Poker Video: No Limit Hold'Em by Joe Tall (High Stakes)

Time Link to 00:10:25

Haha, every time I hear the little bloo-woop beep in a vid I shrink the screen to check my Skype and no one is there!

Good thoughts about raise sizing from the SB. I admit I've always used a standard 4x without really thinking about it (well, to encourage folds, mostly), but I'll have to change it up a bit I think.

great vid! nice format, nice hands, nice analysis!


for the QKo hand in min11:40 : once villain checks back the Flop, shouldn't we just check it/give up on the turn because as you mentioned villain will have often time some kind of showdown value and the Turncard isn't a good card to bluff at - I expect villain to call here with A- high a lot and often times he will also call the river to a normal sized bet.

on the other hand we should really exploit the narrow/face-up range of villain and start to merge our ranges here, right? a shove with TT+ on the river should be more +EV than a normal sized bet because he will often times level himself into a call once he checked the flop to 'induce'

CDA,
Sweet, another convert!

Moe,
As I said in the video, people surprise me with how often they fold on the turn here. Mike's tiny bet to fold out air is awesome once you consider that we win the pot when he calls sometimes. I mean... once you consider that we can overbet river and have massive fold equity, it's def good, but even before considering that I think it's good just cause of how often people somehow manage to check back this flop with air (and how often they bet flop with 99).

I wouldn't ship this river for value because I think he's mucking to a ship almost always but calling a smaller bet really oftne.

Time Link to 00:34:24

What do you all think of my crazy micro-analysis of bet sizes, and possible phycological effects?

What do you all think of my crazy micro-analysis of bet sizes, and possible phycological effects?

Hmm...personally I think round numbers are less scary--like 6, 8, 9, 0. The 7 just looks mean, imo.

I do think there is something to it Joe but I'm not sure we consciously know it yet, i'm sure if there is some large market research on pricing on various products we could delve into the data and find out which prices people on average find to be larger (stronger?) or smaller (weaker? or are they going to be percieved as vice versa, with the whole strong is weak, weak is strong thing?) lol.. coming to think about it, I think 599 does look more callable than 600.. maybe there is something to it

This video is pure gold - funny, interesting and informative.

I dunno, I used to think that round numbers look scarier. Then a bunch of people told me that big piles of chips look scarier.

I think there's probably a lot there if you could figure it out. But, I think figuring it out would be pretty tough, and I think it probably varies a lot by person.

I do remember someone (maybe it was even me.. not sure) who played someone HU who politely asked his oppoenent not to bet odd numbers or else he'd fold.

Sorry that I did not timestamp this but....

Noah with the 68s turn raise vs the villians low doubling stat.
What did you think of villians bet/3bet with pair and 2nd NFD vs hero?

What do you all think of my crazy micro-analysis of bet sizes, and possible phycological effects?

I like making the pile of chips as big as possible, like someone else said. I think that's why I like my bets to end in 4's or 8's. I like how I gave absolutely no justification for it in the video tho, and Joe says "yeah that sounds comfortable" lol.

Sorry that I did not timestamp this but....

Noah with the 68s turn raise vs the villians low doubling stat.
What did you think of villians bet/3bet with pair and 2nd NFD vs hero?

I think his ship is good.

I forgot to mention this in the video, but I think that when mike takes this line, he has a draw really really often because he's almost never slowplaying a big hand on the flop and there's that we call the flop with that raises this flop for value except Qxcc, which is like 3 combos and often calls the turn (and isn't possible because of villain's hand anyway ). Given that, I think villain would be correct to ship all hands that he was value betting the turn with because if he just calls, he gives a free card to lots of strong draws that are unlikely to bluff blank rivers.

That's a big part of the reason I don't like the turn raise. I could've sworn I mentioned it in the video... But, yeah, that's what I should've said when Mike said he was raising to two barrel him off Qx/KK+. I think those hands ship turn a lot.

Time Link to 00:58:00

Noah,

you say, "with a 60% f3b it would be close." what is it? are you suggesting that 3betting would be worse vs a lower f3b %?

What do you all think of my crazy micro-analysis of bet sizes, and possible phycological effects?

There was a guy named lolotrickedu on Party Poker back in the Golden Age. He was one of the first people to experiment with crazy odd looking bet sizes and tilted the hell out of everyone until they understood that he was using auto-hot keys to type the bets in. That kept all his bets the same in any given situation.

What I'm trying to get at is that betting 275.77 vs 275 is fine as long as you are always betting 275.77 in any given situation in which you want to bet that amount. Understand that people might play differently vs the strange bet sizes but don't try to level yourself too hard into figuring out what they will do. Just know they will make mistakes. The mistakes that you'll make when using those bet sizes is in deviating, and not keeping things constant, which results in giving off tells to people looking for them.

