---

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

Time Link to 00:30:42

T8o hand, villain also has some 76s in his range that u didnt mention

Time Link to 00:37:57

Upper left table you say that you prefer to check raise flop with 86 on K75tt, because villain is barreling so much. In a vacuum this is true, but if villain is barreling a lot, aren't we going to be tempted to take a lot of our flop check raise value hands (both our nutted hands, and our thinner value hands) and wait for the turn? Therefore if we want to have a balanced strategy that exploits his tendency to double barrel, shouldn't we also check call most of our standard check raise semi-bluffs with the intention of check raising turns?

Edit: You do mention in this particular hand that we don't rep a ton by check raising the turn, and that is true perhaps on this particular turn, but on many other turns we can rep slow-played monsters and top pairs, as well as other draws that come in.

T8o hand, villain also has some 76s in his range that u didnt mention

Tough to assume that he doesn't x/r 76dd, 76ss given ~20% x/r flop

Time Link to 00:42:51

What adjustments would you make to this?

Personally, I think you could:
- lower your flop x/r % and save some nutted hands to strengthen your turn range
-- also / (or else?), I might x/r a few more weak SD type hands and a few less big draws on the flop
- mix in some x/r turn blast river when your opponent doesn't overbet the turn

I'm not a HU dude though, so what else could you do?

Upper left table you say that you prefer to check raise flop with 86 on K75tt, because villain is barreling so much. In a vacuum this is true, but if villain is barreling a lot, aren't we going to be tempted to take a lot of our flop check raise value hands (both our nutted hands, and our thinner value hands) and wait for the turn? Therefore if we want to have a balanced strategy that exploits his tendency to double barrel, shouldn't we also check call most of our standard check raise semi-bluffs with the intention of check raising turns?

Edit: You do mention in this particular hand that we don't rep a ton by check raising the turn, and that is true perhaps on this particular turn, but on many other turns we can rep slow-played monsters and top pairs, as well as other draws that come in.

Hey man, yes very good point and certainly a reasonable adjustment. The only part I might disagree with is that most aren't going to put top pairs into your turn checkraising range, so while it can be a good play I wouldn't use that as an argument to c/r more draws on the turn because our perceived range has TP in it. Not sure if thats what you meant, but figured I should mention it.

I hope everything is good with you, hit me up sometime.

What adjustments would you make to this?

Personally, I think you could:
- lower your flop x/r % and save some nutted hands to strengthen your turn range
-- also / (or else?), I might x/r a few more weak SD type hands and a few less big draws on the flop
- mix in some x/r turn blast river when your opponent doesn't overbet the turn

I'm not a HU dude though, so what else could you do?

Those are all good adjustments, especially the one about c/r the weak showdown value on the flop (or folding it). This is especially true on more draw heavy boards where lots of turn/river combinations are going to be ugly when facing big bets.

The other adjustments will be related to how balanced he is with the overbets... like what types of spots is he choosing? Figuring out if he ever does it on dry boards, and if so, what sorts of hands does he use? This will help us know when we need to bluff catch when facing either the overbet or the standard bet.

If you are really having problems with it, you could instead implement a donking strategy with some of the types of hands you don't really want to face this action from... but thinking about how it plays out, it might make it pretty tough to execute well. So like donking bottom pairs on semi drawy boards, you're going to need a good feel for when you need to turn your hand into bluff and when you need to bluff catch. You will put yourself into really tough spots when you get raised on the flop... I'm just sort of thinking outloud here.

Also be a little careful not to overadjust here because if you do then you could start getting really unbalanced in your flop play.

Hey man, yes very good point and certainly a reasonable adjustment. The only part I might disagree with is that most aren't going to put top pairs into your turn checkraising range, so while it can be a good play I wouldn't use that as an argument to c/r more draws on the turn because our perceived range has TP in it. Not sure if thats what you meant, but figured I should mention it.

I hope everything is good with you, hit me up sometime.

This has always bothered me a little bit. We want to make an adjustment to our ranges, but we have to wait for a value hand to do so. This makes me think that against a very good opponent we should be willing to use our bluff range first, since he should be expecting us to have value (this becomes a leveling war I guess). Against this particular villain, I have to agree with you given his reaction to our overbets.

Time Link to 00:38:29

bottom left table,in term of hero's value range what hands are u flating,3betting small and shoving to the flop raise?do u have value hands that u shove to balance when shoving draws against this opponent?also if u flat the raise,what turn cards are u shoving?

