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

Time Link to 00:51:02

love it

good video. I've been dabbling a little bit in some FR for the first time ever, and found this to be helpful. going to try to watch the whole series.

I have a complete FR noob question. I noticed that you essentially raise the same range UTG as I would UTG in a 6-max. is that because of the extra credit your opening ranges get and less chance of getting 3-bet? I've been really nitty opening UTG and UTG+1 (folding stuff like AJo, ATs, and 33) and I can see how that can cause problems.

love it

good video. I've been dabbling a little bit in some FR for the first time ever, and found this to be helpful. going to try to watch the whole series.

I have a complete FR noob question. I noticed that you essentially raise the same range UTG as I would UTG in a 6-max. is that because of the extra credit your opening ranges get and less chance of getting 3-bet? I've been really nitty opening UTG and UTG+1 (folding stuff like AJo, ATs, and 33) and I can see how that can cause problems.

Yeah, it's totally a complete carbon copy of what you do so thank you for all the help you've given me.

FWIW, I think the FR games, at least a 200NL, are soooo much better than the 6-max games right now. The 6-max games are a bunch of regs and very few fish How I table select on Merge is I just use the "join all waitlist" function and let the tables pop up. There's so few tables that it isn't too much of a nuisiance. Then when the table pop ups I take a good seat if one exists, and if not I don't rejoin the table. . I'm an equal opportunity game selector so I do this at FR and 6-max and at this point I keep finding myself playing FR on 7 out of 9 of my tables pretty consistently. I honestly prefer 6-max so I tend to pick 6-max games over FR and still most of the good games are FR. Shhhh... don't tell anyone.

Most of those hands are probably folds for me unless I have an extra incentive to open (an obvious mark). I do like ATs as a standard, but I don't go much worse than that in FR. I'd say something like ATs+, AQo+ (you could convince me AQo is a fold) and 88+ (give or take a PP) should be a good starting point. If there's a fishy player in the blinds, or just in general someone who I think will pay me off, then I'll often add the rest of the PPs, A9s, A8s, AJo, KQo. Depends on how fishy we're talking, of course.

I could definitely be making some mistakes due to old habits. Back in the day I would open any PP, any time, anywhere because there were often fish to pay us off. I notice when I'm doing videos that sometimes my play reverts to old habits because I don't have as much of my brain to think. Another thing, I think sometimes I mistakenly open them because I am so big on seat selecting that when playing and I'm in EP I nearly always have a fish in the blinds so I nearly always get to open a little wider. Plus I just tend to want to play loose... it's always something I'm fighting.

Yeah, it's totally a complete carbon copy of what you do so thank you for all the help you've given me.

FWIW, I think the FR games, at least a 200NL, are soooo much better than the 6-max games right now. The 6-max games are a bunch of regs and very few fish How I table select on Merge is I just use the "join all waitlist" function and let the tables pop up. There's so few tables that it isn't too much of a nuisiance. Then when the table pop ups I take a good seat if one exists, and if not I don't rejoin the table. . I'm an equal opportunity game selector so I do this at FR and 6-max and at this point I keep finding myself playing FR on 7 out of 9 of my tables pretty consistently. I honestly prefer 6-max so I tend to pick 6-max games over FR and still most of the good games are FR. Shhhh... don't tell anyone.

Most of those hands are probably folds for me unless I have an extra incentive to open (an obvious mark). I do like ATs as a standard, but I don't go much worse than that in FR. I'd say something like ATs+, AQo+ (you could convince me AQo is a fold) and 88+ (give or take a PP) should be a good starting point. If there's a fishy player in the blinds, or just in general someone who I think will pay me off, then I'll often add the rest of the PPs, A9s, A8s, AJo, KQo. Depends on how fishy we're talking, of course.

