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

w00t \very nice

I'd like to clarify the T6s hand ~15 mins in a bit more. I went for a checkraise on the turn but I should have bet. In BvB a checkraise is good because you get him to bluff all his floats and valuebet non K hands that'll fold to the raise. But here I isolated a limper, which makes both our ranges tighter. He'll have less floats now, so by checking I get less bluffs, and he's also less likely to value/protectionbet 2nd pair type hands, so I get more checks by hands that I might be able to bluff out, and his bettingrange is mostly Kx which will call my checkraise anyway. If he bet, I shouldn't even CRAI, I should c/c hoping to hit the river.

Love this video. Im getting better at taking notes on others. I also use the client side notes to keep track of how "I" played vrs villian, Like if I over bet shoved river with the nuts or a wierd line I may have took. Basically HEM for them client for me.. I used to do it the other way around, but found that I had no notes when I did a hand review in HEM.

One thing I have been trying to do, is to get HEM support to make the note Icon bigger/resizeable so its easier to see.

Time Link to 00:30:52

77 on 4QQ65

I don't think he's valubetting worse here so that only leaves a float oop for hands that we beat imo. He either slowplayed a Q, has something like TT, or hit a set on the turn or river imo.

Actually, just realized it was 3-way. I take out floats for that reason and think this is a fold 100% of the time (barring some specific read).

In reply to the quiz at the end.

The full board is 2d6s7s2c3d

Now if our notes are correct and accurate.

We know he folds air to a 2nd barrel.. he doesn't fold so he doesn't have air

We know snap actions are weak and he snaps all 3 so he's weak

Given he would raise TP on the flop, I would also assume he would raise an over pair in this case 88+, so we can remove all that from his range

and he tanks when he improves, since he never tanked he never improved.

I place his range at 44,55, or 6x which makes me wanna call with 7x,88+ maybe even higher 6x's like maybe as low as J6

Time Link to 00:36:19

You say that BT can't have a strong hand because he limped with a fish in the BB. Because of that, you are saying he can't have any broadway type hands in his range? I see what you are saying, but I wouldn't mind a bit more discussion on this. Are you basically giving him a range of small suited connectors only?

Great stuff Grindcore. Could you leave the name of the program that changes the note icons in HEM please?

You say that BT can't have a strong hand because he limped with a fish in the BB. Because of that, you are saying he can't have any broadway type hands in his range? I see what you are saying, but I wouldn't mind a bit more discussion on this. Are you basically giving him a range of small suited connectors only?

Yes. Or atleast half his range will be hands like that. Similarly when you see a reg limping behind a fish, it's always a hand like that. The only way he hit the flop is with 97s or 22 there, I'm expecting like 80% folds to the underbet.

ah, lookie lookie what I found under the tree!

Thanks Grindcore, happy holidays!

Yes. Or atleast half his range will be hands like that. Similarly when you see a reg limping behind a fish, it's always a hand like that. The only way he hit the flop is with 97s or 22 there, I'm expecting like 80% folds to the underbet.

Thanks That's what I figured, but I just wanted to make sure.

Regarding the HH at the end:

We know he's weak, we know he doesn't have air (what he defines as air we don't know however), we don't know whether he raises straightdraws on the flop aswell like his FDs.

All in all calling here with a rather wide bluffcatching range should be profitable.

I prefer check/shoving though...

Time Link to 00:14:16

Can you explain your thoughts behind isoing T6s OOP?

Time Link to 00:33:02

Hey GC, table 2, w AKo, you kept about the same 3 bet size 150 bbs deep. Just curious if you had a specific reason, or 150bbs is not yet a tipping point...

Thanks, and keep up the nice work.

Time Link to 00:42:20

Loved the image advice. Who the hell wants to be the guy nobody even bothers to think about ???

Can you explain your thoughts behind isoing T6s OOP?

He limps so he's weak. He had also been raising so he's likely limping his weakest hands, unlike fish who also limp KQ etc. And when playing only 2 tables and recording a video you kinda want to play alot of hands to get into spots ofcourse. The next video will focus more on proper play, though I might raise the T6s aswell here if I wasn't making a video.

pls can you take notes off of screen and then drag them onto screen to show the viewers.

Hey GC, table 2, w AKo, you kept about the same 3 bet size 150 bbs deep. Just curious if you had a specific reason, or 150bbs is not yet a tipping point...

Thanks, and keep up the nice work.

I could start making it 10 but it's not really a big deal. OOP it's important to increase your sizing but not really IP. The smaller you make it the cheaper your bluffs, and if he calls it more often then he'll be playing OOP with a weaker range that can take less heat, and you'll have more room to apply heat as a result of the now higher stack to pot ratio. In fact you could probably show a big profit 3betting to 2.5x in position as default with 100bb stacks, or even smaller. Just because it isn't in the 2+2 textbook doesn't mean it's not good.

