---

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

Time Link to 00:08:59

With the AKs hand on the top left is that a board that you generally fire 1 or 2 barrels and give up unless you improve on the river?
I generally would fire 1 or 3 barrles here just because I think because of the blank that came on the turn you are going to get some peels with a lot of the medium PP that flatted the flop. It depends on my opponents 3 bet calling range but it seems like a good board to go 1 or 3.

With the AKs hand on the top left is that a board that you generally fire 1 or 2 barrels and give up unless you improve on the river?
I generally would fire 1 or 3 barrles here just because I think because of the blank that came on the turn you are going to get some peels with a lot of the medium PP that flatted the flop. It depends on my opponents 3 bet calling range but it seems like a good board to go 1 or 3.

why would people flat a lot of medium pp on the flop? You expect most people to flat 88 on Q9x? This spot is hightly dependent on people's 3 bet calling range but I almost never fire 3 on Q high boards without good equity in 3 bet pots assuming reasonable calling ranges.

Firing how many barrel should almost always be villain dependent. I fired 2 here because this guy seem to call flop wide and fold to turn bet alot.

Time Link to 00:17:36

on the 99 hand in the bottom left what do you think about the idea of betting the river somewhat large like 65-75 into 90? I just dont like taking a c/c then c/f a river like this after the turn is checked through because it would be really hard for you to have any bluffs once you bet this river and so I would expect him to fold most or all of his Jx hands. It also doesnt give him a chance to bluff which generally you want people to do but not if ur just planning on C/f.

Time Link to 00:11:30

FWF says, "Even though you'll have a lot of fold equity, your opponents will peel with a wide enough range that you can pretty much barrel a lot."

What is the connection between the above statement and min-raising or 2.5x'ing the button being better than 3x'ing it?

Time Link to 00:32:53

on bottom left. What is your reasoning for 2.5x open SB v BB? I generally pot it since you will be OOP so same reasoning for Potting it UTG.

why would people flat a lot of medium pp on the flop? You expect most people to flat 88 on Q9x? This spot is hightly dependent on people's 3 bet calling range but I almost never fire 3 on Q high boards without good equity in 3 bet pots assuming reasonable calling ranges.

Firing how many barrel should almost always be villain dependent. I fired 2 here because this guy seem to call flop wide and fold to turn bet alot.

Well I guess this spot is really dependent on the villians 3 bet calling range and what he is 4 betting but ya I think the turn card is one that Im going to get peeled with a lot of marginal holdings. I think there are alot of ppl that call twice with 88,9x, and TT (if they dont 4 bet it). I play 200nl though and I think that in general a 1 or 3 strategy has been better than firing 2 unless I have a read like you said that he calls flops and folds lots a turns.
I think my first statement was a little off. lots of medium PP is probably wrong but just lots of marginal hands that will fold by the river. idk maybe i am a spew monkey

Also if your strategy is to bet bet then c/f all bluffs then calling twice with marginal hands seems like a perfectly good counter strategy and then just fold to all of your river jams since you wont have hardly any bluffs in your range. Although he probably isnt thinking that

on bottom left. What is your reasoning for 2.5x open SB v BB? I generally pot it since you will be OOP so same reasoning for Potting it UTG.

Get asked this in every vid I make. Raising small to exploit until someone gives you a reason to not want to raise a wide range. The smaller you raise the less often you need to win the pot to be +EV -> can have a wider range.

Potting it OOP makes no sense unless you range is actually tigher because it doesn't mask your wide preflop range(your PFR shows on villain's HUD) if you have one thus making it bigger is -EV since you win the pot LESS OFTEN and people win MORE MONEY from you when they play back unless of course your actual range is tigher.

on the 99 hand in the bottom left what do you think about the idea of betting the river somewhat large like 65-75 into 90? I just dont like taking a c/c then c/f a river like this after the turn is checked through because it would be really hard for you to have any bluffs once you bet this river and so I would expect him to fold most or all of his Jx hands. It also doesnt give him a chance to bluff which generally you want people to do but not if ur just planning on C/f.

c/c turn donk bet river makes no sense. You can use it as a leveling line vs people but should never be your standard play vs anyone who has a clue about hand reading. What do we rep when you take that line?