I could definitely be making some mistakes due to old habits. Back in the day I would open any PP, any time, anywhere because there were often fish to pay us off. I notice when I'm doing videos that sometimes my play reverts to old habits because I don't have as much of my brain to think. Another thing, I think sometimes I mistakenly open them because I am so big on seat selecting that when playing and I'm in EP I nearly always have a fish in the blinds so I nearly always get to open a little wider. Plus I just tend to want to play loose... it's always something I'm fighting.

awesome, thanks. the last part of the last paragraph about usually having fish in the blinds when you're in EP makes a ton of sense.

Time Link to 00:34:32

I understand that your set really acts no differently than a bluff catcher here if you believe he's incapable of betting two pair for value. I see you have a lot of hands on him, what about his stats or your history make you believe he can't be betting something like 78 aside from very few combos of those hands? Would you also be folding a 4 here?

I understand that your set really acts no differently than a bluff catcher here if you believe he's incapable of betting two pair for value. I see you have a lot of hands on him, what about his stats or your history make you believe he can't be betting something like 78 aside from very few combos of those hands? Would you also be folding a 4 here?

It doesn't really have much to do with his stats. If he had about any two-pair he probably would have bet it on the turn. What's he expect me to call with if he has 87s? I look like I have some sort of weak one-pair hand when I c/c the flop on this board as PFR. I've also seen him check back some thin v-betting hands in spots similar to this. It's one of those things where I can't imagine him v-betting worse and I can't imagine him taking this bet size as a bluff very often. You can make a case for calling though. People will surprise us from time to time.

I don't think I ever have a 4 if I c/c the flop here but if did have a 4 it becomes close because we don't lose to a 4x v-bet anymore. We chop.

Here is the spreadsheet threads13 uses at the end: http://d2jl7hdveqsyxg.cloudfront.net/resources/CFS%206.ods

Time Link to 00:34:00

When I watched this my thought was to bet approximately $15 on the river with your set of 8's with the intention of folding to a raise.
Why do you feel that check/folding is the better play?

When I watched this my thought was to bet approximately $15 on the river with your set of 8's with the intention of folding to a raise.
Why do you feel that check/folding is the better play?

What's he call with that we beat?

Time Link to 00:01:02

Great video as always threads13.

Would you be so kind and explain in more details what calculations you made about the rake and stakes? Is it depends on rake paid compare to winrate on given stakes or smth else? I'm very interested in that. Thx in advance.

Great video as always threads13.

Would you be so kind and explain in more details what calculations you made about the rake and stakes? Is it depends on rake paid compare to winrate on given stakes or smth else? I'm very interested in that. Thx in advance.

I just looked at in pure bb/100. So, "what is the rake in bb/100 at 100NL/200NL/50?". We have the rake contributed stat in HEM so I used them. I'll ask Rusty to host my file since Megaupload has been taken down by the man.

And here's the file.

http://d2jl7hdveqsyxg.cloudfront.net/resources/rake analysis.ods

Time Link to 00:52:35

I know its not a huge difference, but we only have 3rd nuts and nuts 7d9d might very well take this line in my opinion.
BTW: I really enjoy your videos and they help me a lot to have a better approach when playing fullring! Keep it up!

Time Link to 00:32:26

88 on #2: What would you do on the flop if you had 44, 54 or 64 (or are you even opening any of those here?)

88 on #2: What would you do on the flop if you had 44, 54 or 64 (or are you even opening any of those here?)

I'd rather bet 88 than any of those as 88 has more equity when called. All of those hands, and this one, can comfortably c/c. The question is "is betting better". Given I think I induce a lot of bluffs by checking, I don't think so.

A hand that we might bet instead would be A6s. It's hardrer to pick off the bluffs for multiple streets because we don't have as much equity, so betting vvery well could be higher EV than checking.

I know the 88 hand has brought a lot of discussion, so I figured it's worth mentioning why I checked the flop. This post will have a lot of numbers in it. You have been warned.