Time Link to 00:43:51

u said because of villains high 2b% u prefer to c/c 78 on a 483dd board.so are u turning ur hand into a bluffcatcher and c/c all the way?also,same time upper left hand u said because of the same reason u prefer c/r draws otf.do u think for balancing reasons it might be better to c/r 78 here or is it too thin?

Time Link to 00:44:42

do u agree with villains decision to check back river?does he actually think Q8 has showdown value here or he decides to give up?given that hero's range is polarised for overbetting turn ,would you try to turn Q8 into bluff otr when hero checks ?

bottom left table,in term of hero's value range what hands are u flating,3betting small and shoving to the flop raise?do u have value hands that u shove to balance when shoving draws against this opponent?also if u flat the raise,what turn cards are u shoving?

of course its all subject to previous match history and how good of a hand reader I think the opponent is and how blindly aggro he is, but generally speaking:

flatting lots of showdown value hands,

reraising or shoving most draws and value hands that aren't excited to let a large part of the deck roll off on the turn... examples could be like A8 or 77... probably erroring on reraising small with my strongest draws and shoving the weakest ones

when we flat the raise, i dont think i would open shove any turn cards and the stacks have just over a pot sized bet left, so depending on how I view his flop raise and turn betting range (and also, how he views my flop flatting range) i could be putting the rest in when hitting either my draw or hitting a pair

u said because of villains high 2b% u prefer to c/c 78 on a 483dd board.so are u turning ur hand into a bluffcatcher and c/c all the way?also,same time upper left hand u said because of the same reason u prefer c/r draws otf.do u think for balancing reasons it might be better to c/r 78 here or is it too thin?

definitely not too thin given the right dynamic to c/r flop with 78 there. Also look at sweblin's question and response up above. Because of his 2barrel we can start moving some of our semibluffs to the turn (as well as our value hands, although 78 might be a little thin for c/c flop c/r turn)

do u agree with villains decision to check back river?does he actually think Q8 has showdown value here or he decides to give up?given that hero's range is polarised for overbetting turn ,would you try to turn Q8 into bluff otr when hero checks ?

You might have misremembered, but Villain is oop here so he can't check back. I think he played it fine. I think his river decision on whether or not to bluff catch could be difficult, but he probably has enough good hearts in his overbet calling range on the turn to let him fold this kind of hand on the river.

You might have misremembered, but Villain is oop here so he can't check back. I think he played it fine. I think his river decision on whether or not to bluff catch could be difficult, but he probably has enough good hearts in his overbet calling range on the turn to let him fold this kind of hand on the river.

my bad u are right.so ott villain does call the overbet with a marginal hand(for that board). what rivers are u willing to bluffcatch?i guess they are not that many thats why i am not sure if villains decision to call the overbet ott was right....do u think an Ace of hearts otr would make our bluffcatch decision easier?

when we flat the raise, i dont think i would open shove any turn cards and the stacks have just over a pot sized bet left, so depending on how I view his flop raise and turn betting range (and also, how he views my flop flatting range) i could be putting the rest in when hitting either my draw or hitting a pair

on the specific example the turncard kills villains action because we can rep full houses,but dont u think that in most turncards villain will shove ,making our flop flat with KQ -EV ?
also do u ever fight back with total air ? (on the vid u mentioned that u prefer to reraise small and fold to a shove with 67)

definitely not too thin given the right dynamic to c/r flop with 78 there. Also look at sweblin's question and response up above. Because of his 2barrel we can start moving some of our semibluffs to the turn (as well as our value hands, although 78 might be a little thin for c/c flop c/r turn)

i am a bit confused here..didnt u say that its hard to rep turn c/rs because most regs dont think we can c/r 1 pair hands?

my bad u are right.so ott villain does call the overbet with a marginal hand(for that board). what rivers are u willing to bluffcatch?i guess they are not that many thats why i am not sure if villains decision to call the overbet ott was right....do u think an Ace of hearts otr would make our bluffcatch decision easier?

good/tough question. On Ah river it means villain obv can't have it, and likely fewer semibluffs that hit, but at the same time if villain is good enough to overbet the turn because of what our range looks like, then we get that river, we also have to be concerned that he knows what our range looks like when we call. It ultimately depends on how heavy he weights our range toward pair+big heart and how many combos of marginal 1 pair hands he thinks we calls the turn with (and will fold the river). I think it's really hard to know what the right play is, but if I had seen my opponent miss value bets previously in the match in rather standard spots then I'd be more inclined to bluff catch here with Q8

on the specific example the turncard kills villains action because we can rep full houses,but dont u think that in most turncards villain will shove ,making our flop flat with KQ -EV ?
also do u ever fight back with total air ? (on the vid u mentioned that u prefer to reraise small and fold to a shove with 67)

I don't think villain will auto shove the turn on that many cards. When most people bet/call they have some kind of pair and on a lot of cards nothing changes and people don't fold like 8x here on blanks. I think on the scariest cards he can still bluff.

