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

This has probly been on of my favorite series on DC up untill now. I really like the "random" questions Nolan shoots out. And his teaching style in general is very easy to relate to. However my only complaint is that; whether it be the softness of fulltilt, or TingRose's experience level; there arn't enuff tricky spots in this video and that it may be too basic to beat the games vs most of the regs ive played against at 50nl. (pstars) I nominate diggerthedog to continue as Nolan's student. (Great first post imo)

Nolan - you mention that your style is catered towards 12+ tablers.
Can you describe what you mean when you say this?
Are you talking PF hand ranges or Post-flop value betting?
If you had say - 16 tables running - do you adjust your steal range much?

Liked the video.


Thanks for the shout out Z. Good first post imo.

Yea I really liked the dynamic in this series between coach and student was pretty sweet, like the vids are good but also pretty enjoyable to watch for entertainment value to. Ive just recently changed from 6max to FR so Id like to see more of these types of micro/small stakes FR vids if possible.

Good job fellas.

Only 4 eps? Awww,

Love the Nolan videos for FR

Nolan - you mention that your style is catered towards 12+ tablers.
Can you describe what you mean when you say this?
Are you talking PF hand ranges or Post-flop value betting?
If you had say - 16 tables running - do you adjust your steal range much?

Have you watched Nolan's "Movin' on up Full Ring Series"? He pretty much explains what he means there.

Yes, he advocates stealing less, avoiding marginal spots that otherwise clutter multi-table decisions. Nolan himself back in the day 12-tabled micros with a 12/8/2 style. Also, aggressively use position 3B'ing IP.

Postflop, simplify betting decisions with solid bet-sizing so that Villain raises are easier to fold to since they more definitely mean strength. Nolan plays what he calls "big ball" poker putting opponents to difficult decisions for all their chips.

Id like to hear more about your Big Balls sir...wait

I find this difficult, i seem to get frustrated when i get no action on my cbets/bets when i make them too large. Did you find any change in the amount of "action" you got by making this change?

Id like to hear more about your Big Balls sir...wait

I find this difficult, i seem to get frustrated when i get no action on my cbets/bets when i make them too large. Did you find any change in the amount of "action" you got by making this change?

Post-flop CBet's are sized according to wetness of flop. I don't think Nolan does anything differently there.

But Turn bet-sizing is solid. Say for example, Hero has AcKc on Ac8h2h flop and bets and gets called and then Turn is a heart completing the flush if that is what Villain called flop with. Turn bet should be a solid 70% so that Hero gets value from top pair Ax hands but also so that Hero has an easier decision to fold if raised (depending on Villain type). A smaller bet such as 50% leaves Hero in no-man's land if raised. A Check fails to get value and, if Villain bets, how does Hero know what to do?

i was laughing so hard around 21 minute mark when student said, "yea i had something like that happen to me the other day, i flopped middle set on 782 board and he had a set of 8's"..."Get outta here! you got set over set?" hahaha thats annoying thats the worst

Post-flop CBet's are sized according to wetness of flop. I don't think Nolan does anything differently there.

But Turn bet-sizing is solid. Say for example, Hero has AcKc on Ac8h2h flop and bets and gets called and then Turn is a heart completing the flush if that is what Villain called flop with. Turn bet should be a solid 70% so that Hero gets value from top pair Ax hands but also so that Hero has an easier decision to fold if raised (depending on Villain type). A smaller bet such as 50% leaves Hero in no-man's land if raised. A Check fails to get value and, if Villain bets, how does Hero know what to do?

OK so what now if villain calls and then shoves river? Arent we committed to calling it off if we bet again?

OK so what now if villain calls and then shoves river? Arent we committed to calling it off if we bet again?

It depends...on hand, Villain, board texture etc but No, we aren't necessarily committed on River.

In my example hand where flush got there on Turn and if Villain called and then shoved River OOP I would fold as Villain probably has flush.

One of the points of the Turn bet when the potential flush hit was to get the Villain to play his hand face up while disguising the strength of Hero's hand. Hero Turn bet gets value from TP hands but it also gets Villain concerned that Hero has flush. Some tight Villains may even fold a baby flush in that spot. A Villain raise should mean a Hero fold as Villain is representing Flush strongly.

A Villain call on the Turn may mean Villain has the flush or Villain has TP depending on Villain type. If Villain is a nit that would only call Turn with a flush then not a single cent more should go in the Pot. If Villain is loose enough that TP's are the majority of his range then Hero should value bet River. If Villain shoves River OOP despite the Hero's bet on Turn representing Flush Hero can be pretty confident Villain has flush without a specific read otherwise.