---

Poker Video: No Limit Hold'Em by jk3a (Mid Stakes)

cool vid, props to carter for some good calls/solid play.

my thoughts were that the initial strategy of minraising any two and cbetting indiscriminantly was too vague against a competent opponent and the aggro three betting strategy was premature since it was never really clear what his opening range looked like.

the strategy in the second part seemed mostly geared towards the aggro image developed in the first, but that led to some spots where carter adjusted well and made some good calls in spots otherwise appropriate for barreling.

Jk3a made some good reads calling his hand exactly a few times--one was the QJ where he c/r the flop and binked the turn. I almost wanna fold the turn there w/ Ax because the turn K should look at least equally scary in terms of your range as well, yet he barrels.

funass video to watch with the hole cards exposed. Bravo

cool vid, props to carter for some good calls/solid play.

my thoughts were that the initial strategy of minraising any two and cbetting indiscriminantly was too vague against a competent opponent and the aggro three betting strategy was premature since it was never really clear what his opening range looked like.

the strategy in the second part seemed mostly geared towards the aggro image developed in the first, but that led to some spots where carter adjusted well and made some good calls in spots otherwise appropriate for barreling.

Jk3a made some good reads calling his hand exactly a few times--one was the QJ where he c/r the flop and binked the turn. I almost wanna fold the turn there w/ Ax because the turn K should look at least equally scary in terms of your range as well, yet he barrels.

funass video to watch with the hole cards exposed. Bravo

for all that watch: my apologies for overusing the words reasonable and obviously.

zed: def don't think i cbet indiscriminately and my default 3betting strategy against regs is to get in the 15-25% range early and adjust accordingly. thanks for watching and the other nice comments.

cheers

At 39min you say his 3bet with KJ on J86r is reasonable, but against your image wouldn't it be 100x better to TARP and calldown?

At 39min you say his 3bet with KJ on J86r is reasonable, but against your image wouldn't it be 100x better to TARP and calldown?

depends which way he thinks i'd spew the most

Yeah but so far in the match you had been folding a lot to his raises but pretty much spewing a stack any time he took a more passive line... Of course leveling could still go both ways, but I still think more passive line would be better and also help balance his range, so his b/calling range isn't so obviously weak. (obv there's nothing wrong with having face up weak range, if he feels comfortable playing it against you)

Definitely liked the video, seeing his holecards after the match must've been nice for you, that has to be frustrating when nothing you do seems to work. Also a good reminded that sometimes when a reg seems to be getting constantly out of line with aggression over small (like 10-20mins to the match) he could just be running like god and not soulreading you every hand.

Definitely don't like 3bet/5betting 83s in hand 1. Sure he can be 4bet bluffing early on but you just have such a terrible hand equity wise when called (same can be said for the 54s later though that one is closer with game flow).

Don't see much of a need to 3bet 83s basically ever, we can pick plenty of better hands to put in our 3bet bluffing range (even trashy stuff like Q5s, 85o, etc)

Edit: You coach him so you obviously know his game well. If you have a really strong reason to believe that with your dynamic with him, he's extremely likely to 4bet light the first time, then 3bet/5betting could be correct. Would have to be a super strong read with that particular hand though.

Definitely don't like 3bet/5betting 83s in hand 1. Sure he can be 4bet bluffing early on but you just have such a terrible hand equity wise when called (same can be said for the 54s later though that one is closer with game flow).

Don't see much of a need to 3bet 83s basically ever, we can pick plenty of better hands to put in our 3bet bluffing range (even trashy stuff like Q5s, 85o, etc)

Edit: You coach him so you obviously know his game well. If you have a really strong reason to believe that with your dynamic with him, he's extremely likely to 4bet light the first time, then 3bet/5betting could be correct. Would have to be a super strong read with that particular hand though.

but i won 1/2 the pot

Time Link to 00:34:47

u say we should donk bet more if the villan cbet is low ...
why is that ??

u say we should donk bet more if the villan cbet is low ...
why is that ??

why do you think that might be?

Its almost tilting to watch you run so bad. Everytime you try to pull off a (semi)bluff, he has it. I find it really difficult in such times and think he must be full of it and start doing things like you did - barelling the hell out of him, just to find out he is one step infront and is not intending to fold his marginal hands, yet I fail to make anything decent, lol.

Nice video, thanks!

totaly agree to alexhandros.
Why dont you take Hands like Ax, Kx to 5 bet jam? You have some blockers and i think your doing a litle bit better against his 4bet calling range.
Those two spots i really dont like.

But overall a verry good Vid

totaly agree to alexhandros.
Why dont you take Hands like Ax, Kx to 5 bet jam? You have some blockers and i think your doing a litle bit better against his 4bet calling range.
Those two spots i really dont like.

But overall a verry good Vid

for those of you who "don't like" my 5bet bluffs, please watch my short where i detail some of the math. I bet you guys would have liked them alot more if he folded.

