Poker Video: No Limit Hold'Em by chipchucker5 (Mid Stakes)

Good video. Enjoy your videos very much.

Time Link to 00:25:26

I really disagree with the way you played this hand. Pre is good imo. But the flop is an easy bet. When Gogol checks he has showdown value and bluff catchers a bunch of the time. Our hand is underrepped so its an easy bet imo. On the turn, since our hand is underrepped and since they can have so many worse hands its a call. What they show up with shows how wrong giving them such a tight range and folding is imo. Am I missing something?

Time Link to 00:17:39

villain's line looks insanely fishy.

in your shoes i think i'd choose turn/river betsizing that makes sense for my perceived range which is polarized here. you are at the bottom of the value portion of it. since you are ahead of all of his bluff catchers except turned AJ, i guess i'd just go with a polarizing bet sizing and let him bluff catch against all my backdoor draws that miss. another benefit of the polarizing sizing is when villain has a non zero river c/r bluff frequency to your smaller sizing, but a frequency closer to zero with the bigger sizing. however, i doubt he has a non negligible frequency in either spot and it may not change all that much as a function of your sizing anyway.

Time Link to 00:21:03

if preflop you have 12 combos of QJ, 2 of J9s, and 14 AJ and get to the river like this and then raise as a bluff an eighth of the time with them that is 3.5 combos of bluffs (checking turn half the time, turning a quarter of the hands that bet the turn into a bluff). meanwhile your flush combos are close to every Axdd other than the nuts (to make counting easier) and this is discounted slightly because you don't always value shove them. so in this example when you are very conservative with your bluffs and very value happy with your flushes you have about twice as many flushes as bluffs. realistically it's probably going to be somewhat evenishly distributed between 1:2 and 2:1 flushes to bluffs.

your value raising range is exclusively flushes (no boats or straights) so it's a binary nuts or nothing game for him.

i think that since he takes a line that it isn't really possibly to bluff against because it is so polarized, and you either have showdown that can bluff catch or flushes, you can't really get it in here. of course if you both know each other knows all this then maybe sometimes you have history where your frequencies are such that a shove is good here. but i don't think you have it here.

Time Link to 00:30:42

With the J8hh here, calling isn't better than folding?

Time Link to 00:15:55

betting the turn with AT here seems thin. betting the river seems way too thin - you called 3way and both FD and KQ get there on the turn, you bet twice into 2 players and now you're betting the river - can he really call with AK or AQ? i think the river is a check behind.

Thanks a ton for this - your vids are awesome, and you're clearly a sick player. You make some folds here I probably couldn't make, but intellectually, when I listen to your reasoning and think harder I know they are +EV.

The only piece of feedback I have is more on your vid making style - sometimes, when you have a close decision, you tank and think about it to yourself. After 5-10 seconds of silence, you give your reasoning for the play you are going to make. It really helps me to hear your thought process as you go through it, however. Part of the value of training vids is we get to hear the thought process of winning players in the moment. Even if your initial thoughts turn out to be wrong, I think it's helpful for us to hear how you go about thinking through tough decisions.

As I said, that's a minor piece of feedback, and on the whole your vids are sick. Keep it up.

Time Link to 00:32:31

Not really sure what to write here. But do you reeeaally think you can call 64s here profitably?

Not really sure what to write here. But do you reeeaally think you can call 64s here profitably?

i really wonder, how calling a 13/12´s 4bet with 64s can ever be profitable.
BTW, why were you betting flop, would you call off happily against a Flop c/R allin? what was your plan for the Turn, if called?

i really wonder, how calling a 13/12´s 4bet with 64s can ever be profitable.
BTW, why were you betting flop, would you call off happily against a Flop c/R allin? what was your plan for the Turn, if called?

i was wondering that too. why would you call with 6 high here? i loved your postflop play though! your sizing is super awkward for him to do anything with. how often do you expect people to ever check any random flop though or for you to flop a big hand where you get any sort of fold equity?

I really disagree with the way you played this hand. Pre is good imo. But the flop is an easy bet. When Gogol checks he has showdown value and bluff catchers a bunch of the time. Our hand is underrepped so its an easy bet imo. On the turn, since our hand is underrepped and since they can have so many worse hands its a call. What they show up with shows how wrong giving them such a tight range and folding is imo. Am I missing something?

Ok so I'd 3bet this pre sometimes against him because he knows I'm 3betting a lot, and it strengthens our 3betting range a little bit. I agree that the turn is a call as played since there are so many draws out there, and I can be up against 9x, TT, semibluffs, total air, etc. So yeah, my bad I should've concluded that while making the vid. I def like my flop check however.

