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

Time Link to 00:33:49

I'm glad you took sometime to explain these spots a bit bc I still find myself having trouble with wide 3betting ranges and having hands similar to this. I tend to flat AT+ KJ+ 99+ to give a kind of range as I don't have a exact range but, the problem is that that your not always flopping a flop your happy with so I am not quite sure with what frequency should you be bluff min raising or raising with or even shipping with. As the flop here I would probably float to rep some kind of Kx hand or underpair and try and take it away on turn or river and if I think he bets once and c/c I sometimes check turn and bet river to look stronger or one i didnt try yet is ship the river after he thinly vbets.

There seems to be something wrong with the WMV video. Very low bitrate and almost not viewable.

I'm glad you took sometime to explain these spots a bit bc I still find myself having trouble with wide 3betting ranges and having hands similar to this. I tend to flat AT+ KJ+ 99+ to give a kind of range as I don't have a exact range but, the problem is that that your not always flopping a flop your happy with so I am not quite sure with what frequency should you be bluff min raising or raising with or even shipping with. As the flop here I would probably float to rep some kind of Kx hand or underpair and try and take it away on turn or river and if I think he bets once and c/c I sometimes check turn and bet river to look stronger or one i didnt try yet is ship the river after he thinly vbets.

Right, there's lots of options end hands like this.

As far as a frequency with which to bluff-minraise and what have you, it's all just estimating based on the variables of the hand (how will the player respond, what's his range, etc). In this spot, for example, it might be a good mix to min-raise bluff like 20$ of the time or so. Also, you want to keep in mind what your min-raising range may be. If you will min-raise this guy for value a lot(a reasonable play) then, from a GT standpoint, you can bluff that way more often as well. How he will react will tell you how you select what hands to put in your min-raising range.

The delayed float is absolutely a good play here as well, and therefore something you should be making with some frequency. I would estimate that without knowing much about our villain they are probably pretty similar in value so your frequency for that play versus just betting the turn should be something like 50/50.

As far as the whole frequency thing goes though, the idea is really to determine the value of your different lines against the particular opponent and then take them an appropriate frequency. Then from there you can have more options with your entire game and be much more difficult for a TAG to read hands against, which will subsequently theoretically increase your win-rate.

There seems to be something wrong with the WMV video. Very low bitrate and almost not viewable.

Sorry about this, somehow the resolution got shifted on the video. I will repost these later tonight.
-Rusty

I'm glad you took sometime to explain these spots a bit bc I still find myself having trouble with wide 3betting ranges and having hands similar to this. I tend to flat AT+ KJ+ 99+ to give a kind of range as I don't have a exact range but, the problem is that that your not always flopping a flop your happy with so I am not quite sure with what frequency should you be bluff min raising or raising with or even shipping with. As the flop here I would probably float to rep some kind of Kx hand or underpair and try and take it away on turn or river and if I think he bets once and c/c I sometimes check turn and bet river to look stronger or one i didnt try yet is ship the river after he thinly vbets.

i had a few thoughts on this hand. i've always thought that K high boards in this spot are really obvious/good for villain to be barrelling. In general, your range wont include many K's for flatting other than I guess maybe KQ? You would be 4betting AK pre an overwhelming % of the time. So shouldn't villain be assuming your float is mostly hands like 99-JJ and maybe some air like the AT you had and be really really likely to barrell you in these spots? If thats the case, doesn't floating AT become a lot worse? If your plan was to float then bet turn when he checks to you, doesn't it seem better to just raise flop with the same amount of money you would invest given a good % of the time he will barrell the turn and you won't get the chance to bet it, but you always get the chance to raise flop? or is it that your not really repping anything on that board if you raise flop?

also, when you do float this flop and bet turn, what are you really repping in theory? if you float 99-JJ would you be betting this turn or checking for pot control/river bluff value? if you had KQ wouldn't you be taking similar check back/bet river lines? what type of hand do you ever imagine your getting credit for playing this way?

i guess i just saw this hand and thought it was a little weird. i've pretty much always been 4b/folding AT in these spots.

i had a few thoughts on this hand. i've always thought that K high boards in this spot are really obvious/good for villain to be barrelling. In general, your range wont include many K's for flatting other than I guess maybe KQ? You would be 4betting AK pre an overwhelming % of the time. So shouldn't villain be assuming your float is mostly hands like 99-JJ and maybe some air like the AT you had and be really really likely to barrell you in these spots? If thats the case, doesn't floating AT become a lot worse? If your plan was to float then bet turn when he checks to you, doesn't it seem better to just raise flop with the same amount of money you would invest given a good % of the time he will barrell the turn and you won't get the chance to bet it, but you always get the chance to raise flop? or is it that your not really repping anything on that board if you raise flop?

also, when you do float this flop and bet turn, what are you really repping in theory? if you float 99-JJ would you be betting this turn or checking for pot control/river bluff value? if you had KQ wouldn't you be taking similar check back/bet river lines? what type of hand do you ever imagine your getting credit for playing this way?

i guess i just saw this hand and thought it was a little weird. i've pretty much always been 4b/folding AT in these spots.

