---

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

1) was wish-n-chips a lucky nutcase? or did his "apparent random play" earn him calls and "wrong adjustments" by the other players in the game?
2)FoxwoodsFiend's play shows that if you are going to make a mistake, in most cases error on the side of aggression.
3) the Q8o hand on a 653r board...after we defend BB to a btn raiser. Can we c/r flop here as a bluff vs this opp?
4) we folded AA on a KJT9 board facing two bets. I agree it was a good turn fold in this specific case. However ussually dont we have enough two pair draws that counterfiet our opp to continue?
5) Shortly I am hoping to move up to 15/30 live. You mentioned that the SB being bigger tends to create more action. Especially from the late position players and the blinds. Do we make any adjustments from earlier positions? or do you have any other advice that may help me....ty DD..

2)FoxwoodsFiend's play shows that if you are going to make a mistake, in most cases error on the side of aggression.
3) the Q8o hand on a 653r board...after we defend BB to a btn raiser. Can we c/r flop here as a bluff vs this opp?
4) we folded AA on a KJT9 board facing two bets. I agree it was a good turn fold in this specific case. However ussually dont we have enough two pair draws that counterfiet our opp to continue?

2) Yeah, that's usually the case. The problem is, though, that you can't know if erring on the side of aggression is a bigger error. ;-) If one does the math, aggressive lines are often surprisingly effective EV-wise.

3) It's not the greatest board to fight back, in my opinion. Even though the opponent hasn't probably connected with the flop, he will also think that you haven't either, so he isn't likely to give up with Ace high etc. And even if he's giving you some credit for a hand, there aren't any hands that are just going to fold to the check-raise immediately, which makes the (semi)-bluff a bit less effective.

4) Yeah, but with bet and a raise, you can't control the amount of bets that go in. If you call two and the original raiser 3-bets, then you're in an awkward spot. Counter-feit outs are very useful when against one player when you know you're going to the showdown anyhow.

In addition to jajvirta's excellent answer I'll just touch on your 15/30 blind structure question Mickey. It really doesn't matter much from early position because you are more concerned about the guys behind you than the blinds. It's really something that pertains more often to online 6 max games that tend to have a lot of blind steal / blind defense situations. It obviously matters for the same reasons in a live game where there are frequently heads up pots between a late position stealer and a blind or both blinds, but that's not really typical at 15/30 full ring in my experience.

-DeathDonkey

I'm going to sound like a nit here, but I'm having trouble with this concept - at minute 30 1/2, Foxwoods has KsQs on the turn facing just less than 10:1 to call with the board reading AcTh2c9d and Deathdonkey says he has the right price to call with his gutshot draw. We need 10.5:1 to call, which we have in implied odds - I figure we can get 2 bets in on the river, so say we have 12:1 implied odds. The problem I have is with the outs being clean. Villian 1, the aggressor, figures to have a very strong hand such as JJ+ (according to Deathdonkey). Villian 2 could easily have a flush draw or a pair of Aces, so I assume the Ks and Qs are no good for us. We have 4 jacks as outs, but I would value them as 3 outs maximum, in which case we should fold. Again, I know I sound textbook here and I'm somehow I'm thinking about the situation wrong. I play a lot of full table, maybe 6 max concept here is different? Please help.

Hi golden dorado,

I definitely don't think this is a difference between 6 max and full ring thing, just perhaps my optimism vs. your pessimism (realism?). As you point out, we have 12:1 with implied odds, so its a clear peel if we have 4 outs, so the question is just how often do we really have the J as an out? Its pretty much impossible to answer IMO though you do have to discount it slightly. But I would say as a guess if you discount it 25% of the time you can still peel here with 3.75 outs. It's good to think about these things as you are correct there are reverse implied odds associated with catching that jack and it being no good, but to take that as an assumption I think is entirely too pessimistic.

-DeathDonkey

Thanks for the feedback. I have heard this before and I am really trying to work on it. I'll get it eventually.

By the way, I am new to this site and decided to start with the Minibet series and I have to say I am totally blown away with your analysis in these videos. Your commentary is so packed full of data that I'm probably going to have to watch the series videos at least 2 or 3 times. Thank you very much for the quality and depth and content. I can't wait to dig in further to the site, but this alone has been worth the price of admission. Fantastic. Shout out to Foxwoods too.

Thanks so much for the kind words. If you don't know, DeucesCracked has been around for about a year, and used to be primarily a limit hold'em site, so there are lots of older videos from myself, Joe Tall, and Entity that you might also like. We are still uploading some old vids from the archive in fact, so that number will grow for a bit longer, and then we'll just have to make due with the ~9 vids per week (plus stand alones!)

-DeathDonkey