77 on 4QQ65

I don't think he's valubetting worse here so that only leaves a float oop for hands that we beat imo. He either slowplayed a Q, has something like TT, or hit a set on the turn or river imo.

Actually, just realized it was 3-way. I take out floats for that reason and think this is a fold 100% of the time (barring some specific read).

Fishy players often call paired rainbow flops with A high and then end up bluffing the river. But you're right that this was a pretty clear fold. My mind is always looking for excuses to call rather than excuses to fold so I'm always a bit slow to coming to the right conclusion in such spots

Great stuff Grindcore. Could you leave the name of the program that changes the note icons in HEM please?

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/45/software/ahk-transfer-ftp-notes-hem-bonus-image-ftp-note-icons-hem-hud-496455/

weakest hand i call on the river is J high in the last hand.

Regarding the HH at the end:

We know he's weak, we know he doesn't have air (what he defines as air we don't know however), we don't know whether he raises straightdraws on the flop aswell like his FDs.

All in all calling here with a rather wide bluffcatching range should be profitable.

I prefer check/shoving though...

villain isn't turning 3x+ into a bluff and never has 2x given notes. the only hands we should bluff with are 8high-10high.

In reply to the quiz at the end.

The full board is 2d6s7s2c3d

Now if our notes are correct and accurate.

We know he folds air to a 2nd barrel.. he doesn't fold so he doesn't have air

We know snap actions are weak and he snaps all 3 so he's weak

Given he would raise TP on the flop, I would also assume he would raise an over pair in this case 88+, so we can remove all that from his range

and he tanks when he improves, since he never tanked he never improved.

I place his range at 44,55, or 6x which makes me wanna call with 7x,88+ maybe even higher 6x's like maybe as low as J6

Yeah, agree with this. I came up with much the same answer, but Im not sure what better hands he expects us to fold. Although being an aggro fish I guess he can bet without much reason.

Does the donk has 89o in the quiz hand?

Time Link to 00:42:23

Another excellent point and there has been plenty before this timeline - proving to be an excellent series. Lots of good pointers that one doesn't often pay attention to.

weakest hand i call on the river is J high in the last hand.

+1

although I think I could just check-raise 100% of my range and be more profitable for it.

Fishy players often call paired rainbow flops with A high and then end up bluffing the river. But you're right that this was a pretty clear fold. My mind is always looking for excuses to call rather than excuses to fold so I'm always a bit slow to coming to the right conclusion in such spots

You aren't the only one brother! I'm currently working on finding that damn fold button myself!

weakest hand i call on the river is J high in the last hand.

+1

+1

although I think I could just check-raise 100% of my range and be more profitable for it.

+ 1 - i think c/shoving river > hero calling. Often he may be bluffing with KsXs, QsXs etc. If I were to call it'd be with Kx +, as we beat all of his missed flush draws (as given description sure he'd raise NFD).

Based on reads I guess he must have a 6 like always. Probably with an 8 or a 9 on the side since he doesnt connect. I call w.6 10+

Quiz:
If he checks back 55 and 44, we can profitably c/c a half pot bet with T9.

If he bets any pair on the river, we can call with J4. It looks like T9 is the break even point if he bets his pairs on the river.


I don't have Pokerstove available, so my answers are probably slightly off.

Regarding quiz, if our reads are correct (and air excludes weak gutshots like 95) BTN can have any 6 (w/o 76 and 62, dunno if we can count 63, since it improves on the river, but not THAT much with the already paired board), missed straightdraws (T9 T8 98 95 85 84), gutshots rivering a pair (53 43) and 55 44. If he bets his entire range we can still make a +EV call with T4o leaving 9 hi and 8 hi as the only -EV calls. If he bets only 6x we can call w 96+. If he bets anything besides 55 and 44 (showdownvalue_lol) we can call again w T high.

Time Link to 00:54:52

I don't want to be results-oriented but do you think that going for that read is a good idea? I mean, I feel like that risking that much money just because of the idea that he'd value-betted with a smaller bet size is ambitious.

I think, my comment can be broken down to one question: can we generally assume that the weak players' plays are consistent by means of bet size, lines etc.? Because of your style, I've noted a lot of stuff of several NL200 players. It was just 50 hands or so and I noted about 8 "pre-reads" just of his bet size. And it wasn't consistent at all.

I mean, doesn't we want to have more than one hand with a specific bet size to link a bet size to a certain hand type?

Thanks for your great video btw, again

I don't want to be results-oriented but do you think that going for that read is a good idea? I mean, I feel like that risking that much money just because of the idea that he'd value-betted with a smaller bet size is ambitious.