I kind of understand what your saying but I have been thinking that we need to figure out a standard line at some point so we can deviate from it other wise we have no idea what to do. the hardest part is to figure out what the villain thinks we have while knowing his range

i had a few thoughts on this hand. i've always thought that K high boards in this spot are really obvious/good for villain to be barrelling. In general, your range wont include many K's for flatting other than I guess maybe KQ? You would be 4betting AK pre an overwhelming % of the time. So shouldn't villain be assuming your float is mostly hands like 99-JJ and maybe some air like the AT you had and be really really likely to barrell you in these spots? If thats the case, doesn't floating AT become a lot worse? If your plan was to float then bet turn when he checks to you, doesn't it seem better to just raise flop with the same amount of money you would invest given a good % of the time he will barrell the turn and you won't get the chance to bet it, but you always get the chance to raise flop? or is it that your not really repping anything on that board if you raise flop?

also, when you do float this flop and bet turn, what are you really repping in theory? if you float 99-JJ would you be betting this turn or checking for pot control/river bluff value? if you had KQ wouldn't you be taking similar check back/bet river lines? what type of hand do you ever imagine your getting credit for playing this way?

i guess i just saw this hand and thought it was a little weird. i've pretty much always been 4b/folding AT in these spots.

Good points and the there are two possible ways of making sure that these types of plays are +EV

A) Have a solid read.
I don't recall if we discussed this but some villain's play very straightforward in 3-bet pots, they fire cbets near 100% (especially on this board) then play honestly on the turn. Of course this is very exploitable and a lot of people realise this and bawl a lot of turns - but a good chunk of regs still have leaks in 3-bet pots that they dont have in single raised pots.

B) Protect your range (and own people at the same time)
Against good players if I'm defending light to 3-bets 100bb deep then I'm often also flatting big pairs and AK . The big pairs actually play better by flatting (so long as you dont have a 4-bet range that needs balanced) and AK is excellent because on Kxx (or xxxK boards that you float) some players might try to apply pressure when they misjudge your range.


Something that I dont think I mentioned is that if I was using both strategies Id 4b ATo and call ATs as the suited part of the equity can be realised often by calling and never by 4b/folding.

I kind of understand what your saying but I have been thinking that we need to figure out a standard line at some point so we can deviate from it other wise we have no idea what to do. the hardest part is to figure out what the villain thinks we have while knowing his range

To find the villains range you can look that the 3-bet filter in HEM.

As for what the villain thinks of our range it often wont matter as we are usually only targeting the part of the range that is ace high, low pairs or air. Therefore even if he knows we have junk a high % of the time he can't do anything about it as a raise of a cbet in a 3-bet pot "put him to a decision for all his chips" (so cheesey but true here) and he cant really do that much about it - because if he does he runs into my sneakily played top of my preflop range that I flatted.

To find the villains range you can look that the 3-bet filter in HEM.

As for what the villain thinks of our range it often wont matter as we are usually only targeting the part of the range that is ace high, low pairs or air.

Are you talking about when we 3bet OOP and we cbet we are targeting that range to fold? and it doesnt matter what villain thinks we have?

Therefore even if he knows we have junk a high % of the time he can't do anything about it as a raise of a cbet in a 3-bet pot "put him to a decision for all his chips" (so cheesey but true here) and he cant really do that much about it - because if he does he runs into my sneakily played top of my preflop range that I flatted.

and in this statement are you talking about when we flat in postion and raise his cbet with either air or top pair?

do you think that raising this flop is more effective than floating and betting the turn when he checks to us?

do you think that raising this flop is more effective than floating and betting the turn when he checks to us?

Like a regular float it depends on his 2-barrel range.

Take an extreme example of a player who is 100% honest in his turn betting, so if he checks he is check folding and if he bets it's because he has TP+.
Against this player floating>>>>>>>>>>>>raising because we get to play perfectly on the turn (and with very little risk to the equity of AT, almost a perfect example for that).

Compare that to a player who bluffed, value bet and checked a much more balanced range on the turn. Against that guy I'd probably prefer raising.

Are you talking about when we 3bet OOP and we cbet we are targeting that range to fold? and it doesnt matter what villain thinks we have?

