---

Poker Video: Limit Hold'Em by Entity (Mid Stakes)

Wow sick intro. Did the alien blow up Rob's ankle / knee / shin / leg?

Also, the vid is mis tagged - it's 2/4 (error also appears in the description line).

Wait does this mean Rob lost the weight loss prop bet?

Time Link to 00:31:00

Awesome hand, awesome discussion.

Seriously, this is one of the best moments in a poker vid I've seen in a long time.

Time Link to 01:06:19

Rob, while I do like where you're coming from here, there are a couple of things here that are potentially confusing or just wrong.
First, getting in a bet as a 92% favorite to win makes you 0.84 bets, not 0.92. Similarily the cost of bet/calling as an underdog isn't quite as expensive. That's only on that bet alone, which leads to the second point, namely that you must not forget the size of the pot and the value of protection (yeah I know it's not much in most HU pots, but it's still there). Check/calling against a 4 outer costs you 8% of the pot, compared to betting and having the other guy fold.

Just thought I would take the time and point this out for the sake of clarifying what is otherwise a very useful discussion.

Time Link to 00:59:14

Left table: is this really a fold? As you mentioned therere gutters and that guy might be peeling light so Selassar might be betting with AT,AJ,AQ. cuz id always call here i think

Rob, while I do like where you're coming from here, there are a couple of things here that are potentially confusing or just wrong.
First, getting in a bet as a 92% favorite to win makes you 0.84 bets, not 0.92. Similarily the cost of bet/calling as an underdog isn't quite as expensive. That's only on that bet alone, which leads to the second point, namely that you must not forget the size of the pot and the value of protection (yeah I know it's not much in most HU pots, but it's still there). Check/calling against a 4 outer costs you 8% of the pot, compared to betting and having the other guy fold.

Just thought I would take the time and point this out for the sake of clarifying what is otherwise a very useful discussion.

Could you please explain why you win .84 bets i dont get it Its like you have 0.92 on the turn so thats the amount you get.
If hes gonna bet anyway his hand you dont need to protect, unless hes gonna fold if you bet having sufficient pot-odds

Could you please explain why you win .84 bets i dont get it Its like you have 0.92 on the turn so thats the amount you get.

Well, 92% of the time you win one bet, 8% of the time you lose one bet. EV of the turn betting: EV = 0.92 * 1 + 0.08 * (-1) = 0.84

If hes gonna bet anyway his hand you dont need to protect, unless hes gonna fold if you bet having sufficient pot-odds

True, but the whole point of the discussion was to do a quantitive analysis of the different lines we could take (at least that's how I understood it). I was just saying that protecting your hand has a certain amount of value, and that has to enter into the equations somewhere if you want to do everything as exactly as possible.

Well, 92% of the time you win one bet, 8% of the time you lose one bet. EV of the turn betting: EV = 0.92 * 1 + 0.08 * (-1) = 0.84

Yeah, right, it would be funny if you bet the river with 50% equity and be making 0.5 bet

True, but the whole point of the discussion was to do a quantitive analysis of the different lines we could take (at least that's how I understood it). I was just saying that protecting your hand has a certain amount of value, and that has to enter into the equations somewhere if you want to do everything as exactly as possible.

I understand you, i just got the impression you were absolutely against playing passively in spots like that.


I really enjoyed this video, like the video review style and hope to see some more, thanks!

Yeah, right, it would be funny if you bet the river with 50% equity and be making 0.5 bet

Exactly

I understand you, i just got the impression you were absolutely against playing passively in spots like that.

Heh, not at all. In fact I do it all the time. Just wanted to get the math str8.

Description is fixed, tag is still wrong.

Time Link to 00:58:58

If SB had lead this turn and UTG had folded do you think there would be any merit to raising and planning to fold to a 3-Bet (and checking behind most rivers when called?) I'm just kind of brainstorming here but if we are planning on calling down on a lot of rivers anyway, the same amount of bets will likely go in regardless of whether we are ahead or behind since I certainly wouldn't expect most opponents to B3B 88 on this turn to charge any flush draws that we might be semi-bluffing with so I don't think I have to worry about folding the best hand here very often at all. I'm wondering if we might not get a fold out of hands like TT or JJ every once in a while. What if the turn was the 2 of spades instead of clubs, which would make a raise look even stronger?

awesome vid for playing against the stellar opposition out there. limped pots are really interesting imo.

games R gud

Rob, while I do like where you're coming from here, there are a couple of things here that are potentially confusing or just wrong.
First, getting in a bet as a 92% favorite to win makes you 0.84 bets, not 0.92. Similarily the cost of bet/calling as an underdog isn't quite as expensive. That's only on that bet alone, which leads to the second point, namely that you must not forget the size of the pot and the value of protection (yeah I know it's not much in most HU pots, but it's still there). Check/calling against a 4 outer costs you 8% of the pot, compared to betting and having the other guy fold.