I think, my comment can be broken down to one question: can we generally assume that the weak players' plays are consistent by means of bet size, lines etc.? Because of your style, I've noted a lot of stuff of several NL200 players. It was just 50 hands or so and I noted about 8 "pre-reads" just of his bet size. And it wasn't consistent at all.

I mean, doesn't we want to have more than one hand with a specific bet size to link a bet size to a certain hand type?

Thanks for your great video btw, again

I think you are right, these reads are not 100% accurate etc. BUUUT, that considered, just by taking note and noting that his bet sizes aren't consistent IS a tell. You see? It means his range is probably well balanced and it will be tough to exploit him in the future. Also - you don't lose as much as it might seem calling down with a bluff-catcher versus a well balanced opponent because they really ARE bluffing sometimes with that bet size, just not this time - it balances out in the long run and you get all that extra info.

I don't say it's not great to observe this stuff, I do it in each session since I watched the first or second video of this great series.

I just ask, whether it is good to go for a stack-off based on a first little observation like in the video. It was just one read "weak bet size = TP" and that was enough to get it in with some equity and a little chance to be still ahead vs. draws w/o a pair.

So, is this
a) generally a good idea
b) a good idea in THAT case against SUCH an opponent (because of several reasons, would be interesting to hear what details are most important)
c) not a good idea at all and just for the purpose of having action and SDs in the video

Looking forward to a resolution!

About 54:00, A7s against a player you labeled yellow (weak postflop). Isnt it better to 3b this kind of player for thin value since he is going to fold to a cbet on flop so often. Earlier in the vid you folded A2o in sb vs his co opening, again since we have blockers to premiums and he plays fit/fold on flop, 3betting and cbetting most flops should be profitble here as well, or?

is it possible to make episode two and three compatible for the ipod like episode 1. btw. very nice video

I don't want to be results-oriented but do you think that going for that read is a good idea? I mean, I feel like that risking that much money just because of the idea that he'd value-betted with a smaller bet size is ambitious.

I think, my comment can be broken down to one question: can we generally assume that the weak players' plays are consistent by means of bet size, lines etc.? Because of your style, I've noted a lot of stuff of several NL200 players. It was just 50 hands or so and I noted about 8 "pre-reads" just of his bet size. And it wasn't consistent at all.

I mean, doesn't we want to have more than one hand with a specific bet size to link a bet size to a certain hand type?

Thanks for your great video btw, again

Well, calling flop and folding turn sucks. If I'm gonna fold to a turn bet, I should just ship the flop. Shipping any turn risks the same ammount of money as shipping flop, but this way we allow him to make another bluff. Ofcourse if I knew he'd do that with 99 shoving flop is much better, but given the info we had it was extremely unlikely that he had such a hand. You can't be afraid to take certain lines because of low probability events. You don't fold KQ on the button vs a limping fish because he might be limpshoving AA either etc.

About 54:00, A7s against a player you labeled yellow (weak postflop). Isnt it better to 3b this kind of player for thin value since he is going to fold to a cbet on flop so often. Earlier in the vid you folded A2o in sb vs his co opening, again since we have blockers to premiums and he plays fit/fold on flop, 3betting and cbetting most flops should be profitble here as well, or?

I believe I had position on him, so he's likely 4b-folding, which sucks. Also, by 3betting depolarized my 3b% will go way up, lowering the EV of future 3bets. This is a much better spot to 3b polarized. I'm 3betting him for value with hands that I can 5b allin, and 3b bluffing with the top x % of my foldingrange. The in between hands are all flats. I discussed why we want to 3b polarized in such spots in episode 1 so I'm not gonna elaborate on that here.

can we generally assume that the weak players' plays are consistent by means of bet size, lines etc.?

Yes, until proven otherwise. That's why you have to keep paying attention.

Time Link to 00:15:13

Why 3barrel ? issnt his range weighted to Kx when if he calls twice in that spot ?

Time Link to 00:11:15

This A7 on KTx vs c/r,
What do you think about calling ?

This A7 on KTx vs c/r,
What do you think about calling ?

If he's doing it with air, he'll likely jam a spade to rep the flush, which is a card I'd be folding on. I also let him get there for free with whatever or bluffing with 88 and then I lose when we check it down. It's a push/fold spot I think. Calling is good if I know he only valueshoves turn and all his checks are c/f's, but I didn't have such a read.

Why 3barrel ? issnt his range weighted to Kx when if he calls twice in that spot ?

That depends on wether he folds 2nd pair type hands on the turn, which I don't know yet. He might also fold some of his weaker Kx on the river and he could have a missed draw aswell.