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 28.632% 28.35% 00.28% 143691512 1426164.00 { 53s }
Hand 1: 71.368% 71.09% 00.28% 360298144 1426164.00 { 88+, AQs+, AQo+ }


---

1,294,501,824 games 0.884 secs 1,464,368,579 games/sec

Board:
Dead:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 26.749% 25.54% 01.21% 330620268 15646692.00 { A2o }
Hand 1: 73.251% 72.04% 01.21% 932588172 15646692.00 { 88+, AQs+, AQo+ }


---

486,294,336 games 0.443 secs 1,097,729,878 games/sec

Board:
Dead:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 24.886% 24.57% 00.31% 119492260 1529292.00 { 83s }
Hand 1: 75.114% 74.80% 00.31% 363743492 1529292.00 { 88+, AQs+, AQo+ }

Don't mean to continue this point and it was another wise good video, but I definitely would not have liked it any more if he folded because I think it's a pretty awful 3bet to begin with. Good vid overall, and way to not tilt after the rough bumps early on

Don't mean to continue this point and it was another wise good video, but I definitely would not have liked it any more if he folded because I think it's a pretty awful 3bet to begin with. Good vid overall, and way to not tilt after the rough bumps early on

thx, glad you liked it

"pretty awful" is very anti learning. Those words imply that the 3bet was significantly -ev which is simply not true. I could be convinced with a bunch of ev calcs and a lot of sound arguments that 3betting 83s or 35s is slightly -ev, but I doubt that's the case either.

why do you think that might be?

well, if his cbet is low that probably means that his cbet range is TP ,over pairs , strong draws
but that does not really mean that he folds his medium or low pair , or his 2 overs with a gutshot
when we only donk once .

although he does fold to a dbet when he completely misses . and he should cbet dry boards when he misses.

but again we just make him fold the bottom of his range . that part of his range does not cbet in the first place.

and when the flop goes x/x we can fire turn and be certain that he does not have strong holdings.

but again we just make him fold the bottom of his range . that part of his range does not cbet in the first place.

hugely dependent on board texture but most people that cbet 55 or lower are polarized cbettors. leading a balanced range is mainly good to take advantage of the times he has the middle part of his range

for those of you who "don't like" my 5bet bluffs, please watch my short where i detail some of the math. I bet you guys would have liked them alot more if he folded.

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 28.632% 28.35% 00.28% 143691512 1426164.00 { 53s }
Hand 1: 71.368% 71.09% 00.28% 360298144 1426164.00 { 88+, AQs+, AQo+ }


---

1,294,501,824 games 0.884 secs 1,464,368,579 games/sec

Board:
Dead:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 26.749% 25.54% 01.21% 330620268 15646692.00 { A2o }
Hand 1: 73.251% 72.04% 01.21% 932588172 15646692.00 { 88+, AQs+, AQo+ }


---

486,294,336 games 0.443 secs 1,097,729,878 games/sec

Board:
Dead:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 24.886% 24.57% 00.31% 119492260 1529292.00 { 83s }
Hand 1: 75.114% 74.80% 00.31% 363743492 1529292.00 { 88+, AQs+, AQo+ }

jk3a- the reason 53s does better against that range is because of all the combos of AQ and AK. but a lot of players flat AQ/AK in position. especially in 6max, flatting AQ in position is standard and AK is usually a flat as well.

how much will it cost to teach me how to run like dotcart..??

jk3a- the reason 53s does better against that range is because of all the combos of AQ and AK. but a lot of players flat AQ/AK in position. especially in 6max, flatting AQ in position is standard and AK is usually a flat as well.

very very std for most regs to 4bet/felt AQ/AK in a hu game, also very std with most of the 6max regs at 2/4 in steal situations

very very std for most regs to 4bet/felt AQ/AK in a hu game, also very std with most of the 6max regs at 2/4 in steal situations

yeah i understand 4bet/calling those hands in HU, but do you think that 4bet/calling AQ/AK on the button in a 6max game is good to have as a standard?

yeah i understand 4bet/calling those hands in HU, but do you think that 4bet/calling AQ/AK on the button in a 6max game is good to have as a standard?

@ 2/4 6m AK is usually the nuts in tons of cases, and it would become the super nuts from steal positions

AQ with history/dynamic can be viewed/played the same way, but likely not a default play vs unknowns, and would require a bit more history/dynamic.

@ 2/4 6m AK is usually the nuts in tons of cases, and it would become the super nuts from steal positions

AQ with history/dynamic can be viewed/played the same way, but likely not a default play vs unknowns, and would require a bit more history/dynamic.

in position in 6max it just seems much better to be flatting AK/AQ without some sort of history where you think the villain will be 5bet bluff jamming A rag hands a lot. Whether hes using small pairs or unpaired little cards like 53s as his 5bet bluffs, both of those hands do well against AK/AQ all in pre-flop, but play really bad oop post flop on tons of boards. Plus by 4betting you let him off the hook a lot by letting him fold depolarized stuff like KJ which you have dominated.