I was referring to the times the villain 3bets and cbets a hand that can't take the heat of a raise in a 3-bet pot. Unless he wants to start making ace high call downs or re-shoves his perception of our range doesnt really matter much because we force him to commit his stack to find out if he is right, while we can risk only ~30-40bb and play near perfect against his range for the remainder, that's a huge advantage

and in this statement are you talking about when we flat in postion and raise his cbet with either air or top pair?

This was what I was referring to.

Good points and the there are two possible ways of making sure that these types of plays are +EV

A) Have a solid read.
I don't recall if we discussed this but some villain's play very straightforward in 3-bet pots, they fire cbets near 100% (especially on this board) then play honestly on the turn. Of course this is very exploitable and a lot of people realise this and bawl a lot of turns - but a good chunk of regs still have leaks in 3-bet pots that they dont have in single raised pots.

B) Protect your range (and own people at the same time)
Against good players if I'm defending light to 3-bets 100bb deep then I'm often also flatting big pairs and AK . The big pairs actually play better by flatting (so long as you dont have a 4-bet range that needs balanced) and AK is excellent because on Kxx (or xxxK boards that you float) some players might try to apply pressure when they misjudge your range.


Something that I dont think I mentioned is that if I was using both strategies Id 4b ATo and call ATs as the suited part of the equity can be realised often by calling and never by 4b/folding.

Agreed. Some other things that you have to keep in mind is that you want to think about how your opponent may react to a raise. A sophisticated player could see right throw a min-raise on a K42r board because you aren't repping much. Would you raise TP? The only set you should have is KK and you sometimes 4-bet that pre and rarely raise the flop with it.

However, the players at 200NL FR that are sophisticated enough such that you should be concerned about this are few and far between.

I wouldn't much 4-bet AT in this spot though. I think it has far too much value postflop. I would start my 4-bet bluffing range with A9o.

i had a few thoughts on this hand. i've always thought that K high boards in this spot are really obvious/good for villain to be barrelling. In general, your range wont include many K's for flatting other than I guess maybe KQ? You would be 4betting AK pre an overwhelming % of the time. So shouldn't villain be assuming your float is mostly hands like 99-JJ and maybe some air like the AT you had and be really really likely to barrell you in these spots? If thats the case, doesn't floating AT become a lot worse? If your plan was to float then bet turn when he checks to you, doesn't it seem better to just raise flop with the same amount of money you would invest given a good % of the time he will barrell the turn and you won't get the chance to bet it, but you always get the chance to raise flop? or is it that your not really repping anything on that board if you raise flop?

also, when you do float this flop and bet turn, what are you really repping in theory? if you float 99-JJ would you be betting this turn or checking for pot control/river bluff value? if you had KQ wouldn't you be taking similar check back/bet river lines? what type of hand do you ever imagine your getting credit for playing this way?

i guess i just saw this hand and thought it was a little weird. i've pretty much always been 4b/folding AT in these spots.

Our Kx range should be much wider than KQ, imo. We should really have AK-KT. I find it's more profitable to flat AK(I know this is contrary to conventional wisdom) in spots like this against players who are willing to put a lot of money in on the flop with a weak range (them c-betting puts 1/3 of their stack in. That's a lot of a stack to put in with air and thus something we can easily exploit.). You are right that it might be correct to check those back, but if it is correct to check those back then your opponent probably isn't a sharp enough hand reader to notice that you are likely floating here (and thus your range is out of balance) AND to do something about it. Most players at these limits are not sophisticated enough for you to have to worry about it in this spot.

However, if you are playing against a player who is a sharp hand reader who will perceive your range to be weak here(and do something about it) then you need to commit lighter and bet all these hands for value. Any K should certainly be bet/calling the turn against a player who is going to CRAI to attack weakness and/or protect a wide value range.

Time Link to 00:07:00

The timestamp link is in the mioddle of the AK 3bet pre dicussion.

Two points:

1. With 2 shortstackers in the blinds, I don't think that a 3bet is "absoulutely mandatory" as you said. Granted I don't play vs shortstackers a lot (50BB min yo) and I play 6max, but inducing squeezes from them can't be a badt thing, if they don't squeeze, we still have a good hand in position. I'm not saying call ths every time, just "mandatory 3bet" is a bit extreme I guess.

2. Increasing value 3betting range vs light openers.
I don't think that the width of our value range should depend too much (if at all) on the width of his opening range, but rather on the width of his continue-to-a-3bet range. And also on what he does with taht continue range OOP (is he 4b or fold, or does he call a lot?). I don't care if he opens 72o, because if he never continues with it, I can 3bet 62o profitably. Conversely if his continue range is QQ+AK, then 3betting ATo is atrocious.