Since all air is roughly equal in EV for bluffing on the river and from a balance point of view you should only bluff a certain % of your air, you should fill that percentage with the air that has the least showdown value or blockers to his callingrange. T high is one of the weakest hands I'll ever show up with there. It also blocks KT. A6 for example wouldn't block any value hands, and in fact blocks some of his air (NFDs) and it might also go check check and me winning vs a missed lower FD, so that'd be a bad choice to bluff if you only wanna do it with some % of your range. So T6s would be a good choice to add to the air part of my 3barreling range. Balance is not really important at these stakes though, usually you can either bluff 100% or fold 100%. I think this spot would have been close on a brick, and when it doesn't really matter either way, going for the balance is better than doing something random.

HH, at end of vid.

Villain: A5, A7, possibly 33, 44, 5x, 7x.

Hero I think, we can call with any overpair, A7, and stronger. About the only surprise hand he might have would be a rivered boat or turned quads, but nobody gets that lucky.

Yes, until proven otherwise.

That is very helpful. Thank you Paying attention is obviously extremely important.

Time Link to 00:04:28

Backraise-shove with 99, standard. I seem to run into KK+ even against squeeze-monkeys...

Full Tilt Poker $0.50/$1 No Limit Hold'em - 6 players - View hand 443013
The Official DeucesCracked.com Hand History Converter

BB: $100.00
UTG: $152.25
MP: $98.75
Hero (CO): $110.40
BTN: $100.00
SB: $366.25

Pre Flop: ($1.50) Hero is CO with J J
1 fold, MP raises to $4, Hero calls $4, 1 fold, SB raises to $17, 1 fold, MP calls $13, Hero raises to $110.40 all in

Looks fine, especially when MP calls there's more dead money + MP could call twice with TT/99 but would probably have 4b QQ+.

Time Link to 00:41:36

Folding to a 4bet I presume?

Folding to a 4bet I presume?

Hmm... That's close. Probably fold because of the stacksizes. Because of my relentless 3betting he's more likely to 4b bluff me there, but shoving is quite expensive. With 100bbs I'd 5b shove, or maybe even flat and jam over a cbet to induce 1 more bluff.

Despite him 4betting me a bit more there, he'll also flat me more with hands I beat to make up for it.

In the quiz hand I think we need 88+ to call him here I put him on A6s type hand

Time Link to 00:47:33

the 67s hand on KQxxQ.
He checked back the river w AA also, thats prob also a good thing to note right ? is the check back a good play by him or not ?

btw great vids man!

What do you think of the idea to donkshove the 67 hand, we missed the draw there.
Do you think it looks really drawy, we can represent a Q pretty well imo.

And would you call AK/KJ/AA (pretty much the same relative strength right?) there vs an unknown?

the 67s hand on KQxxQ.
He checked back the river w AA also, thats prob also a good thing to note right ? is the check back a good play by him or not ?

btw great vids man!

Yeah I should have noted that. I probably fold Qx on the turn and c/r sets so I have a missed draw or KJs or something alot there, so he should just valueshove because all draws missed. I now know that when he shoves the river there he has a boat or a missed draw, so I can c/c AJ high/better.

What do you think of the idea to donkshove the 67 hand, we missed the draw there.
Do you think it looks really drawy, we can represent a Q pretty well imo.

And would you call AK/KJ/AA (pretty much the same relative strength right?) there vs an unknown?

I think jamming the river is really bad because I'd probably fold Qx on the turn so my jammingrange there is pretty much only busted draws. I also think he very often has a strong hand that might not even fold even when he thinks hes beat because people hate folding big hands, + he might have a boat or something.

Hi Grindcore,

After you won the 94s hand on 773xx vs the shortie, why did you call his 3bet with a3s? I don't think that particular hand has enough equity to call ai with. Which seemed rather odd.

Fun to see a dutch commentator

Depends on how much he shoves. It's gonna be a slightly losing call (A5s being neutral or something) vs good shortstackers, and I just stacked him so he might be a little tilted. I agree this spot was a fold, I kinda called without much thought in the video.

Quiz at end -

Based on reads/board, I think his most likely holdings are busted straight draws - 45, 89, 9T - (weighted a bit towards the open-enders).

What we "know" -

1. He's weak
2. He hasn't improved
3. He'd raise a 7 or flush draw on the flop
4. He doesn't have complete air (such as random overs)

What I think -

1. He wouldn't bet river with 44, 55, 3x, or 6x.
2. Because of his wide bluffing range (listed above), I would call here with Tx where x = 9+.
3. Because of all the reasons stated above, I expect him to have air on the river here pretty much 100% of the time (based on accurate reads), and his air doesn't include overs, so the only thing I'm shoving here as a bluff would be hands worse than Tx.

As for my soul read, I put him on 89

Time Link to 00:15:51

Why would we double barrel if Kx is a higher frequency in his range? Since we likely don't have fold equity and he has more equity at this point...why would we double barrel? I understand if he has pairs under king to barrel, but if his frequency of king hands are high when he calls the flop, do we really have fold equity here?