When you say gogol has SD value, you mean like ace high or some other medium strength hand, like 88ish, right? I'd def agree with that..he's also got slowplays once in a while too. But there's no way he wants to c/c A high against me OOP and have to play guessing games on future streets (and there's a lot more A high than 7x in his range). So I think checking back has the advantages of getting closer to showdown, possibly inducing bluffs, and having a better chance of getting value since gogol and chorel only have to worry about paying off 1 or 2 streets instead of 3.

When you say gogol has SD value, you mean like ace high or some other medium strength hand, like 88ish, right? I'd def agree with that..he's also got slowplays once in a while too. But there's no way he wants to c/c A high against me OOP and have to play guessing games on future streets (and there's a lot more A high than 7x in his range). So I think checking back has the advantages of getting closer to showdown, possibly inducing bluffs, and having a better chance of getting value since gogol and chorel only have to worry about paying off 1 or 2 streets instead of 3.

Yeah, but wouldn't you like to be able to credibly bluff when you have air on that board? If you're checking back hands like this what would you bet the flop with? Would you check back trips or a full house?

hey guys, sorry for not getting to your questions sooner..I've just been really busy, and the internet is super sketch ball. But I'm leaving vegas in the morning, so I'll def get to them. Thanks for your patience, and I hope you're all crushing

villain's line looks insanely fishy.

in your shoes i think i'd choose turn/river betsizing that makes sense for my perceived range which is polarized here. you are at the bottom of the value portion of it. since you are ahead of all of his bluff catchers except turned AJ, i guess i'd just go with a polarizing bet sizing and let him bluff catch against all my backdoor draws that miss. another benefit of the polarizing sizing is when villain has a non zero river c/r bluff frequency to your smaller sizing, but a frequency closer to zero with the bigger sizing. however, i doubt he has a non negligible frequency in either spot and it may not change all that much as a function of your sizing anyway.

I think this is just a spot where I look really strong pretty much no matter what I do. So I think betting smaller and trying to get crying calls out of AQish is going to yield the most profit in this particular spot.

I disagree w/ your argument about my sizing WRT getting check raised. I really don't think his river c/r bluff range changes much (if at all) when I vary my size from 160 to 200. I'm getting bluffed such a tiny % of the time because I look so strong. So I think betting smaller will be better because I'll save $40 or w/e the times he does c/r and I fold.

if preflop you have 12 combos of QJ, 2 of J9s, and 14 AJ and get to the river like this and then raise as a bluff an eighth of the time with them that is 3.5 combos of bluffs (checking turn half the time, turning a quarter of the hands that bet the turn into a bluff). meanwhile your flush combos are close to every Axdd other than the nuts (to make counting easier) and this is discounted slightly because you don't always value shove them. so in this example when you are very conservative with your bluffs and very value happy with your flushes you have about twice as many flushes as bluffs. realistically it's probably going to be somewhat evenishly distributed between 1:2 and 2:1 flushes to bluffs.

your value raising range is exclusively flushes (no boats or straights) so it's a binary nuts or nothing game for him.

i think that since he takes a line that it isn't really possibly to bluff against because it is so polarized, and you either have showdown that can bluff catch or flushes, you can't really get it in here. of course if you both know each other knows all this then maybe sometimes you have history where your frequencies are such that a shove is good here. but i don't think you have it here.

Yeah, it's a pretty interesting spot. Like you said, we never have a boat or a straight, so when we call the turn we look like AJ, J9s, AT, QTs, QJ and some Axdd that didn't bet the flop. So we can't have boats and straights when we shove the river, so he would figure our bluffing range consists of hands that are turning themselves into bluffs (which there are a decent amount of actually). It's def a spot where he shouldn't expect me to be bluffing hardly ever, but at the same time, I'm only repping backdoor diamonds. So I think he'll be fairly tempted to put me on a made hand turned into a bluff and make hero calls with AKish with a somewhat high frequency (contrary to what I said in the video).

So the range of possible value hands that get to the river before discounting are as follows:

AK(6), KQ(8), AQ(12), KJ(6), KT(6), JJ(3), TT(3), J9/QJdd(2)

Not totally sure, but I think he's a little more likely to check the flop w/ AK/KQ than the two pair/straight/sets. So we'll discount like 3 of the 18 combos of boats for 15 total. That leaves 28 combos of AK, KQ, AQ and J9/QJdd. I think there's about 0.5 combos of J9/QJdd that he gets to the river with, we'll discount 2 of AQ and none of AK/KQ, so that's 24.5 total. Then we'll say he folds KQ 1/3 of the time and AK 1/4 of the time, so we discount 2.5 and 1.5 respectively. That leaves us with 20.5 combos that we beat that will call, and only 15 that beat us that will call so looks like a shove is best.

