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

sweet

Time Link to 00:32:27

Table 1 with Q8.

Why you didn't raise the river?

video looks strange for me

Time Link to 00:18:45

for the Q7 hand facing the overbet - Do you guys think he would even overbet trips 3s on that board? Seems like he's only getting called by flushes and the times you do hero call with a hand like what you had, no? Plus if he's overbetting with like 53s, you can still have a lot of better 3x in your range that you decided not to 3bet the flop with, right? Just seems like the value with a lot of his 3x is very thin when he overbets, so he basically is repping almost all flushes as his value range. Thoughts?

Time Link to 00:20:29

for the AJ hand when the K falls on the river - you guys get interrupted by the action on the other table, can you finish your thoughts on what your river play would have been on a brick river, and why?

Time Link to 00:24:24

Baluga - are you saying here that a lot of players don't raise their random rivered 2pairs or they don't bluff raise with blockers there like imfromsweden did? Also, you say they are afraid and then get cut off by the action - what are they afraid of?

Time Link to 00:25:21

Baluga - on the 999 board - do you remember if he was 3betting small and medium pairs? If he was, what is he representing? Seems like a dumb spot to run a bluff though, but if anyone is the type to try it it's probably a swede. . .

nice vid

Baluga - on the 999 board - do you remember if he was 3betting small and medium pairs? If he was, what is he representing? Seems like a dumb spot to run a bluff though, but if anyone is the type to try it it's probably a swede. . .

imfromsweden wasn't 3betting too much in general, so medium pairs are in his range but does he takes this line with like 88? such a strange hand

imfromsweden wasn't 3betting too much in general, so medium pairs are in his range but does he takes this line with like 88? such a strange hand

yeah idk either. i guess there's still like 30 combos of 9x if he defends 97o+, but like who flops quads? lol

Time Link to 00:33:38

FWF says the Q8 doesn't have terrible equity if called, but isn't particularly playable if called. Can you expand on the difference between equity and playability if called?

Time Link to 00:33:55

FWF - you start to say that in last year the c/r oop with weak sd value is "starting to go like way more thin," then get cut off by the action on another table. What do you mean by that, that it's starting to go way more thin?

Thanks for the video guys, enjoying it quite a bit!

why is your standard cbet size only 25 into 40?

Time Link to 00:44:36

for the A3dd hand facing the 3rd barrel - what about shoving the river that deep? Would call with anything other than sets and KQ/Q9?

Thanks for the video guys, enjoying it quite a bit!

+1

Time Link to 00:48:07

FWF says that we can fold the river because we'll often "have the hands we just gave him that he could be bluffing with." So are you saying we call the turn with 57/A5 and call the river with that as well? Or that we call the turn with a bare gut shot 87?

Table 1 with Q8.

Why you didn't raise the river?

didnt think he would call with worse as often as he would have KQ.

Andrew

for the Q7 hand facing the overbet - Do you guys think he would even overbet trips 3s on that board? Seems like he's only getting called by flushes and the times you do hero call with a hand like what you had, no? Plus if he's overbetting with like 53s, you can still have a lot of better 3x in your range that you decided not to 3bet the flop with, right? Just seems like the value with a lot of his 3x is very thin when he overbets, so he basically is repping almost all flushes as his value range. Thoughts?

fix the timestamp please? linked to wrong Q7 hand

for the AJ hand when the K falls on the river - you guys get interrupted by the action on the other table, can you finish your thoughts on what your river play would have been on a brick river, and why?

at the time i probably would've bet. now that my reads are a little better i prob would've c/c.

Andrew

Baluga - on the 999 board - do you remember if he was 3betting small and medium pairs? If he was, what is he representing? Seems like a dumb spot to run a bluff though, but if anyone is the type to try it it's probably a swede. . .

a weird hand. he wasn't 3betting much early but started to pick it up. it was a very weird spot. he's not repping much, but bluffing there should be kinda dumb. he could def pick up a J easily though.

Andrew

Havent seen vid yet but I hope u smashed that hybris- trollolololololol called imfromsweden!

Time Link to 00:16:53

table 2 - this is the Q7 hand I was referring to - I think you guys were still discussing this during my original time stamp though.

at the time i probably would've bet. now that my reads are a little better i prob would've c/c.