Thanks.

Why would we double barrel if Kx is a higher frequency in his range? Since we likely don't have fold equity and he has more equity at this point...why would we double barrel? I understand if he has pairs under king to barrel, but if his frequency of king hands are high when he calls the flop, do we really have fold equity here?

Thanks.

If he folds everything worse than Kx on the flop we shouldn't bluff him on the turn indeed, but that's a ridiculous asumption. It's NLHE, nobody ever has anything. I don't think he's folding any pair on the flop. Maybe 22/33 but that's about it. And he might have floats etc. And even if a king calls me when I bet, I have so much equity that I can c/c a bet anyway. And he'll bet his kings on the turn anyway, so basicly I'm seeing the river for the same ammount of money wether I bet or c/c. But when I check he'll check down his 2nd pair type hands which I could have folded out on the turn, making betting far superior here.

And with betting I keep the initiative so I have the opportunity to 3-barrel if I want to aswell.

If he folds everything worse than Kx on the flop we shouldn't bluff him on the turn indeed, but that's a ridiculous asumption. It's NLHE, nobody ever has anything. I don't think he's folding any pair on the flop. Maybe 22/33 but that's about it. And he might have floats etc. And even if a king calls me when I bet, I have so much equity that I can c/c a bet anyway. And he'll bet his kings on the turn anyway, so basicly I'm seeing the river for the same ammount of money wether I bet or c/c. But when I check he'll check down his 2nd pair type hands which I could have folded out on the turn, making betting far superior here.

And with betting I keep the initiative so I have the opportunity to 3-barrel if I want to aswell.

Ah...I see! Thanks so much, such a great analysis.

Time Link to 00:04:49

I love your videos, you are my hero Grindcore.

By the way could you please expand on the shoving of 99 (you said 55-88 are virtually the same) when we get squeezed?
Is this still standard if the original raiser folds?

Could you please expand on reasoning and your equity when shoving pp's that we called PF in this spot?


Many Thanks

Time Link to 00:36:35

loool

With the remaining videos, will you be doing more on theory and less playing (like in the first one). The first episode was so amazing and the theory GREATLY enhanced my game.

Are you going to be doing more episodes that are just theory based?? I hope so! The other two vids are great, but there are so many specific situations, most of which arn't found in an hour of playing. The theory seems to cover so much playing in general...so helpful IMO.

I love your videos, you are my hero Grindcore.

By the way could you please expand on the shoving of 99 (you said 55-88 are virtually the same) when we get squeezed?
Is this still standard if the original raiser folds?

Could you please expand on reasoning and your equity when shoving pp's that we called PF in this spot?


Many Thanks

This is still standard when the pfr folds. When the PFR calls there's some extra dead money so unless he has a range that's gonna call twice, it's even better than when he folds. When he calls twice his range for doing that influences the EV (like him ever flatting AA there, or calling twice with 66).

95% of players don't squeeze mid pairs but only broadways Ax Kx some junk maybe and premiums or something. They'll call the backraise with all their premiums.

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 35.504% 35.21% 00.29% 224290476 1863336.00 { 22 }
Hand 1: 64.496% 64.20% 00.29% 408959940 1863336.00 { TT+, AQs+, AQo+ }



equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 37.260% 37.06% 00.20% 236051700 1286694.00 { 99 }
Hand 1: 62.740% 62.54% 00.20% 398352000 1286694.00 { TT+, AQs+, AQo+ }

As you see 22-99 are all the same hand. Lets say PFR folded, which generally makes it worse to backraise. If we jam and get called the pot will be 203 bbs so with ~36% equity we have 73bbs equity. We jam allin for 97 more, so when we get called we lose 24bbs. There are 18bbs in the pot. So we're risking 24 to win 18, so it has to work 24/(18+24) = 57% of the time. So if TT+/AQ+ are less than 43% of villains range, we can jam. TT+/AQ+ are 4.7% of all startinghands, so his squeezingrange has to be 4.7/0.43 = 10.9%. This range for example, is already 11.6%:

TT+,AJs+,KQs,ATo+,KTo+,QTo+

Alot of people will also squeeze suited aces, suited kings/queens, some more offsuit aces etc. It's almost impossible for a reg not to squeeze 10.9% in BB v BU/SB so we can pretty much always shove 22+ unless we have a better read telling us not to.

how do you pronounce grindcore in dutch? GHHHHrindcore?

Quiz at the end:
Ok assuming all reads are perfectly 100% right, which they probably aren't always, cause he is just a fish clickin buttons.

When he doesn't raise the flop we can discount every hand better than 7x, every FD and probably most of his openenders.