Also if your strategy is to bet bet then c/f all bluffs then calling twice with marginal hands seems like a perfectly good counter strategy and then just fold to all of your river jams since you wont have hardly any bluffs in your range. Although he probably isnt thinking that

Our strategy should be different vs everyone. Vs that particular villain I decided that b/b/cf is the highest EV line but doesn't mean it's the highest EV line vs next player. There are no standard way to play any hands.

If our assumption changes so we no longer think that's the highest EV line then we adjust.

Time Link to 00:16:41

if the turn were a T or a Jack you say you would bet. Would that be with the intention of 3barreling a lot of rivers too? Don't those cards hit a lot of his floating range like AJ, JThh, KJhh, QJhh, KQhh, giving them either pairs or straightdraws + overs? And you don't expect him to fold like 77 or 65s on a Ten or Jack turn right?

c/c turn donk bet river makes no sense. You can use it as a leveling line vs people but should never be your standard play vs anyone who has a clue about hand reading. What do we rep when you take that line?

The turn was checked through

Get asked this in every vid I make. Raising small to exploit until someone gives you a reason to not want to raise a wide range. The smaller you raise the less often you need to win the pot to be +EV -> can have a wider range.

Potting it OOP makes no sense unless you range is actually tigher because it doesn't mask your wide preflop range(your PFR shows on villain's HUD) if you have one thus making it bigger is -EV since you win the pot LESS OFTEN and people win MORE MONEY from you when they play back unless of course your actual range is tigher.

Ok well then just min raise from every position.
Raising Pot UTG makes the pot bigger and therefore takes away from peoples positional advantage and discourages them from flatting you IPO a lot. IF you min raise utg your going to be playing OOP a lot and not getting a lot of money in pre with value hands. So potting OOP makes sense.
from the SB it makes a little more sense to make it small like you said and if someone is folding a lot then it seems great to me but I would assume that you just get flatted a lot.

Our strategy should be different vs everyone. Vs that particular villain I decided that b/b/cf is the highest EV line but doesn't mean it's the highest EV line vs next player. There are no standard way to play any hands.

If our assumption changes so we no longer think that's the highest EV line then we adjust.

Yup sounds reasonable

Ok well then just min raise from every position.
Raising Pot UTG makes the pot bigger and therefore takes away from peoples positional advantage and discourages them from flatting you IPO a lot. IF you min raise utg your going to be playing OOP a lot and not getting a lot of money in pre with value hands. So potting OOP makes sense.
from the SB it makes a little more sense to make it small like you said and if someone is folding a lot then it seems great to me but I would assume that you just get flatted a lot.

How does the argument translate to math and EV? Our end game in poker is just to achieve the highest EV. Even if people fold more vs a larger raise does not necessarily mean bigger raise has higher EV. For example, minraising and making villain fold 50% of the times will clearly be higher EV than raising to 3x making villain fold 60% of the times, not considering postflop play.

Preflop raise size i a math question. I never said minraise from every spot is highest EV. We are allowed to have different raise sizes vs different villains as well.

The turn was checked through

Miss the action. Betting the river is reasonable but I wouldn't bet huge. We can rep a wider range of value hands by betting smaller and we don't rep too many bluffs when we called the flop bet OOP. In this spot though, I think 99 has enough showdown value vs unknown to just try to win at showdown.

Great video guys!

Question to FoxwoodsFiend

How do you manage to share your time between studying at university and playing poker at high level? When you study to your exams do you play poker at all or just give it up for a while?

Miss the action. Betting the river is reasonable but I wouldn't bet huge. We can rep a wider range of value hands by betting smaller and we don't rep too many bluffs when we called the flop bet OOP. In this spot though, I think 99 has enough showdown value vs unknown to just try to win at showdown.

Ya that makes sense and I like the idea of betting smaller also because my idea of betting that river would be to represent a decently wide value range

How does the argument translate to math and EV? Our end game in poker is just to achieve the highest EV. Even if people fold more vs a larger raise does not necessarily mean bigger raise has higher EV. For example, minraising and making villain fold 50% of the times will clearly be higher EV than raising to 3x making villain fold 60% of the times, not considering postflop play.

Preflop raise size i a math question. I never said minraise from every spot is highest EV. We are allowed to have different raise sizes vs different villains as well.