Andrew

so you expect him to turn what into a bluff on the river, like JT, J9, 98, T8, KT?

Time Link to 00:53:30

FWF says ppl put you on a bluff all the time when you call turn/jam river, but are we really trying to bluff him off of any made hand anyway? Like aren't we just trying to get him to fold his bluffs that have us overcarded, so does it even matter if they put us on a bluff?

awesome video. please do more videos together, you worked great together and were very instructive. great team.

Time Link to 00:27:03

you said going in your plan was to take some passive lines and induce aggression. i'm not sure what spots you had in mind, but i don't really see you putting this into action. did you change your mind? not get the sort of board textures? was this an adjustment based on his play?

Good video. I agree what with terp said: "you said going in your plan was to take some passive lines and induce aggression. i'm not sure what spots you had in mind, but i don't really see you putting this into action. did you change your mind? not get the sort of board textures? was this an adjustment based on his play?" IFS seems to barrel through a bit too often even on perceived bad boards to bluff (have seen him post HHs earlier showing this). Also, you dont have a flop donking range? Cant remember seeing you doin it in the vid anyways.

Time Link to 00:27:23

@Baluga:
Hey,
you said here that you advice you students to look for spots were the opponent barells with lots of air which has good PotEQ which then fizzles (?) on the river.
What means the expression "fizzle"^^
Or what you mean here in general by this advice - I don`t get it here.

@Baluga:
Hey,
you said here that you advice you students to look for spots were the opponent barells with lots of air which has good PotEQ which then fizzles (?) on the river.
What means the expression "fizzle"^^
Or what you mean here in general by this advice - I don`t get it here.

Fizzle meaning that the river misses all of their outs.

I think he means a board like Q8 762 where a lot of their range on the turn will have picked up equity so they will barrel and can call a turn raise looking to hit 2pr, trips, gutter, flush draw, etc... but when they miss the river they aren't going to call a shove.

First thing I learned from this video is that my tiny brain is insanely dependent on the 4 color deck.

thanks for the video, solid goldmine

Fizzle meaning that the river misses all of their outs.

I think he means a board like Q8 762 where a lot of their range on the turn will have picked up equity so they will barrel and can call a turn raise looking to hit 2pr, trips, gutter, flush draw, etc... but when they miss the river they aren't going to call a shove.

thx man

Good video. I agree what with terp said: "you said going in your plan was to take some passive lines and induce aggression. i'm not sure what spots you had in mind, but i don't really see you putting this into action. did you change your mind? not get the sort of board textures? was this an adjustment based on his play?" IFS seems to barrel through a bit too often even on perceived bad boards to bluff (have seen him post HHs earlier showing this). Also, you dont have a flop donking range? Cant remember seeing you doin it in the vid anyways.

i think flop donking is only good under a pretty specific set of circumstances which didn't come up during this match.

I didn't really get a ton of hands that I could induce action with, and I think I chicken out and make a few bad folds here or there anyway. The basic plan was, rather than trying to steal a lot of pots on the flop or preflop, trying to steal a lot of pots on the turn and river. Unfortunately FWF and I didn't get to the 2nd part of the session in which we see a lot more of this (when I stage my comeback haha).

Andrew

Time Link to 00:41:14

Table 2 -> T6o:
Don`t you overrep here your hand a little bit by C/Raising the turn when the Flush comes in?
I also think that especially vs. this aggr. barell-happy villain a C/C has here anyways more merrits b/c I think you will pretty often face a 3rdbarell on blankrivers b/c so many hands of your perceived C/Callrange (TPs, 2nspair w a FD...) on the turn can hardly stand much heat on the river...

for the A3dd hand facing the 3rd barrel - what about shoving the river that deep? Would call with anything other than sets and KQ/Q9?

seems kinda interesting.
I guess you would only rep by jamming KQ? Or what else would you valuejam here so deep?
The thing is that you would deep maybe pretty often raise the turn w KQ what would throw out some combos of your valuejammingrange you wanna rep.

seems kinda interesting.
I guess you would only rep by jamming KQ? Or what else would you valuejam here so deep?
The thing is that you would deep maybe pretty often raise the turn w KQ what would throw out some combos of your valuejammingrange you wanna rep.

maybe repping AJ too? idk, he probably wouldnt raise KQ on the turn since IFS barrels so much and he would still be able to get the money in on the river if IFS does have a big hand that's not folding, and IFS probably knows that. Would like to hear BW and FWF's thoughts though.