With the J8hh here, calling isn't better than folding?

TBH I'm really not sure, but IMO it's pretty tough to show a profit OOP against a good player w/ a hand this weak without the initiative. So I'm usually 3betting or folding it pf.

betting the turn with AT here seems thin. betting the river seems way too thin - you called 3way and both FD and KQ get there on the turn, you bet twice into 2 players and now you're betting the river - can he really call with AK or AQ? i think the river is a check behind.

It's a pretty awkward spot and I think I should've just checked the turn. But you'd be surprised by some of the crap people look me up w/ in spots where they really shouldn't. But yeah, it really does look too thin TBH. Only 16 possible combos of AK/AQ, and he checks the flop maybe 40% of the time, and calls the river maybe 1/3-1/2 of the time, so only calls w/ like 3ish combos of them on the river. Then there are a couple weirdly played FDs and 6 combos possible of AJ. So yeah, you're right.

Not really sure what to write here. But do you reeeaally think you can call 64s here profitably?

As I said in the vid, I think it's pretty close. If he made it smaller, I def think it's a profitable call against weakish opponents who are on a very narrow and well defined range. We only need about 28% equity against his range to breakeven.

Jman talked about this recently on BFP. He pointed out a few things that I thought were pretty interesting to think about that I'll note below.

With a hand like 64s against a range of TT+, AK, villain will flop < TP about half the time. On a flop like A82r, he'll have an underpair about 61% of the time. And on a flop like Q83r, he'll have no pair 37% of the time, and an underpair about 28% of the time.

Also, a hand like 64s is pretty ideal since the A high flops are decent ones for us to attack, since as noted above, villain will usually have < TP and we'll just have air, potentially w/ some BD draws.

So as I said, I'm really not sure about this since it's a really complicated subject. But I do think that in general, people fold too much to really small 4bets when in position.

Thanks a ton for this - your vids are awesome, and you're clearly a sick player. You make some folds here I probably couldn't make, but intellectually, when I listen to your reasoning and think harder I know they are +EV.

The only piece of feedback I have is more on your vid making style - sometimes, when you have a close decision, you tank and think about it to yourself. After 5-10 seconds of silence, you give your reasoning for the play you are going to make. It really helps me to hear your thought process as you go through it, however. Part of the value of training vids is we get to hear the thought process of winning players in the moment. Even if your initial thoughts turn out to be wrong, I think it's helpful for us to hear how you go about thinking through tough decisions.

As I said, that's a minor piece of feedback, and on the whole your vids are sick. Keep it up.

Hey Mikefut, thanks a lot for the praise and for the criticism..that's really helpful for me to hear. As I'm new to making videos, I'm sure there's lots of stuff I could be doing to make for a better learning experience for the viewer. So yeah, glad you enjoyed it, and thanks for the feedback

Yeah, but wouldn't you like to be able to credibly bluff when you have air on that board? If you're checking back hands like this what would you bet the flop with? Would you check back trips or a full house?

I can still credibly bluff there. I really don't worry too much about stuff like that. I seriously doubt he's going to say "oh he doesn't have the 6 combos of JJ in his betting range when checked to OTB in a 3 way pot on KK7..I'm going to start c/r bluffing him more in that spot." I can have 77, Kx, hearts, some QQ and complete air when I bet. Just eyeballing the made hands and hearts, that's like 45ish combos..so adding 6 combos of JJ really makes a marginal difference in our range.

Time Link to 00:33:41

Nice video. What would you do in the same spot where you flop 6 high with equity? Like changing the 6 to a 5. What about where we flop nothing like T93? Are we betting the flop usually regardless? Any bet sizing implications?

Nice video. What would you do in the same spot where you flop 6 high with equity? Like changing the 6 to a 5. What about where we flop nothing like T93? Are we betting the flop usually regardless? Any bet sizing implications?

thanks buddy. yeah def def betting basically every flop when checked to tbh. I think most random tags at these stakes are folding after they check pretty often cause they're kinda weirded out that I called a 4bet. Plus since we're betting 1/3 pot, we're laying ourselves a sick price on our bluff/value/protection bet. Not sure what you mean by bet sizing implications. But like I said in the vid, I think it's a good size to be betting w/ our whole range.

Time Link to 00:16:52

hey in bottom left, i agree u have the best hand here a good amount cause he rarely check calls a FD, but do u still think u have more than 50% equity when called here, is unlikely to bluff catch considering u 3 barreled into 2 ppl, and pretty much everything got there, i doubt AK or AQ call here?