Poker Video: MTT/SNG by DJ Sensei (Mid Stakes)

The episode cuts off immediately after the sweat portion for me on the mp4 download. Otherwise, I enjoyed the vid.

I've got Rusty looking into what happened here, will update you as soon as we know what happened to part 2.

Rob

Time Link to 00:03:13

Is it your standard to flat with MPP OTB with one limper?

Time Link to 00:34:07

It was mentioned that with this stack size opening wide isn't really the most profitable since we lose our 3betting fold equity. And I realize that Vanessa was talking more along the lines of when we're deeper. But how relevant are their VPIP / PFR stats here vs their 3bet and steal stat. We've already had Luke identify the player to his immediate left as a tough player. He did just iso A9s last hand as well.

Also, since this is a turbo it's really difficult to approximate their true vpip/pfr as we know it takes a long time for those to converge properly. However if someone's steal is at 60% or their 3bet is > 10% it's easier to assume that they're just going to own us when we start opening wide.

I'd also like to add that it's a $100r, which from what I've seen are the toughest tournaments because of the high rolling regs, and that it's a turbo they're already prepared for the variance of 3bet shoving hands like SC.

I say call with the ATo hand on the river for the reasons you guys gave at the end of the analysis. Liked the video though, great format and good insight.

We've already decided that she's a super nit w/ 0/0, even though it's only 24 hands which I don't put a lot of weight on. All it means to me is that they either haven't had many opportunities to steal, which is pretty common w/ someone like Luke to your right, or that they just on a dry run of cards. Since we didn't see how "her" chips were gained it's hard to range her as just a nit. Also, when I see those stats a lot of times I search them on the client and see if they're multi-tabling. If they are playing a bunch of tables it would make it more likely for them to be auto piloting. If they're playing just one table, then you could possibly add a boredom factor into their range and widen it out a little bit

With the shove the only hand that should be in villains range that we "might" value from with the check / shove is AQ. They're folding 99-JJ and snapping us off w/ QQ+, we chop AK and obviously get wrecked by KQs(if we can assume that's in their range for being a nit in early position.) Personally I like 3betting pre better, playing oop is definitely really annoying and w/ AKs we have so much equity vs their range, don't need to go into the value of it, we obviously know that already. The problem comes with the sizing of the 3bet, when we get 4bet/ shoved on we're obviously calling since she only has 8800 behind after the pfr and any 3bet gives near 2:1 odds on what is easily a flip situation vs the range. Granted we fold out KQs, possibly AQ, but it's also very likely that we can fold out TT/JJ vs a super nit. But what's wrong with picking up that really nice sized pot pre and moving on. I'm not sure if I would just 3bet to something like 2300 or just shove myself. In game I'd probably shove pre and the more I think about it, the more I like it.

One thing I'm thinking about here is that her stats are 0/0 and not 15/0 or 20/0. Even though it is 24 hands, I think a total fish would limp a few hands in 3 orbits of play. What I do with that assumption is just assume some form of TAG player who most likely won't call a 3-bet with dominated hands (TOURNEY LIFE!!!). Therefore, the most value would be in calling.

Not to be results oriented, but I think check/calling the turn is better in retrospect. I doubt the type of player I described above would actually call with hands other than KJ, KT, big draws.

Sure, being OOP with AKs might be tough but don't forget the shorter we are, the less position is going to matter. For instance, in that situation I would definitely just shove over a small bet on XXX (little cards) hoping my assumptions are correct and that she'll fold some hands she shouldn't. It also simplifies the hand.

Anyways, I wouldn't go too far with what I have assumed about the player in question. I would rather you think about why I reacted the way I did (or think I should) than how I got to the assumption I did based on 24 hands. There is no magic behind it. Just making an ass out of...me.

Thanks for the comments btw.

I feel like this would work so much better with people commentating with Luke who play online mtts as their profession. It feels like Luke has to explain a lot of the considerations you need to have in these tournaments to the two of them and despite the fact they are obviously very good poker players, it seems strange they were picked for this series.

I feel like this would work so much better with people commentating with Luke who play online mtts as their profession. It feels like Luke has to explain a lot of the considerations you need to have in these tournaments to the two of them and despite the fact they are obviously very good poker players, it seems strange they were picked for this series.

That is kinda the point really isn't it? I mean, there wouldn't really be much point in having three people that did not need to explain things to each other. From what I am seeing, Luke is able to explain some of his points very well, but at the same time Vanessa and DJ (who are both very good at mtt also) are able to bring other stuff to the table that Luke can learn from.

All good from what I can see.