Would like to hear BW and FWF's thoughts though.

me, too^^

me, too^^

I think its a great idea in this spot in theory to be shoving things there, but I think IFS isn't folding AT there to a shove. Against people who fold more often/don't hand read as well, its def better to ship than call there.

Andrew

I think its a great idea in this spot in theory to be shoving things there, but I think IFS isn't folding AT there to a shove. Against people who fold more often/don't hand read as well, its def better to ship than call there.

Andrew

do you think he goes for thin value with like A9/A8? if so, assuming he folds AK/AQ/A9/A8 and bluffs, it's still probably profitable even if he calls with AT, no?

http://video.mynet.com/c_z55/How-i-met-your-mother-but-umm-Robin/1102039/

We can play a drinking game with Baluga !
Just kidding, you're the best!
This vid is kinda beyond my level, but it seemed like you peeled/floated some marginal hands and then folded them later, didn't it cost you quite much against such an aggresive opponent?

Also I have noticed that you c/r some weak air on very dry boards like 922 with J5, is it a good play against someone who knows you have so much air there and is generally call happy? He did fold to some turn bets though so I guess that was the plan.
Cheers!

do you think he goes for thin value with like A9/A8? if so, assuming he folds AK/AQ/A9/A8 and bluffs, it's still probably profitable even if he calls with AT, no?

obviously having him fold bluffs means nothing to me on the river

the question is whether or not there are more combos of AK/AQ/A9/A8 than there are two pairs, sets, and straights, and there probably aren't. So, unless he folds 2pairs, its either a fold or a call. If he folds two pairs its a no-brainer ship.

Andrew

obviously having him fold bluffs means nothing to me on the river

is this really true?

aren't there spots where you have a bluff catcher on the river and you don't have a +EV call given the pot odds, but you do have a profitable jam which wouldn't be +EV if he didn't have bluffs in his range? To illustrate with an example, if someone has 20value combos and 8 bluff combos and pots the river, you can't call getting 2-1 as you only have 8/28= 28% equity. But if you shove for a pot sized raise and he folds 7 of his value combos and his 8 bluff combos, your bluff is profitable as he's folding 15/28=53% of the time and you only need him to fold 50% to break even. But if he didn't have those bluffs in his range and was still folding the 7 value combos, now he's only folding 7/20=35% of his range and our bluff is now -EV. So even though we are beating the bluffs on the river anyway, they are still relevant in determining whether or not we have a profitable shove if we've determined that we don't have a profitable call, no?

his number of bluffs only determines whether its a non-fold or not. it doesn't help us choose between calling and raising.

his number of bluffs only determines whether its a non-fold or not. it doesn't help us choose between calling and raising.

idk, tbh at least the example of ! Ass get to jigglin" seems to be logical and very correct to me.

his number of bluffs only determines whether its a non-fold or not. it doesn't help us choose between calling and raising.

ahh ok, yeah that makes sense now, thanks.

what you said AGTJ is a very clear way of explaining the decision - sometimes we have a -ev call but a +ev shove with a bluffcatcher.

there are three variables here. think of them as a+b+c=100

a={nutted value hands}
b={thin value hands}
c={bluffs}

value range={a,b}

he should be bet/calling with {a} and bet/folding {b,c}. i think we can see that if a:b is constant, as c ---> 100, EV(call)-EV(shove) changes, including possibly such that our action will change.

if a>our hand>b, EV(shove)<EV(call), since we are putting more money in and always losing.

idk, tbh at least the example of ! Ass get to jigglin" seems to be logical and very correct to me.

hmm, actually yeah I think Andrews response is just partially correct. To continue with my example, if the guy had 12 bluff combos and 20 value combos we can call getting 2-1. But that doesn't mean raising isn't more profitable. If he folds say 17 of his value combos, then raising is more profitable. So if he has enough bluff combos such that we can call, then the bluff combos don't help us choose whether to raise or call - the number of value combos he folds determines that and Andrew is correct in saying that the number of bluffs only determines if it's a non-fold (call or raise).