There was a guy named lolotrickedu on Party Poker back in the Golden Age. He was one of the first people to experiment with crazy odd looking bet sizes and tilted the hell out of everyone until they understood that he was using auto-hot keys to type the bets in. That kept all his bets the same in any given situation.

Same guy from the free pokertrikz training site?

Noah,

you say, "with a 60% f3b it would be close." what is it? are you suggesting that 3betting would be worse vs a lower f3b %?

Yeah, I was talking about 3-bet vs. call. I think 60% was prob a bit high and it's prob more like 55ish.

But yeah, the more he folds, the worse a 3-bet is. A call is only better than a fold if our equity when called is $305 in a pot of $445. There aren't many hands that villain could call with that leave us with that much equity, IMHO, since villain is IP and is a good player. And a 4-bet costs us 200 whereas a fold gains us $105. So, yeah, even though we have a pretty strong hand, we're still hoping for a fold here when we 3-bet.

A lot of really helpful turn spots in the video. Gave me a lot to think about in terms of turn plays based on psr and equity.

Thanks

This video is pure gold - funny, interesting and informative.

+1

Time Link to 00:55:56

Hey Noah as usual sick video. I have commented before on your videos and you have shut down my argument but this time I think I have a better case. When you shoved here against Hero's 10 8 I was definitely thinking by way of combo analysis that he has clear call. First of all I wanna say by the way I have seen both of you play it seems equally likely that one of you is holding some sort of 6x combo or j10 combo. I just feel when you shove there you are putting hero on so many semi bluffs that cant call an all in that your pot equity + your fold equity makes shoving there with a flush draw a +EV play. The primary factor here is that we know you think like this so that opens your range way up from just J10(like you said) to any pair+flush draw or any good flush draws. Oh and just to be clear you are obviously shipping all J10's and maybe a discounted number of 6x's although I know you would be capable of shipping there with 6x. So the 12 combos of J10 + discounted 6x's is kinda balancing all YOUR semi bluffs. Thus given the dead money and HERO's made/equity it is an easy call. Maybe i'm factoring a little to much leveling here that wasn't a factor at the time? Would love to know what you think!

luv and ourrr,
Glad you liked it.

bezzer,
I think you're just overestimating how many FDs are possible and how much equity Mike has against them. When I plug in pretty much the weakest possible range I could have here, { AdKd, AdQd, AdJd, AdTd, Ad8d, Ad7d, A6s, Ad4d, Ad3d, Ad2d, KdQd, KdJd, KdTd, Kd7d, QdJd, QdTd, JTs, 8d7d, 86s, JTo } which includes all the flush draws that I'm opening preflop and no sets, Mike has 33.12% equity when he needs 33.07%. If I add just 99, it's a fold. So you're right that it's closer than Mike + I made it sound in the vid, but it's def a fold since I think pretty much everyone has one combo of a set in their range here.

I should add that I said in the video that I wouldn't be betting the turn here much with a set (though obviously not betting often and not betting at least one combo are different), but I actually think I should be betting sets here because Mike's flop calling range has a lot of FDs, two pair, pair + OESD.

Time Link to 00:10:46

I'm interested in the arguments for 3xing vs 4xing SB v BB. This topic came up in FWF's latest vid - see http://www.deucescracked.com/videos/1971-Episode-Ten?seek=1357.

He argues that we should be making it 4x to reduce the value of position and limit the postflop options of our opponents. Noah I notice you acknowledge this argument in the vid but still believe getting a cheaper price on your bluffs makes 3xing superior.

Fwiw I've been in the 3x camp for a long time and am inclined to think the issue hinges on how much your opponents adjust. FWF argues people peel more to 3x raises than 4x when you open from the SB. Would be interested to see you guys thrash this out.

Chop,
Unfortunately, this is a pretty complicated issue. While I'm sure that there's a correct answer, I don't really see a good way to come up with it, except maybe playing like 50k SBs one way and 50k another and then just go from there (which would take forever at 6max. I dunno exactly how often you get folded to in the SB, but it's prob like 10-20%, so it'd take like 500k to 1M hands). Even that sample wouldn't really settle it because of variance, and of course it could easily turn out that 3x is better for some players whereas 4x is better than others.

I tend to like the idea of keeping the pot small when I'm OOP and making my blind steals cheaper more than I like the idea of lowering stack to pot ratio and discouraging calls when we're OOP. But that argument is really weak because 1) I have no proof that those considerations dwarf FWF's and 2) it's not even clear why the debate is between 3xing it and 4xing as opposed to 2x and 3x or 5x and 6x or whatever.

So, yeah, unfortunately a lot of preflop opening stuff in 50 BB+ NLHE requires a lot of guesswork and vague arguments . I suggest choosing based on who you think has the sexiest voice, me or FWF.