He doesnt have a 2 cause he would tank on the turn.
He doesnt have 53 cause he would have tanked and probably just check it back on the river, as I expect him to do with a 6.

That said most of his range is gutshots that missed, so his range is like 48/59/9T.
That said with getting that good of a price we can call with hands as weak as 89, sick shit ^^

how do you pronounce grindcore in dutch? GHHHHrindcore?

grajndkor

Nice vid, liked first 2 better tho.

Regarding the question on the end:
I would put him on a range of 89/6x/44-55 unless you consider in your note that 33-55 is air for him. Against that range given the pot odds you should snap off with 86 here Personally if I was certain that he doesn't have top pair (and also raises small over pairs on the flop) I think I would call with A6 (since I wouldn't go crazy with 86, and don't play K-96).

Time Link to 00:55:59

What is your reasoning about this call with A3s against, a short stack you owned a hand ago?

What is your reasoning about this call with A3s against, a short stack you owned a hand ago?

This was asked before, it's somewhere in the replies above.

This was asked before, it's somewhere in the replies above.

Thx, found it.

Answer to quiz:
Since T9,89,T8 are not exactly air and I fully expect a 65 VPIP to call with these on the turn I include them in the riverbetting range.I have not included any 3x hands since the river would have improved him and yet he still made a snapaction.

Range: A6-86,65,64,44,55,89,T9,T8.

Against this range we need about 33% equity so a call with 55 is borderline.

If he is not capable of valuebetting light on the river which most donks aren't, then you could argue he can only have T9,T8 and 89 and then you could make a pot odds call with T4 since you would have 40% and you are getting 3:1 on your call. Even though 9s8s is not in his range anymore.

enjoying the series so far!
would be really cool if you could do a video at ipoker!

bart is a nit when it comes to outing himself

wheres the new one

Time Link to 00:14:52

You discuss this spot in the forum: barrelling vs. c/c, but in the video you mention check-raising.

In what situations do you think c/r this spot is optimal?

w/100bb stacks our river play will very tricky, so are we limited to crai the turn if we take this line? (seems kinda risky in a vacuum/ vs. Tag ok)

or can we c/r and c/f a river; call off vs. 3b? ewww.. (if vill. calls c/r he should be calling much of his range off on the river for ~3:1)

w/150-200bb stacks, vs. what players would you suggest, and what bet sizing? + river plans vs. various cards

I have been concocting some various player types/bet sizing amnts, but am interested to hear your analysis before i start throwing these around.

edit: actually you clarify some of this post 1 (oops), but still some expansion on this play would be great.. i.e. no limper involved
This is a really interesting hand...

c/r is good if villain has a decent bet/folding range. Here he'll just check back his 2nd pairs and bet/calls kings so a c/r is horrible. With deeper stacks I'd still just barrel to get him to fold his 2nd pair type hands. I might go for a bet check bet line vs some playertypes as this will get them to fold their 2nd pairs regardless, and when he bets turn I might c/r jam river with deeper stacks to get them to fold Kx, but that really depends on my image and wether they like bluffcatching or not.

With no limper involved his callingrange pre weakens and so does my perceived raisingrange. A turn c/r now gets better as he'll have more floats in his range.

grindcore, really good stuff. Pls keep focusing on the most important reads at SSNL and how to use them to our advantage. Your notetaking and readbased game has something new and fresh into it. looking forward for more vids

wheres the new one

+1

Time Link to 00:02:20

think ur the most instructive and informative coach iv seen on deuces. I love krantz for his spew and handreading but i really like this series. thanks.

would like to ask where this feature is on HEM? im a techdonk and cant find it. thanks, Jenny

think ur the most instructive and informative coach iv seen on deuces. I love krantz for his spew and handreading but i really like this series. thanks.

would like to ask where this feature is on HEM? im a techdonk and cant find it. thanks, Jenny

It's in the default layout. If you don't have it, you turned it off.

HUD Options, player preferences, Appearance, Number of pots: 3

In that same window is also "show note icon" in case that's what you were talking about and not the HH window as your timelink seemed a few seconds off.

grindocre is it back to schedule now then with a video this sunday then every other sunday after?

cheers

Part 4 is a pain in the ass, I might have been a bit over ambitious with my plans for this one. It'll be released as soon as it's done. I haven't had much opportunity this week to work on it, tomorrow I'm free all day. The second half of the series will run every other monday in the next season which starts the 21st. I'm not sure wether it'll run the first or the 2nd monday of the new season yet, so it's either gonna be the 25th or the 1st.

Looking forward to it!

Part 4 and 5 have both been submitted, they should be out very soon.