Yes I think fighting back with total air vs some opponents here is fine/good. 67 would be an OK example of that (I realize I said shoving the weakest draws, so we could shove this too as it's obviously pretty weak). It really is hard to talk about in a general way though because it just depends on what we've seen him do with various types of hands. If he's raise/calling with every J9 and flush draw and QJ etc then obviously shipping these hands wouldn't be so hot. If we've seen him not fastplay draws on semi-dry boards before and we can take some of those combos out, then it makes it a lot more attractive to bet/ship (or bet/small raise) 67 here to get him off the total air

i am a bit confused here..didnt u say that its hard to rep turn c/rs because most regs dont think we can c/r 1 pair hands?

yep, which is why you could consider c/c c/r 78 but i'd feel more comfortable with a better kicker. Remember if we're going to c/r 78 on the turn, we need the villain to be willing to value bet worse than 8x and call it... not just 2 barrel a lot. So what I'm saying is if we opt to not 3bet 99 pre or have K8 here or something like that, i'd feel more comfortable going for a turn c/r for value to balance some turn semibluffs because it gives a bunch more combos he can bet/call that are worse compared to a hand like 78.

Compare that to c/r the flop with 78 where we have his whole flop cbet range to play against for a bet/call... not all of those bet/calling hands keep value betting the turn when we just call the flop.

Time Link to 00:33:56

Am I the only one that noticed him just showing down A2o in the hand seconds before this one? I have no idea what to think about what level this guy is on in terms of having just shown that exact hand in a similar situation, but it should be worth to note that this is a hugeee leveling game cause of that AQcc hand right?

Am I the only one that noticed him just showing down A2o in the hand seconds before this one? I have no idea what to think about what level this guy is on in terms of having just shown that exact hand in a similar situation, but it should be worth to note that this is a hugeee leveling game cause of that AQcc hand right?

flatting preflop? I didn't notice that

Hey on the upper right table w/ the KJo hand why do you say that the 4 is a better card for his range then ours? Isnt it a decent card for our range given that we are going to have a wider range on the BTN then he had in the BB and therefore connect better with this type of texture. I would assume his range to be wieghted toward one pair hands like A5,A8, K5s,K8s,8xs and maybe 67 and I would think that the one pair hands we can get to fold by the river a decent amount of the time

befintingu - do you have a timestamp? I dont remember when this hand happened

just to answer generally because I dont remember the board or situation... don't forget that it's true we "can have" more hands because we open raise more hands than he defends, but that cuts both ways since we have way more air (comparatively) as well.

Time Link to 00:10:31

My bad thought I already put a Time stamp.

My bad thought I already put a Time stamp.

Yea so it's just a case where yes, it's true we can have every combo of 67 and he can't, we still have far more air on this turn than he does and it is generally a better card for his range of hands to c/c the flop than it is for us. As I mentioned, going for 3 streets here could be OK. I should note though that because he's pretty tight oop, he will have fewer pair+gutter hands here than some other looser player types would have. So it's not like it's a "great" card for his range, but overall it's probably better for him since a lot of his c/c range is either 8x or now some pair+gutter or occasional A3/67 (but it's true the guy probably c/r his 67 here often. I might have overstated the impact of this card on our opponent's range, given his pf oop tightness.

Good question.

hey nice vid guys! rly good footage! Is there a way to get glitteringprizes HUD somewhere?

10.21 into the video Hero opened with KJo and cb the 5d2c8c : Turn 4h , and you say the turn probably hits the villains c/c range more than Heros betting range and you would not barrel on, can you elaborate this pleaze?

I though our high opening range would be more likely to hit this low board hard, than a thighter BB calling range.

LoveYToo - read up a few posts

hey nice vid guys! rly good footage! Is there a way to get glitteringprizes HUD somewhere?

I dont think so, sorry. He's probably going to see this thread at some point so maybe he will upload it and post it?