Everthing you said makes sense. And if those numbers were true with a certain villian then I agree a smaller raise would be better. That would also assume that you would be raising with the same range also right? I guess my approach was that if im going to get flatted x amount then I can make the villian make more of a mistake by raising bigger with a tighter range and if he is still flatting x amount then he will be making more of a mistake and probably set him up for more mistakes post flop also if he still perceives my range to be really wide.

I will think about it more but it seems reasonable to use ur strategy against an unkown and then adjust using my strategy as a counter strategy

I will think about it more but it seems reasonable to use ur strategy against an unkown and then adjust using my strategy as a counter strategy

exactly. I don't minraise vs everyone and when I do raise tigher range I will pot raise the SB. Optimizing the EV of our range vs each individual villain is how to crush poker, no matter the stake.

why would people flat a lot of medium pp on the flop? You expect most people to flat 88 on Q9x? This spot is hightly dependent on people's 3 bet calling range but I almost never fire 3 on Q high boards without good equity in 3 bet pots assuming reasonable calling ranges.

Firing how many barrel should almost always be villain dependent. I fired 2 here because this guy seem to call flop wide and fold to turn bet alot.

I guess you 2dBarelled here b/c he will peel on the flop enough weak draws and maybe hands like AJ himself -> regards to your targetrange which you wanna make here fold, you are ahead.
I don`t wanna say that i do not like your 2ndBarell here b/c you are OOP with one further street to go and hence X/C Turn is somewhat difficult, unless special reads are given (such that he does not bluffjam rivers with busted draws after floated them on the turn).
Furthermore you can at least make some PotEQ to fold and hence there is even some protectionvalue.

Just curious if you had similar reasons to 2ndBarell there while making mostly worse hands to fold, or as well some further thoughts?
Just interested in your reasoning...

I guess you 2dBarelled here b/c he will peel on the flop enough weak draws and maybe hands like AJ himself -> regards to your targetrange which you wanna make here fold, you are ahead.
I don`t wanna say that i do not like your 2ndBarell here b/c you are OOP with one further street to go and hence X/C Turn is somewhat difficult, unless special reads are given (such that he does not bluffjam rivers with busted draws after floated them on the turn).
Furthermore you can at least make some PotEQ to fold and hence there is even some protectionvalue.

Just curious if you had similar reasons to 2ndBarell there while making mostly worse hands to fold, or as well some further thoughts?
Just interested in your reasoning...

Making worse hands fold or some hands call, get value from some part of range are all flawed thought process. There only equity, your line and EV. Before you get to the river making some hands fold makes no sense since we have equity vs a calling range and if we c/c we have equity vs that betting range.

For example, it could be +EV to inflat the pot with equity disadvantage and no FE if we have skill advantage. Build a pot for when we hit works when villian plays very poorly postflop for example which is why we still raise 22 when a fish limps. Do you call that a value bet or a bluff? or does it matter what you call it.

Making worse hands fold or some hands call, get value from some part of range are all flawed thought process. There only equity, your line and EV. Before you get to the river making some hands fold makes no sense since we have equity vs a calling range and if we c/c we have equity vs that betting range.

For example, it could be +EV to inflat the pot with equity disadvantage and no FE if we have skill advantage. Build a pot for when we hit works when villian plays very poorly postflop for example which is why we still raise 22 when a fish limps. Do you call that a value bet or a bluff? or does it matter what you call it.

ehm,
you realized that I have similar thoughts on that and that i think all those phrases (bet only when better can fold or worse can call) are flawed?
B/c your explantation seems that you have not relaized this?

Just assume that b/c you haven`t referred to that particular spot, but have given me some overall input, regards to which I am actually already aware.

ehm,
you realized that I have similar thoughts on that and that i think all those phrases (bet only when better can fold or worse can call) are flawed?
B/c your explantation seems that you have not relaized this?

Just assume that b/c you haven`t referred to that particular spot, but have given me some overall input, regards to which I am actually already aware.

Then I have no idea what your question is. Your previous post said stuff about target range I fold I'm ahead of , making worse hands fold, given villain specific hand like AJ etc so I thought this is what you're talking about.

About that double barrel, my assumption is that villain gets to the turn with a wide range thus betting is higher EV than giving up that's it. If I don't plan to bet turn then I would of c/f the flop.

Time Link to 00:08:20

AK top right

What do you think about c/c T and checking river?