Just thought I would take the time and point this out for the sake of clarifying what is otherwise a very useful discussion.

Thanks Mauritz. Good analysis. I'll post a bit more once I'm back from Aussieland in a few days, the internet here sucks balls so I can't really load the videos easily to see what spots we're talking about.

Rob

can somebody tell me how can i get this pokerstars mod / HUD style?

can somebody tell me how can i get this pokerstars mod / HUD style?

the theme is pokerstars default "hyper-simple"

the HUD is from pokercopilot.com exclusive for macs

Hey guys, really good video.

Andrew, I'd like to give you some general feedback on your game based on what I saw in this video.

The number one thing that jumped out at me from this video was how often you said, 'I've never ever even thought of taking that line' (or some variation thereof). To be honest I think Rob should have taken you to task a bit more for that. Not considering all your options is definitely a leak and I know it came up during Dojo (in general, not about you).

Examples:
~15 Flop donk discussion of 96s (I think Rob's analysis was excellent)
~36 Turned second nut flush with J7o (I think you should have donked the turn, once it goes bet and fold I actually think we should probably x/r, and in any event we almost certainly should have donk / led the river)
~55 PF limp behind discussion of A9o (by the way I think this was very well played post flop and agree with your turn fold)

That said, I know you probably didn't literally mean you've never thought of xyz, but it probably does indicate you're not thinking about xyz ENOUGH. I think you should try to figure out why that is. My guess is that you're not taking enough time to think through situations and are at times lapsing into auto pilot at the tables.

Another possible explanation is that you lack the creativity / cannot break out of traditional rules (as if you had a chart for pre AND post flop! ). I doubt that is the case as we saw you cold call 96s PF (~15), K9o twice (~31 and ~73), QJo (~76), and I really liked the flop x/r with K9o (the one at ~31).

Anyway, I don't intend for any of this to be mean-spirited. Overall it looks like you have a pretty decent game. I'm not saying, 'you suck - do this instead.' It's more that I look at this as something that could maybe help transform your game into one that really crushes.

Okay, my second major point is about calling down. Make sure you're valuing hands correctly, taking into account board textures, opponent types, and past history.

You called down Kleenex twice in spots where it was pretty thin:
~20 with T6o, he shows a bluff, and we win with sixes
~43 with 32o, he shows a bluff, and we win again with deuces

Those were probably fine / good since he appeared to be bluffy and hated you (certainly I think we're all a lot more likely to showdown the second time after seeing the first bluff). I kind of think those call downs made you look like a genius.

BUT, those both came early-ish in the video and from watching the rest I was left to wonder if maybe your playing style is just very call downy and it just happens to be designed very well to crush this sort of player (sorry if that's harsh - I don't want to be too critical but I do want to help you improve your game).

Examples:

~48 we have 32o and make what I think is a flop error that compounds, causing us to put bad-ish money in on the turn (glad to see you folded the river). I think this spot is just a RIO nightmare and don't really mind a x/f in a tiny pot.

~53 with T6s - I pretty much agree with Rob that we can peel once and be done. The PFR-er is just all over this board texture. I hope you weren't going to call the river.

~68 with KTo on the four straight board. I think there's a tendency to say that it's HU and you have a pair, but I think a much more accurate way to look at that spot is that you're HU against the strongest of the 5 hands that saw that flop. In a way I think you got unlucky because I think villain bet on the end not so much for value as because he isn't really sure what to do and because the Jamie Gold is (usually) a strong hand, but I think you're generally losing a lot to two pairs / straight here.

~73 with K9o facing a turn raise. Given how the exact same situation played out earlier (~31) I think this call down is pretty bad. He played you straight up and folded to your flop x/r the first time and this really looks like a slowplayed hand when he pops you on the turn. I just don't think he was going to mess around with you.

Okay, that's all I have. Sorry about the lack of time stamp links - I had too many hands to make that practical. Again, great video - I really enjoyed it.