But if he doesn't have enough bluff combos such that we can call, then whether or not to raise or fold depends on how many bluffs he has AND how many value combos he folds (illustrated by my original example where we can shove when he has 8 bluffs in his range, but can't when he doesn't). So in my first example, the number of bluffs he has doesn't determine whether or not it's a non-fold, it determines whether or not it's a fold or a raise, and the number of value combos he folds combined with the number of bluffs he has determines whether or not we raise (we can't call getting 2-1 so fold or raise are our only options). So in my example if he only had 4 bluffs instead of 8, but folds 9 value combos instead of 7, than shoving for pot is +EV because he folds 13/24=54% of the time. If he had 9 bluffs and only folded 6 value combos, we still can't call getting 2-1 but we can shove making him fold 9/29=51% of the time.

Andrew - if you still disagree, can you show where your disagreement is with this analysis, perhaps using my example or something similar to illustrate?

what you said AGTJ is a very clear way of explaining the decision - sometimes we have a -ev call but a +ev shove with a bluffcatcher.

there are three variables here. think of them as a+b+c=100

a={nutted value hands}
b={thin value hands}
c={bluffs}

value range={a,b}

he should be bet/calling with {a} and bet/folding {b,c}. i think we can see that if a:b is constant, as c ---> 100, EV(call)-EV(shove) changes, including possibly such that our action will change.

if a>our hand>b, EV(shove)<EV(call), since we are putting more money in and always losing.

didn't see this post before I made my last post. yeah, this makes sense.

EV(call)-EV(shove)

is this EV(call) minus EV(shove)? or you're just saying the EV of both actions changes as c increases?

that's just a random equation comparing them. could have done it the other way, too.

if EV(call)-EV(shove) > 0, then calling > shoving

that's just a random equation comparing them. could have done it the other way, too.

if EV(call)-EV(shove) > 0, then calling > shoving

ahh ok got it, thanks terp

Time Link to 00:49:44

gg man :-) Just gotta ask, why are you 3betting 44 here, as opposed to flatting? I think life will become hell if you 3bet tbh, especially this deep, when you can't just shove if I 4bet

gg man :-) Just gotta ask, why are you 3betting 44 here, as opposed to flatting? I think life will become hell if you 3bet tbh, especially this deep, when you can't just shove if I 4bet

in retrospect i think i should've shoved anyway

ok. Not sure if I agree that it's a good default plan to 3bet/ship small pairs 150bb+ deep, but haven't done the math,

Not sure how to create a timelink, but at 00:1:40. We have AA on 964s Qss Qo. How do you think he plays draws here OTT? I think there is some merit to c/c the river.

thanks for the vid !

Not sure how to create a timelink, but at 00:1:40. We have AA on 964s Qss Qo. How do you think he plays draws here OTT? I think there is some merit to c/c the river.

im pretty sure he's jamming his draws somewhere earlier most of the time, and he's hero calling all the time.

Andrew

Time Link to 00:23:47

I think you could call the river with the J8s on the JTAQ board since he just got caught overbetting on the other table and it seems your hand range is capped and therefor I would expect him to valuebet as an overbet as well with the K and probably also for balancing reason(since he seems to bluff often in such spots). Therefor I would really love to look up his "normal" sized bets in this certain spot with this previous history.

What do you think about that?

I think you could call the river with the J8s on the JTAQ board since he just got caught overbetting on the other table and it seems your hand range is capped and therefor I would expect him to valuebet as an overbet as well with the K and probably also for balancing reason(since he seems to bluff often in such spots). Therefor I would really love to look up his "normal" sized bets in this certain spot with this previous history.

What do you think about that?

I think its way more likely that he's choosing that size with a thin value hand like AT or QJ than a pure bluff, but I could obv be wrong.

Andrew

where is part 2 ?

Time Link to 00:04:18

Top right Q5 ....... is this standard to a min open (the preflop call) against someone who's not giving up easily postflop?

Edit: once again I didn't realize this video was 9 months old...... oh well