AK top right

What do you think about c/c T and checking river?

spew without knowing how villain constructs his turn and river ranges.

Time Link to 00:27:47

Really like the vid and series guys. But this comment sort of got to me a bit. You guys should consider throwing out a disclaimer first before you tell us we should be deffending that wide to OMPFR from the BTN when were in the BB. I think if you dont play that well oop your not turning a profit oop calling with 68o, 75o and a few other randoms. Im not the best player oop obv, or else i prolly wouldnt have posted this. But not many pple play well oop imo. Not that you have to with those odds but still cautionary is best imo. Alot of viewers hear stuff and just add it into there game blindly and lose money due to it.

Really like the vid and series guys. But this comment sort of got to me a bit. You guys should consider throwing out a disclaimer first before you tell us we should be deffending that wide to OMPFR from the BTN when were in the BB. I think if you dont play that well oop your not turning a profit oop calling with 68o, 75o and a few other randoms. Im not the best player oop obv, or else i prolly wouldnt have posted this. But not many pple play well oop imo. Not that you have to with those odds but still cautionary is best imo. Alot of viewers hear stuff and just add it into there game blindly and lose money due to it.

If viewers do anything in any coaching video without thinking about it they will most likely be losing money. Definitely don't copy what people say in videos without understanding why.

If viewers do anything in any coaching video without thinking about it they will most likely be losing money. Definitely don't copy what people say in videos without understanding why.

this is really key

i remember like four years ago right after cts' first video, everyone started c/r Axx flops. you could float the c/r with your whole cbetting range....

Time Link to 00:05:28

Shouldn't we be 3betting with a polarized range in this spot? Is that what you are describing when you talk about 3betting "like an animal" against an e.p. raise on the button?

Shouldn't we be 3betting with a polarized range in this spot? Is that what you are describing when you talk about 3betting "like an animal" against an e.p. raise on the button?

Sorry forgot to answer this question. We shouldn't have 1 generalized strategy. what we should do is have different strategy for each spot and villain. So general statements like we should 3bet polarized IP is meaningless. We should 3 bet like an animal if it's +EV otherwise what's the point in spewing? If someone is raising a wide range in EP though, we should 3 bet often to discourage them from opening wide. We can play 50-60% of hands profitably on the button if it's folded to us but can't do that if someone raised in front. People raising wide range in front of us reduces our overall EV so we 3 bet to discourage them from doing so.

Sorry forgot to answer this question. We shouldn't have 1 generalized strategy. what we should do is have different strategy for each spot and villain. So general statements like we should 3bet polarized IP is meaningless. We should 3 bet like an animal if it's +EV otherwise what's the point in spewing? If someone is raising a wide range in EP though, we should 3 bet often to discourage them from opening wide. We can play 50-60% of hands profitably on the button if it's folded to us but can't do that if someone raised in front. People raising wide range in front of us reduces our overall EV so we 3 bet to discourage them from doing so.

I understand what you are saying and wholeheartedly agree. I was more referring to 3betting polarized IP as a default. NAtuarlly player tendencies override any plan we had going into the game when the player was an unknown.

However, I think there are many layers to how we can 3bet and it's not all or nothing as described. Further, even when we 3bet like crazy there are some non 3-bet hands. Further, even when we 3-bet very thin we have to mix in some non-premium hands. It's all a matter of how you're balancing... and that's what i'm trying to establish. In position I'm going to want to, as a default, balance by polarizing. This isn't a general strategy. It's my strategy until I determine what type of leak my opponent has (please let me know if I'm misunderstanding, here).

Essentially, what I'm saying is, that against any unknown or standard reg I'm going to want to balance my 3-betting range with polarization due to a good opponent's aversion to flatting 3-bets out of position. I feel that this is in line with what you were saying but said in a different way.

In regards to 3-betting a wide open range, would it make more sense to flat more often to play more hands with better equity in position to hammer this opponent's leak?

I'm sorry if my explanations are insufficient/dumb. Thanks for taking the time to answer my questions/correct the flaws in my thinking.