Time Link to 00:13:00

OK so in this hand, the J6 4bet pot on table 1 (top left), my thought process is that he might not be betting his air on the turn because the board is pretty bad to bluff at for the typical reasons. First, if we go with the standard idea that people often tend to check back with hands that are marginal on boards that sometimes get bluff check raised (the idea being to not get blown off what might be the best hand), our opponent might expect us to be calling most turns in this situation. That is, if we had air, we'd bet the flop the vast majority of the time. Second, the 9 makes leading turn with air even worse for him because there is much less for him to rep (and he can't just bet every single time that we check back). So we can't necessarily say that he'd just lead turn with air....... its very reasonable to believe that he could be checking a lot.

On the river (I havent seen the result or what happens yet) it feels like a really gross spot because he knows our hand is obviously very weak SD value, but at the same time I feel that he wouldn't bet so big with a bluff. If my assumptions are correct above (which they may not be, but you have to go with something), he can still have Q's in his range when he checks the turn and can be expected to bet like this on the river. I'm almost certain that if he does have a Q he is going to think he is literally never beat hence a pretty hefty bet. Also if he was going to bluff it would nearly always be in the form of a 2 barrel bluff on turn & river because it just doesn't make sense to wait until the river to bet - I mean for one, he's never thinking "he's weak so I should try to steal this pot, but first I'm going to check twice". Other than the general psychology, the objective reasons he wouldn't do this are: one, the river may often be a bad card for him to bluff; two, its clearly much less pressure with one bet than two; and three, by checking the turn he continues to rep weakness which reduces the credibility of a river bluff. Given all this I tend to feel this river bet is value, but if my assumptions are not solid then I'm easily wrong.

What do you think of what I've said here? Also I agree, it would be a very valuable piece of information if we got to see his hand here, regardless of what he has.

EDIT: looks like I was correct, I mean, my assumptions could still be wrong, but at least he didn't turn over Jack high and completely prove me wrong.

i agree with your second paragraph more than your first paragraph. I think you're maybe not giving enough credit to just pure give ups by the hero 4betting and getting this board. I think there are a bunch of AK/AQ that can play this way and not bet the flop and therefore the 9 pairing turn, while maybe in a single raised pot marginal card to bluff, isn't so bad to bluff here because we're basically threatening the A high's whole stack with a turn bet (since it seems pretty unlikely they are going to bet turn and just check/give up river). I think for villain here betting the turn, given his equity and the fact that we can just be check/giving up and the fact that he can put our entire range in a tough spot with a 2 street bet is way better than checking.... if he had some hand like QT no heart, maybe he just didn't feel like bluffing and was giving up on the turn, rivered the effective nuts, and decided to go for a big bet... I could understand that more.

Anyway, good thoughts and good post and this is exactly the type of stuff you need to do to get better... pausing the video and writing some stuff down before seeing the results etc, so I commend you for being a good student and asking good questions

Time Link to 00:41:16

Top left table, 86. I'm gonna go off on a huge tangent here, but whatever, I wanted to pose a conceptual question.

If we think our opponent would be jamming every Ax on the river, why would we NEVER check the river to him with a strong hand (AK, two pair, FH)? I assume your answer would be "because we don't get as much value by checking", but at the same time we're claiming that he's jamming all of his Ax hands which is basically his entire river range. Conversely, if we jam into him on the river (say with 57), he's in a tough spot with any of his Ax hands. Sure he can reason out a call often, but what I'm postulating is that at some point (against *certain opponents* or in specifc game flow scenarios) we reach an inflection point where he is actually more likely to jam when checked to than call when we jam into him, with the same range of "all Ax hands". So we could make more money for that particular play by checking, while simultaneously protecting our checking ranges .... this then should improve our profitability with our more marginal hands and open up new lines / strategies for us as well (improving overall profit and in general making our life easier in many cases).

In my opinion we should very rarely have a scenario where we always take a particular action, especially against good opponents. When it comes to getting exploited, we tend to care a lot if it means we might fold the best hand, but we often just care much less (or don't even realize) when our opponent folds an extremely strong, but second best hand. The vast majority of forum posts are over topics like "is this a good bluff spot" or "what does villain have here, can I call?" and very few are ever asking questions about maximizing value or taking a unique line tailored to a specific opponent to get him to spaz out. It's not surprising though, because after all we all win money with our big hands, so its naturally harder to be skeptical over our play in spots where we are historically profiting consistently. Because of that though I think the value hands are actually where most of us - if not all of us - could be improving our winrates most significantly....... for example if I flop a set of 7's on K78 and my opponent has AK, and I only get half of his stack before he folds, I look at that as equivalent to being bluffed off half of my stack when I had a top pair hand. It's hard to look at it that way though especially when the majority of the time you have no idea that he folded a big hand. We just say to ourself "well I guess he hand nothing" and go on feeling happy about the medium-ish win, when surely if the situation was different and we were getting *bluffed* off of 50bbs, we would probably be a bit tilted.

