic jackpot drops before the flop, what adjustments would you make to coming in first from the CO or BTN?

which

DJ,

You mentioned that although "You may be seeing a lot of stealing from the button .... you should be thinking not in terms of stealing the blinds.... but in terms of building a pot in position..."

Would you still agree with this 4 years later? It seems that winning 1 1/2 big blinds versus blinds who do not defend enough would make this automatically profitable, and so is something to be looked for.

In a live game, with the higher rakes, and automatic jackpot drops before the flop, what adjustments would you make to coming in first from the CO or BTN?

which

An excellent question! I think you are correct, the value of stealing the blinds is enough to consider on its own. Of course you must be aware of such things as reverse implied odds when we don't successfully steal, etc, but generally if your blinds are tight enough you can snatch them up with a nice wide range.

This (mini)series was intended for a very beginner audience, and one that would be playing in low-stakes FR games full of bad loose players. These days, the closest to that would certainly be live games, and the rake/drop considerations are worth considering. If the game does not take a rake unless a flop is seen, then you should obviously be stealing a lot against tight opponents (especially those who are smart enough to realize that calling will trigger the rake and make their prospects even worse). If there's an automatic rake drop, you can simply calculate how much you stand to win if your steal succeeds, and adjust accordingly. In a worst-case scenario like 1/2 blinds, $1 to jackpot and $1 to rake in any hand, there's almost no incentive to make a pure steal because you're risking $5+ to win a single dollar. But of course you should still be opening in late position with many hands that you want to build a pot with because you could win a big one.