First of all I have no idea why we want to be balanced in our 3 betting range vs EP to start with. In fact I don't think we ever need to balance our actual range unless it's a spot where villain will exploit us if we're not. We're not 3 betting that much to start with so they can't 4bet or call with a wide range. If our default assumption is people never ever ever call 3 bets OOP then we can be purely polarized but that's only a theoretical scenario. When the call button pops up people will click it sometimes so we'd like the strongest hands that doesn't make much profit flatting to be in our 3 betting range if possible. Of course we don't control the order in which we get dealt cards so that "strongest hands" is subject to game flow, dynamic etc.

As games get more aggressive, flatting open raises with hands that are slightly +EV postflop will be come -EV due to squeezing and not even getting to see a flop.

1First of all I have no idea why we want to be balanced in our 3 betting range vs EP to start with. In fact I don't think we ever need to balance our actual range unless it's a spot where villain will exploit us if we're not. (2) We're not 3 betting that much to start with so they can't 4bet or call with a wide range. (3)If our default assumption is people never ever ever call 3 bets OOP then we can be purely polarized but that's only a theoretical scenario. (4) When the call button pops up people will click it sometimes so we'd like the strongest hands that doesn't make much profit flatting to be in our 3 betting range if possible. Of course we don't control the order in which we get dealt cards so that "strongest hands" is subject to game flow, dynamic etc.

(5)As games get more aggressive, flatting open raises with hands that are slightly +EV postflop will be come -EV due to squeezing and not even getting to see a flop.

I numbered your post and my response for organization

1.To be certain, I am not advocaitng being balanced... but we will ned to have some balancing factors to continue to get value from the very top of our range when we 3-bet. Preflop play is a spot where even bad villains can have it somewhat down. So if we're only 3betting the very top of our range we don't get a ton of value so we have to mix more hands in in order to (a) get villain to call lighter or (b) exploit their incredible tightness. We aren't balancing so much as we are shifting our 3bets to exploit their leaks. Saying balance was a misnomer and my mistake.
2. I'm referring to "3betting like an animal" this may be my mistake but I was under the assumption that we were 3-betting a wide range here based on that comment
3. I think that you think I'm thinking in absolutes here... Villains will call some... but it's their propensity to call vs. raise that would indicate whether we should polarize and to what degree
4. This is 100% how I bet my polarized range. I have a feeling we might be having an issue of semantics here but when I 3bet a polarized range the air portion of that range should be the very best hands we can't profitably call.
5. I had not thought of this. Great point

I numbered your post and my response for organization

1.To be certain, I am not advocaitng being balanced... but we will ned to have some balancing factors to continue to get value from the very top of our range when we 3-bet. Preflop play is a spot where even bad villains can have it somewhat down. So if we're only 3betting the very top of our range we don't get a ton of value so we have to mix more hands in in order to (a) get villain to call lighter or (b) exploit their incredible tightness. We aren't balancing so much as we are shifting our 3bets to exploit their leaks. Saying balance was a misnomer and my mistake.
2. I'm referring to "3betting like an animal" this may be my mistake but I was under the assumption that we were 3-betting a wide range here based on that comment
3. I think that you think I'm thinking in absolutes here... Villains will call some... but it's their propensity to call vs. raise that would indicate whether we should polarize and to what degree
4. This is 100% how I bet my polarized range. I have a feeling we might be having an issue of semantics here but when I 3bet a polarized range the air portion of that range should be the very best hands we can't profitably call.
5. I had not thought of this. Great point

1. How is anyone going to find out that we're only 3 betting the very top of my range against them so they can make correct folds? Please don't say stats since I can 3 bet everyone 10% and 3 bet you 2% and my stats in that spot will show like 9.8%. Range also should be constantly changing so different range each time someone raises. Balancing our actual range in this spot is not very useful as long as we have weaker hands in our perceived range villain will defend vs 3 bets.

3. There are hands that are +EV both 3 betting and calling AA is the best example hands like KQo are probably in that category as well. It's our job to decide whether it's higher EV to 3 bet or call. Even with a polarized range or whatever you want to call it if it's higher EV to 3 bet KQo for whatever reason then just do it. So only using hands that can't profitably call to 3 bet "bluff" is a misconception and not considering overall EV of our range.

1. How is anyone going to find out that we're only 3 betting the very top of my range against them so they can make correct folds? Please don't say stats since I can 3 bet everyone 10% and 3 bet you 2% and my stats in that spot will show like 9.8%. Range also should be constantly changing so different range each time someone raises. Balancing our actual range in this spot is not very useful as long as we have weaker hands in our perceived range villain will defend vs 3 bets.