Just something to think about. (lol I cant stop myself today)

/tangent

PS. Thanks for the reply above also.

You bring up another good question, but in a spot like this where our value range looks so narrow and his range is so full of bluff catchers, I think we would miss out too much POTENTIAL value by checking to induce. I mentioned this would be a spot where we shouldn't bluff, and of course if our opponent knows this, then it makes going for value much worse and going for some kind of bluff inducement much better, but I don't think we can draw that conclusion based on what we've seen so far, so we have to shift back to a more general approach.

The problem with the idea of checking there to induce value shoves from his Ax hands is that a) we don't know if he's cbetting Ax yet (i wouldn't assume so by default on this board against a good player) and b) we let him take a free showdown with every single Kx he would have here. His range is wayyyy more weighted toward bluff catchers than it is toward hands that can bluff or value bet, so I think we do ok by constructing a strategy where we are never checking and calling here (against a general opponent) because we miss out on so many opportunities to take advantage of his bluff catcher-heavy range.

Once you start getting a better handle for how good of an opponent you are against, or you have some idea that he would think we wouldn't bluff in a spot where our value range is extremely narrow, then now you can try to check to him with some value hand and see if he will try to turn Kx into a bluff to try to get you off a chop or simply value shove his own Ax assuming he's freerolling since in a vacuum hero checking a better hand than Ax on the river probably wouldn't be a great play.

It's very difficult to get that sort of depth in a read though, but it is good to think about those things.

Only watched 20min so far but had to comment already

T8o hand where glitter was getting thin value from river you say you would call. We are bottom (or near) of our value range, right ? So basically if you wanna call this hand you are not bet-folding any value hand. You agree we should have bet-fold range always, regarding what / how many / how unlikely value combos our villain has otherwise we aint balance ?

Hand where villain called with lower straight to 765s8bdfd T board you weren't so thrill about it. If he aint calling that hand, then he only calls with 9. You agree that is way too exploitable ? And after hand you say something like:"people gonna bluff catch with better hands." Of course you should bluff catch with better hands, if you think "I will only beat a bluff so any one pair/two pair/set hand haves a same value against nuts", you end up calling too often/rarely. So it makes perfect sense to call with better hands and find the threshold for your range hand with the math, as a math guy I assume you know.

Only watched 20min so far but had to comment already

T8o hand where glitter was getting thin value from river you say you would call. We are bottom (or near) of our value range, right ? So basically if you wanna call this hand you are not bet-folding any value hand. You agree we should have bet-fold range always, regarding what / how many / how unlikely value combos our villain has otherwise we aint balance ?

Hand where villain called with lower straight to 765s8bdfd T board you weren't so thrill about it. If he aint calling that hand, then he only calls with 9. You agree that is way too exploitable ? And after hand you say something like:"people gonna bluff catch with better hands." Of course you should bluff catch with better hands, if you think "I will only beat a bluff so any one pair/two pair/set hand haves a same value against nuts", you end up calling too often/rarely. So it makes perfect sense to call with better hands and find the threshold for your range hand with the math, as a math guy I assume you know.

My goal is not to play an unexploitable strategy against virtually anyone. There are certain recurring situations that I think it is best to be balanced/unexploitable, but not every situation. A more rare situation like that river checkraise on the T8 hand (going off memory since you didn't link the time), at that point in the match I wouldn't bet/fold any value hand there. Given what we see at showdown we can get a better read about how he thinks about poker and apply it to other situations later. Deciding to fold and wait until we have a better bluff catcher in a situation where villain could himself be hugely unbalanced given the extreme lack of value combinations isn't how I approach HUNL.

The comment about calling with the top of your range is best/better isn't necessarily true. There are other considerations which are more important, including blockers to value hands when they have the same bluff catching value as a hand stronger on a linear scale of hand strength. Also, until you identify how many bluffing combos a guy has compared to his value combos compared to the pot odds, it is really pretty meaningless to say that we should bluff catch with the top part of the range. If they are bluffing often enough from a pot odds perspective, we might never have to fold any bluff catcher. If your goal is to play unexploitably in every situation, then perhaps you wouldn't play that way. That's not my goal.