I really appreciate your thoughts on this Mike

I can definitely admit i do have a call downy style (wtsd 41-42)

With regards to the comment "i never really considered that line". that's usually how it works when i talk to Rob about poker

more serious though, I felt like most of the times i said that i was in multi-way pots with a draw (96s) or weird pre-flop dynamic (A9o) and i totally agree that J7o was just played badly

I'm still trying to get better at multi-way pots where ranges are really wide and I feel a little lost on some streets

re: to the "lack of creativity/cannot break out of traditional rules", i'm not sure how i feel about this i've never played with a PF chart and feel like i played some hands rather unorthodox

If SB had lead this turn and UTG had folded do you think there would be any merit to raising and planning to fold to a 3-Bet (and checking behind most rivers when called?) I'm just kind of brainstorming here but if we are planning on calling down on a lot of rivers anyway, the same amount of bets will likely go in regardless of whether we are ahead or behind since I certainly wouldn't expect most opponents to B3B 88 on this turn to charge any flush draws that we might be semi-bluffing with so I don't think I have to worry about folding the best hand here very often at all. I'm wondering if we might not get a fold out of hands like TT or JJ every once in a while. What if the turn was the 2 of spades instead of clubs, which would make a raise look even stronger?

sorry it took me so long to reply to this

I think the biggest reason i don't like doing it because when he bets into two people again i feel like our hand is a crying call down and I think we should strongly consider folding the river if he continues betting

i really doubt he is ever b/f'ing JJ/TT here

re: to the "lack of creativity/cannot break out of traditional rules", i'm not sure how i feel about this i've never played with a PF chart and feel like i played some hands rather unorthodox

Yeah, just to clarify I said I thought this was likely NOT the case. I really only tossed it out there because it'd be possible explanation in general and is therefore something you should think about (since you're the person who can / needs to figure it out ultimately).

Time Link to 00:10:59

About the QT XR on T22. U argue that if BTN fold we should steal more frequently from him in the future on dry board textures (I agree). There's also the opposite way to think: Next time he will be more suspicious and more likely to pay off. Which one is more often correct is decided by experience, I suppose. Suppose we steal from him again. The third time a similar board texture comes up would u tghten ur XR range or loosen it up even more? One key competence of a really good poker player is to have a feel for when his opponent is likely to adopt.

Meh I don't expect u to answer this ofc because no one can. Just some thoghts popping up. It's the main problem in interpreting informationin poker in guess.

BUT, those both came early-ish in the video and from watching the rest I was left to wonder if maybe your playing style is just very call downy and it just happens to be designed very well to crush this sort of player (sorry if that's harsh - I don't want to be too critical but I do want to help you improve your game).

Excellent comment and one I can refer about my own game! Basically some opponents are playing right into my hands by being too bluffy in certain spots. They do no realize how comfortable it is for me to just keep calling down. And there' enough of these playersfor me to beat the game although I call down too much IMO. However when I play tougher opps it's a leak! They don't auto fire turn or rivers and can value bet as thin as my SD frquency opens up for. I try to exploit other TAGs, that are similar to me, by reducing my bluffing frequency to a minimum.

Im working on it .

Thanks Mauritz. Good analysis. I'll post a bit more once I'm back from Aussieland in a few days, the internet here sucks balls so I can't really load the videos easily to see what spots we're talking about.

Rob

Ok, reloaded, 100% agree. Everyone listen to fnup here.

Either way, I think the point is correct, but the mathematical analysis supporting the point is a bit off.

Rob

at 8:32 on the right BBB has TdQd and the flop comes Tc2c2h, you go into a fairly extensive discussion of lines of play, but it seems y'all never consider donking out?

I am not saying that it is best, but has 'donking' been solved so completely that we should not consider it?

If we donk, many think it smells of a draw, and URFishy might call, and the PFR may still raise?

the way y'all seem to be approaching it is to get the 2 bets in on the flop, and then drive out the PFR equity on the turn. But this assumes the PFR bet the flop.

Now he usually will, but now always. Sometimes he might fold if we donk? IF he folds the turn UI we are probably costing ourselves money, but if the turn improves he may raise the turn, and cost us, and the ratio is higher for him to make up for his lower odds. Add that in the times he has a higher PP already, or a set, or UR fishy has a two or good hand....

Again, the x/r seems what the majority do.... just wondering out loud.

which
PS i have bart hanson (admittedly NL)in my brain saying "aren't we basically turning our hand face up and allowing them to play perfectly against us?"