Awesome series so far and probably worth the 30$/month even if you wouldn't watch anything else. Anyway my take on the quiz at the end:
Villain never has 7x or an overpair (assuming he raises an overpair on the flop as long as tp, and even if he doesn't, he doesn't snap act since he's pretty strong and the turn deuce improves his hand).
He never has 2x since he snap calls the turn, and he's probably not value betting the river since he snap bet. If those reads are all accurate his range is 100% missed straight draws; { T8s+, 98s, T8o+, 98o }
We need approx 25% equity to call and so the worst hand we should call with is T4 (has 40% equity vs that villains range, 98 has only 13%).

What do you think?

Awesome series so far and probably worth the 30$/month even if you wouldn't watch anything else. Anyway my take on the quiz at the end:
Villain never has 7x or an overpair (assuming he raises an overpair on the flop as long as tp, and even if he doesn't, he doesn't snap act since he's pretty strong and the turn deuce improves his hand).
He never has 2x since he snap calls the turn, and he's probably not value betting the river since he snap bet. If those reads are all accurate his range is 100% missed straight draws; { T8s+, 98s, T8o+, 98o }
We need approx 25% equity to call and so the worst hand we should call with is T4 (has 40% equity vs that villains range, 98 has only 13%).

What do you think?

The answer to the quiz was supposed to be at the start of episode 4, Rusty must have overlooked the small 2nd videofile I send him. I'll make sure it's at the start of the next episode.

In response to the question at the end of the video about the aggro donk, I think he has a missed str8 draw and the weakest I would call is Jx high.

Time Link to 00:04:28

in the 99 hand I was confused why you didnt 3bet for value vs the Button or do you ususally call all PP 22-99 in sb and 3bet TT-AA. and you back raised bc you assume the BB is doing that with a lot more hands than 99+ AK AQ?

in the 99 hand I was confused why you didnt 3bet for value vs the Button or do you ususally call all PP 22-99 in sb and 3bet TT-AA. and you back raised bc you assume the BB is doing that with a lot more hands than 99+ AK AQ?

It's a hand that can go both ways. Since I'm new to the table and my image is presumably uknown, I prefer flatting, as my 3bet will get more credit than normal. Just like when I have a hand that's close between 3betting and folding, I'll 3bet it at the start of the session. Also, postflop play is more interesting for a video.

The answer to the quiz was supposed to be at the start of episode 4, Rusty must have overlooked the small 2nd videofile I send him. I'll make sure it's at the start of the next episode.

Any update on when we can expect part 6 to be released?
Anyway I started thinking about this again today, and even though T4 is the weakest hand we can profitably call with, I think the weakest hand we should be calling with is J4. We should be shoving with worse.

Villain has 54 for str8 or a busted flushdraw.
Since there are more flushdraw combos in his range that str8s i think calling with any pair is fine. 43 would be the weakest hand we can call. I think calling with any pair is +EV because his 65% vpip preflop calling range can flop tons of flushdraws but only few str8draws and his range consists mainly from busted flushdraws and there are only few 54 combos. Gives strength of his range and pot odds i think 43 is good enough to call.

Time Link to 00:04:48

You said that most people don't SQZ w/ pkt 88's and lower - then when you back raise you have just removed the majority of hands from his range that you dominate? How can that be good?

You said that most people don't SQZ w/ pkt 88's and lower - then when you back raise you have just removed the majority of hands from his range that you dominate? How can that be good?

as I understand, the basic thought is that's why we can do back raise allin with 22. We can't be dominated by 33-88 cause the are not in squizer's range

Time Link to 00:09:19

What is your reasoning for a larger value bet? What are you putting his calling range to be? It looks like we won't get called worse betting bigger vs smaller.
Bet strong because a weak bet would be vulnerable to a c/r?

What is your reasoning for a larger value bet? What are you putting his calling range to be? It looks like we won't get called worse betting bigger vs smaller.

First ask yourself what the hands are he can call with. I think he's mostly giving up with air here, but the times that he does have a bluffcatcher it'll likely be 8x as he'd probably have bet the turn with 99+. Most regs don't fold a bluffcatcher to a single bet, especially not after I checked back the flop. He might even call with AK. By larger I don't mean valuebettin giant, I meant should I underbet or "large"bet. I can also bet $5 there to get called more often by A high. I think $15 into $20 is a pretty normal bet there? If he's calling $12 he's calling $15 too.

Time Link to 00:43:13

the 99 hand :

I understand why a c/c is better than a cbet here but what to do on later street ?

what are you doing when
1) flush hit and he bets turn (and river if you called turn)
2) overcard comes and he bets turn (and river if you called turn)

thx

the 99 hand :

I understand why a c/c is better than a cbet here but what to do on later street ?

what are you doing when
1) flush hit and he bets turn (and river if you called turn)
2) overcard comes and he bets turn (and river if you called turn)

thx

I've just glanced at the HH now. I can't remember my reads on villain. I think I'd probably c/c again on pretty much any turn card and then re-evaluate on the river, which would usually be a c/f unless the board runs out in a favorable way for him to bluff.. Sure he can hit a scarecard, but he'll also bluff at it with his air. And a quite common line for players to take is to bluff with any piece but give up on the river. There are quite a few spots in the rest of my videos where I c/c as the preflop raiser where you can see my thought process for specific spots.