I think that we have pretty decent equity on this flop when it comes down, but I'm not sure how awesome our equity is versus his calling range. I don't think it's bad by any stretch, but I think it's not a super-awesome value bet. I gave him this calling range pre:

22-TT,AJs-ATs,KTs+,QTs+,JTs,T9s,98s,87s,76s,65s,AJo,KQo

He's fairly 3-bet happy and off the top of my head I'm pretty sure he likes to 3-bet somewhat depolarized... 3-betting things like AQ.

I think he would likely fast play his two-pair+ range. According to Combonator (check it out in the first video of the series) he has 103 hands in his pre-flop calling range on this board. Two-pair+ is 15 combos, so thats about 15% of the time I'm getting raised for value. He's pretty raise happy so he may also raise me with some bare overs and BDFD type hands. That leaves me getting raised pretty often. Which I'm ok with given that I have 60% equity. If you take some of those hands out, though. Then I start not really getting "value" when he raises.

Board: 7d 6s 5c
Dead:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 39.692% 38.83% 00.86% 15376 342.00 { 77-55, AcJc, AdJd, AsJs, AcTc, AdTd, AsTs, KcJc, KdJd, KsJs, KcTc, KdTd, KsTs, QcJc, QdJd, QsJs, QcTc, QdTd, QsTs, JcTc, JdTd, JsTs, T9s, 98s, 76s, 65s }
Hand 1: 60.308% 59.44% 00.86% 23540 342.00 { 8c8h }



He's only actually calling me here about 13% of the time (TT-88). Vs that range we have 36% equity.

Board: 7d 6s 5c
Dead:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 64.462% 59.52% 04.94% 8250 684.50 { TT-88, 87s }
Hand 1: 35.538% 30.60% 04.94% 4241 684.50 { 8c8h }



So, if we just see how our equity is vs the combination of his raising range and his calling range (which isn't super accurate, but helps is get a image of how things look) we get this:


Board: 7d 6s 5c
Dead:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 46.114% 44.19% 01.92% 23626 1026.50 { TT-55, AcJc, AdJd, AsJs, AcTc, AdTd, AsTs, KcJc, KdJd, KsJs, KcTc, KdTd, KsTs, QcJc, QdJd, QsJs, QcTc, QdTd, QsTs, JcTc, JdTd, JsTs, T9s, 98s, 87s, 76s, 65s }
Hand 1: 53.886% 51.97% 01.92% 27781 1026.50 { 8c8h }


Check out how not-awesome our value is by betting this flop. Sure, our hand is very pretty but we aren't really getting great value. It's also going to be get hard to get paid when we really realize our equity. When we are far ahead he mostly folds and when we're flipping and slightly behind a lot of money starts going in, AND we may even have to fold our equity at some point.


However, if we check I expect this guy to bet almost 100% of his range. Now my equity looks like this.

Board: 7d 6s 5c
Dead:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 32.000% 30.66% 01.34% 32477 1420.50 { TT-22, AJs-ATs, KTs+, QTs+, JTs, T9s, 98s, 87s, 76s, 65s, AJo, KQo }
Hand 1: 68.000% 66.66% 01.34% 70612 1420.50 { 8c8h }


Now we're building a pot with much greater equity. I'm pumped to c/c this flop, and it's going to be really easy for us to click call again on the turn. We're just building the pot with equity much more often if we check.

Also, think of it from a perceived range standpoint. How many bluffs does really expect me to have when I bet this flop? Sure, I have some straight draws, but not that many really bluffy hands? It's pretty interesting that Combonator says he's folding this flop about 50% of the time, so we could actually bet ATC here. This is an example of a "bad" board to c-bet, but in reality it looks like a pretty good board to bluff. But he won't think that we are bluffing that much because it's a "bad" board to c-bet so we need to start thinking about having a checking range both because he won't call as much and to protect our checking range so we aren't just always folding every time we check.

What do you guys think?

And here's the file.

http://d2jl7hdveqsyxg.cloudfront.net/resources/rake analysis.ods

Unfortunately the link is dead.

Unfortunately the link is dead.

Sorry make sure you copy and paste the whole thing (includeing analysis.ods). That's the site, but the space in the URL screwed it up.