3. There are hands that are +EV both 3 betting and calling AA is the best example hands like KQo are probably in that category as well. It's our job to decide whether it's higher EV to 3 bet or call. Even with a polarized range or whatever you want to call it if it's higher EV to 3 bet KQo for whatever reason then just do it. So only using hands that can't profitably call to 3 bet "bluff" is a misconception and not considering overall EV of our range.

I think there's a failure of communication between us which is very likely to be my fault. I tend to skip steps when talking/writing and take too long with other steps.

In this conversation I'm referencing the idea that we want to 3bet EP raisers a lot. In order to do this, we will need to 3bet some portion of our non-nut range. What I'm trying to discuss is how that non-nut range should be constructed. I guess the crux of what I'm trying to say is this (and again, I apologize for being confusing in my posts... I'm really a terrible writer):

The non-nut portion of our depolarized range will almost always be more +ev than the non-nut portion of our polarized range, regardless of our action. Even if villain is more likely to raise/fold 3betting KJs will be more +ev than 3betting J5s. I'm not arguing this. What I'm arguing is that in this situation 3betting KJs reduces its overall ev due to the frequency by which we'll get raised. Since we don't want to reduce the ev of such a large portion of our range we will want to call with our tier 2 and tier 3 hands. Now, in order to obtain the 3bet frequency we want to deter early position raisers from opening too wide and reducing our overall button EV we will have to 3bet some non-nut hands. Since 3betting our good but not great hands reduces their EV we will want to 3bet more towards the bottom of our range.

Does this make sense or am I still really far off from where I should be in understanding this concept?

Thanks again, for clearing up my misconceptions

We're talking about the same thing I believe. If you think it's higher EV to call KJs than 3 bet then you should call. We're comparing the EV of 3 betting vs call of for example KJs and not the EV of 3 betting KJs vs J5s.

We're talking about the same thing I believe. If you think it's higher EV to call KJs than 3 bet then you should call. We're comparing the EV of 3 betting vs call of for example KJs and not the EV of 3 betting KJs vs J5s.

Yea, like I said, I'm often times a pretty bad communicator. I did learn a lot from this video series/conversation so thanks again

Time Link to 00:16:32

I really hate the small raise in the SB vs BB....... you're just giving him a crazy good price to own you with position, I'm confused why FWF suggests a small raise when 3betting IP and larger when OOP, but for this situation says its fine to raise small OOP? We get into a lot of situations like this because nowadays people just constantly flat pre and float the flop all day and there's so little we can do to counter it other than raise more pre....

I really hate the small raise in the SB vs BB....... you're just giving him a crazy good price to own you with position, I'm confused why FWF suggests a small raise when 3betting IP and larger when OOP, but for this situation says its fine to raise small OOP? We get into a lot of situations like this because nowadays people just constantly flat pre and float the flop all day and there's so little we can do to counter it other than raise more pre....

Last time I answer this questions in any of my videos. I do it because it's higher EV than folding and that's it. I've explained the reasoning already. Whoever disagree with it can pass up this spot. Math doesn't lie.

Time Link to 00:13:17

If the small blind was not involved, you wanted to flat AQ here. You say you can blufraise with overcards, but what are good situations for bluffraising? Calling preflop only for a pair is not enough? We need to call most of time 6bb for a pot of 20bb, so we get immediately pot odds. your thougts?

Time Link to 00:31:39

table 2 68s: you only 3bet here a wide valuerange?

Time Link to 00:37:38

which size is normal 4bet size here in your eyes? I always 4bet: 2* + 1bb in position, 2* + 3bb out of position 100bb diep

@39:44
table 4 AK: here you make it 130 thats 2* + 6bb I think thats way to big? Except if he calls to much 4bets.

which size is normal 4bet size here in your eyes? I always 4bet: 2* + 1bb in position, 2* + 3bb out of position 100bb diep

@39:44
table 4 AK: here you make it 130 thats 2* + 6bb I think thats way to big? Except if he calls to much 4bets.

4 bet size needs to be bigger than 20BB+ generally otherwise people can flat. I suggest you do some math or play around with card runner EV for this. Rules like 2x + some BB is dumb so if someone 3 bets you to 15BB you'd make it 33BB OOP? That clearly doesn't make sense.