I've just glanced at the HH now. I can't remember my reads on villain. I think I'd probably c/c again on pretty much any turn card and then re-evaluate on the river, which would usually be a c/f unless the board runs out in a favorable way for him to bluff.. Sure he can hit a scarecard, but he'll also bluff at it with his air. And a quite common line for players to take is to bluff with any piece but give up on the river. There are quite a few spots in the rest of my videos where I c/c as the preflop raiser where you can see my thought process for specific spots.

ok thx because I try to cbet less ( I cbet 81% on 25K hands so I think its a BIG leak in my game) and always questioning myself if I can bet for value and with what type of hands vilain can call me with instead of just betting and think that he can have a FD, SD or somethinkg when, in fact, these combos arent in his range (given his action). When I watched this video, I saw this spot and its a perfect exemple of spot that I would have cbet thinking that its for value. But there isnt many hands he can all with that are in his range.

I understand that the turn is a pretty easy call because lots of vilains will bluff a scare card but its on the river that I suck. I always end up folding because I assume that micro s players dont run big bluff, are passive ...

Yeah at microstakes I'd be much more inclined to just cbet 99 there, as there's less value in bluffcatching because they're passive, and also more value in valuebetting as they're more stationy. Also betting just to fold out air is fine. If he has JTo in the 99 hand and won't bluff because he's passive, all I do by checking it down is giving him a 25% chance of catching up. Betting 99 is very +EV there, but checking is even more +EV. When in doubt at microstakes, bet.

Yeah at microstakes I'd be much more inclined to just cbet 99 there, as there's less value in bluffcatching because they're passive, and also more value in valuebetting as they're more stationy. Also betting just to fold out air is fine. If he has JTo in the 99 hand and won't bluff because he's passive, all I do by checking it down is giving him a 25% chance of catching up. Betting 99 is very +EV there, but checking is even more +EV. When in doubt at microstakes, bet.

its what I was thinking too but I tend to put all micro's player in the same package: loose passive, which isnt true (a lot of them are loose passive but not all). I think that vs a reg, checking 99 would be good but vs fish, its def better to vbet.

Time Link to 00:20:09

With trip 8s on the river here, is there an argument that we've under represented our hand by checking the turn? Is it bad to call here on the river without any reads on a fishy player?

With trip 8s on the river here, is there an argument that we've under represented our hand by checking the turn?

Fish don't handread. When a fish overbet shoves, he has the goods.

Time Link to 00:04:20

I don't get it.. (likely it's just me missing important part in reasoning), But how can backraise All-in here be plus +ev?? The sqz is flipping or chrusing us if we get it in. It's not better to call to hit set and stack lower sets or get value from hands like AJ+, when we hit and the flop somes A and/or K-high??

Thanks

I don't get it.. (likely it's just me missing important part in reasoning), But how can backraise All-in here be plus +ev?? The sqz is flipping or chrusing us if we get it in. It's not better to call to hit set and stack lower sets or get value from hands like AJ+, when we hit and the flop somes A and/or K-high??

Thanks

There's $27 in the pot. If they fold, we win that uncontested. That's a lot more $ than we make by calling. And 99 has pretty decent equity against their callingranges. But mostly we'll get folds. BB is often light and BU would often 4b better hands than ours. Also, setmining OOP isn't as profitable as you think and could even be -EV.

There's $27 in the pot. If they fold, we win that uncontested. That's a lot more $ than we make by calling. And 99 has pretty decent equity against their callingranges. But mostly we'll get folds. BB is often light and BU would often 4b better hands than ours. Also, setmining OOP isn't as profitable as you think and could even be -EV.

Ok now I get it, it makes sense for me now.. Thx.

There's $27 in the pot. If they fold, we win that uncontested. That's a lot more $ than we make by calling. And 99 has pretty decent equity against their callingranges. But mostly we'll get folds. BB is often light and BU would often 4b better hands than ours. Also, setmining OOP isn't as profitable as you think and could even be -EV.

Then I assume you're also backraise All-in with AK and QQ+, what is your range?

Then I assume you're also backraise All-in with AK and QQ+, what is your range?

It depends. I might not flat those preflop to begin with. AA is less vulnerable and it might be better to slowplay it again. The video was recorded too long ago for me to remember anything but if you keep watching the rest of the series I'm sure you'll find all sorts of preflop spots where I state my reasoning.