2. Increasing value 3betting range vs light openers.
I don't think that the width of our value range should depend too much (if at all) on the width of his opening range, but rather on the width of his continue-to-a-3bet range. And also on what he does with taht continue range OOP (is he 4b or fold, or does he call a lot?). I don't care if he opens 72o, because if he never continues with it, I can 3bet 62o profitably. Conversely if his continue range is QQ+AK, then 3betting ATo is atrocious.

Really enjoyed this vid and all the comments, and this might be a stupid addition but I have my asbestos undewear on ;-)

It seems to me that it is neither the opening range, nor the continue to 3 bet that is important of themselves, but the ratio of one to the other. If his opening range is wide but his C3B is QQ+AK then that seems completely exploitable and 3betting not only ATo but ATC is profitable.

If we assume we have no equity (ie if he calls, we'll open fold if checked to) then {[(100-C3B%)*pot] - [C3B%*(Call+R)]}/100 would give the EV.

But in reality as with the particular situation being discussed we have to add our fold and pot equity to get the full picture.

And one other advantage to raising 62o against the QQ+AK villain is you'll never have to show it down (unless you stack him).

The timestamp link is in the mioddle of the AK 3bet pre dicussion.

Two points:

1. With 2 shortstackers in the blinds, I don't think that a 3bet is "absoulutely mandatory" as you said. Granted I don't play vs shortstackers a lot (50BB min yo) and I play 6max, but inducing squeezes from them can't be a badt thing, if they don't squeeze, we still have a good hand in position. I'm not saying call ths every time, just "mandatory 3bet" is a bit extreme I guess.

This guy is such a weak player that isolating him in position versus his very wide opening range is a far bigger EV move. I'm not saying it's absolutely mandatory every time. I'm saying it's absolutely mandatory versus a loose-aggro mark that we have a huge edge against and will likely flat our 3b OOP.

2. Increasing value 3betting range vs light openers.
I don't think that the width of our value range should depend too much (if at all) on the width of his opening range, but rather on the width of his continue-to-a-3bet range. And also on what he does with taht continue range OOP (is he 4b or fold, or does he call a lot?). I don't care if he opens 72o, because if he never continues with it, I can 3bet 62o profitably. Conversely if his continue range is QQ+AK, then 3betting ATo is atrocious.

There are a lot of factors to consider when deciding a 3-betting range. Again, I was speaking to this specific player type. I thought I mentioned in the video that players like this call 3-bets a vast majority of the time(maybe it wasn't at this exact moment, but I'm pretty sure I mentioned it somewhere in the vid)? Against a player like this 9 times out of 10 he will have a 3-bet calling range nearly equal to his opening range. In this case the width of his opening range is what makes widening our value range so profitable. In addition, we get to isolate this guy and play a HU pot IP versus him. This also should widen our 3-bet value range.

2. Increasing value 3betting range vs light openers.
I don't think that the width of our value range should depend too much (if at all) on the width of his opening range, but rather on the width of his continue-to-a-3bet range. And also on what he does with taht continue range OOP (is he 4b or fold, or does he call a lot?). I don't care if he opens 72o, because if he never continues with it, I can 3bet 62o profitably. Conversely if his continue range is QQ+AK, then 3betting ATo is atrocious.

For a continue range of QQ+AK shouldn't we 3bet Ax for blockers or KJ, KT, K9 or since they fold to much it doesnt matter and since there opening range is pretty wide we should just flat those to keep in all those other hands?

1. With 2 shortstackers in the blinds, I don't think that a 3bet is "absoulutely mandatory" as you said. Granted I don't play vs shortstackers a lot (50BB min yo) and I play 6max, but inducing squeezes from them can't be a badt thing, if they don't squeeze, we still have a good hand in position. I'm not saying call ths every time, just "mandatory 3bet" is a bit extreme I guess.

I disagree, sure the shorty might widen his range to include some hands we have dominated but he will also widen to all PP which we are flipping with. Folding out 50% equity in the pot can't ever be bad.
Also short stacks at SSNL are LOL bad and most don't squeeze as light as they technically should in this spot.

The advantage of playing a bigger pot against this villain far outweighs anything else. The only exception would be a squeeze happy full stack that we can back raise over, that I really like.

2. Increasing value 3betting range vs light openers.
I don't think that the width of our value range should depend too much (if at all) on the width of his opening range, but rather on the width of his continue-to-a-3bet range. And also on what he does with taht continue range OOP (is he 4b or fold, or does he call a lot?). I don't care if he opens 72o, because if he never continues with it, I can 3bet 62o profitably. Conversely if his continue range is QQ+AK, then 3betting ATo is atrocious.

Totally agree, if it wasn't made clear in the vid then the advice of 3-betting a wide (de-polarised) range for value is best when they call OOP a lot. If they fold then just 3-bet trash all day and flat good hands until they adjust.

I cant recall if we explicitly stated that he called wide but I *think* we did but if not I was talking on the assumption that players of that type usually call lots of 3-bets.

For a continue range of QQ+AK shouldn't we 3bet Ax for blockers or KJ, KT, K9 or since they fold to much it doesnt matter and since there opening range is pretty wide we should just flat those to keep in all those other hands?

Against a wide open range but a high fold to 3-bet (as you describe) I'm calling K9s+ and KT+ for value since we do well against his wide range.

I get your point about the discount combos but the EV of 3-betting in that spot is just so high even without blockers, the main point being that KJ has a better use in this spot (calling).



A better example for the use of blockers would be OOP to a 3-bet with these hands, you cant call so if you are to have a 4-bet bluff range it might as well be these hands (because they have blockers whereas 22/97s etc. dont)

Sorry about this, somehow the resolution got shifted on the video. I will repost these later tonight.
-Rusty

The video was reposted sorry I did not post here to remind you.
-Rusty

I don't have much to add except I really enjoyed the video and the conversation between threads and SS was great.

I like it when you talk about a hand but also talk about different hands in the same spot.

How many hands do you need on Villain before 3Bet range stat is reliable? Do you light 3B unknowns to "see what he'll do" and speed up the stat convergence or wait until you have a big enough sample naturally?

Does the 3B light advice vary by site? I find more Nit/folders at PS and more aggromonkeys at FTP.

Does the 3B lite advice vary by stake? NL25/NL50 players seem to call 3B's OOP very widely. NL50 players then call Cbets very widely but fold to a Turn bet.

How many hands do you need on Villain before 3Bet range stat is reliable? Do you light 3B unknowns to "see what he'll do" and speed up the stat convergence or wait until you have a big enough sample naturally?

Does the 3B light advice vary by site? I find more Nit/folders at PS and more aggromonkeys at FTP.

Does the 3B lite advice vary by stake? NL25/NL50 players seem to call 3B's OOP very widely. NL50 players then call Cbets very widely but fold to a Turn bet.

I feel like unless I have atleast 2-3k hands the 3bet/fold3bet stats are OK but still just an approximation. Once you have maybe 5-10k hand sample on someone you can be a little more confident. I don't very often just 3bet randoms or ppl will small samples to "see what they'll do" because I don't have a big enough sample to determine their ranges.

I suppose the 3b advice could vary a little bit by site but its mostly related to the stats. Someone folding to 70% of 3bets on stars should have similar ranges to someone folding to 70% of 3bets on ftp.

As far as varying by stake, there is probably some differences in how ppl play postflop in 3b pots, but once again someone folding to 70% of 3bets at 50NL should have similar ranges to someone folding to 70% of 3bets at 100NL or 25NL.

I find this excellent when thinking about interpreting small sample sizes.


http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=10933141&an=0&page=0#Post10933141

I find this excellent when thinking about interpreting small sample sizes.


http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=10933141&an=0&page=0#Post10933141

Thks.

Time Link to 00:59:24

How often do you make this bet size with your value hands?

How often do you make this bet size with your value hands?

If I think the villain is folding then I'm almost never making this bet for value unless I have a near nut hand. It's a spot where it can be ok to be out of balance because overbets tend to make players stop reading hands. When they see the overbet they are just like "wow, I guess he has a big hand. My hand isn't big enough to call an overbet." And then they fold.

Time Link to 00:41:52

Can you explain the hand where you squeezed AJo on table 1? Is this a pretty standard spot or did you squeeze because the flatter has a weak range? What other hands would you squeeze with?

Can you explain the hand where you squeezed AJo on table 1? Is this a pretty standard spot or did you squeeze because the flatter has a weak range? What other hands would you squeeze with?

Looks like he was opening about 19% from that position over my sample while also folding 100% to 3-bets so far. Yeah, it's only 80-some hand, but I also have a hand that's pretty much at the top of my squeezing range. I think when you see stats like that (say... opening greater than 10% and folding to 3-bets higher than 70%) you have a pretty good squeeze spot.I think given those reads, as limited as they may be, it's a pretty standard squeeze for me. Other hands I might squeeze with would be stuff like ATo... 76s... KQo... etc.

On that note, I think squeezing is something that most players could stand to do more in these games. It really is an extremely powerful move still. It easily adds some bb to your win-rate and it's not a particular difficult play to learn.