Just seems like 4betting lets him play more perfectly then flatting in position, whether hes polarized or depolarized.

yeah i understand 4bet/calling those hands in HU, but do you think that 4bet/calling AQ/AK on the button in a 6max game is good to have as a standard?

yes

yes

why

Time Link to 00:18:11

yup

excellent point. people try to reduce it to this 'i look weak' without considering the number of combos someone can valuebet. sometimes you look weak because you ARE weak because he has 100000 better easily valuebet combos.

in position in 6max it just seems much better to be flatting AK/AQ without some sort of history where you think the villain will be 5bet bluff jamming A rag hands a lot. Whether hes using small pairs or unpaired little cards like 53s as his 5bet bluffs, both of those hands do well against AK/AQ all in pre-flop, but play really bad oop post flop on tons of boards. Plus by 4betting you let him off the hook a lot by letting him fold depolarized stuff like KJ which you have dominated.

Just seems like 4betting lets him play more perfectly then flatting in position, whether hes polarized or depolarized.

It is still going to be difficult to play hands like AQ/AK IP on boards u miss vs unknowns when u have no idea of their tendencies/frequencies postflop. Do u float.. raise?.. or just play the absolute strength of ur hand?. Also when u do showdown these spots where u have flatted AK preflop and its happening with any degree of regularity it will make ur 4b range extremely polarized. I am all for flatting IP some of the time with these hands, but id say as a default 4betting is gonna be better.

It is still going to be difficult to play hands like AQ/AK IP on boards u miss vs unknowns when u have no idea of their tendencies/frequencies postflop. Do u float.. raise?.. or just play the absolute strength of ur hand?.

Well if he's unknown, you wont have any idea of their tendencies pre flop either. And if he's unknown, you wont have the sort of history/dynamic where he is going to be 5bet jam bluffing A-rag type hands either. So he will usually fold his 3bet bluffs or worse 3bet value hands like KQ/KJ, or you will be flipping or crushed when you get it in, meaning he plays pretty perfectly.

Also when u do showdown these spots where u have flatted AK preflop and its happening with any degree of regularity it will make ur 4b range extremely polarized. I am all for flatting IP some of the time with these hands, but id say as a default 4betting is gonna be better.

If he starts to think our 4bet range is extremely polarized and is likely to 5bet bluff, then why can't we depolarize it and start 4betting thinner for value?

thx, glad you liked it

"pretty awful" is very anti learning. Those words imply that the 3bet was significantly -ev which is simply not true. I could be convinced with a bunch of ev calcs and a lot of sound arguments that 3betting 83s or 35s is slightly -ev, but I doubt that's the case either.

this

jk3a puts this very diplomatically. i cringe in the same way when people say something is 'not necessary' at whatever stakes or something. folks, the threshold is 0ev and we want to see our actions fall on the high side of that line. things like 'pretty awful' or 'unnecessary' are, well, unnecessary unless they are shorthand for -ev. challenge yourselves to think in terms of expectation and ranges.

Well if he's unknown, you wont have any idea of their tendencies pre flop either. And if he's unknown, you wont have the sort of history/dynamic where he is going to be 5bet jam bluffing A-rag type hands either. So he will usually fold his 3bet bluffs or worse 3bet value hands like KQ/KJ, or you will be flipping or crushed when you get it in, meaning he plays pretty perfectly.



If he starts to think our 4bet range is extremely polarized and is likely to 5bet bluff, then why can't we depolarize it and start 4betting thinner for value?

this is basically the same as flatting sometimes when u have good reasons and not random ones.. more or less adjusting. Every time u flop nothing with no info its gonna be tricky even IP.. getting AK in is fine for ur range and likely profitable vs most regs in a steal position and takes a lot of the guess work out. I dont recommend avoiding tuff decisions just for the sake of not wanting to be put in a tuff spot, but when its fine for ur range and likely profitable I am def ok with it. Especially when u can flat at a better time with more info when ever you wish.

"pretty awful" is very anti learning. Those words imply that the 3bet was significantly -ev which is simply not true. I could be convinced with a bunch of ev calcs and a lot of sound arguments that 3betting 83s or 35s is slightly -ev, but I doubt that's the case either.

Let's say you can profitably 5bet jam junk hands on a certain frequency. For example every fourth time you get 4bet and you have air. If you start jamming significantly more frequently than that, it will most certainly not be +EV anymore. So, assuming you can only do this profitably with certain frequency, why would you ever choose to do it with 25% equity hand (83s) when you could always do it with 30% equity hands like 76s and still maintain that same frequency?

Obviously this would be ignoring gameflow totally, but I think you get enough spots where you think shoving is OK gameflow wise that you never have to shove those hands with super low equity when called. 100bb deep that extra 5% is 10bb difference when called and that's just huge.

Also same could be applied to 3betting, why would you want to 3bet hand like 83s which is in the bottom 27% percentile of the hands when you are folding sooo many hands that have more equity and better playability? Good hands to 3bet bluff with should be the bottom of your flatting range or top of your folding range, not bottom 27% of all hands.

Obviously that 83s jam very early in the match can't be "huge mistake" like someone said and I agree that it could possibly even be breakeven in direct equity, but maintaining your image for folding equity to bluffjam hands with 5-6% more equity later in the match also has some EV. In my experience especially against lower stake regs showing down 1 or 2 bluffjams has really significant effect on your FE for future jams, many regs just get scared of 4bet/bluffing and start 4b/calling way wider, which usually is an adjustment I don't want them to make because I'm a scandi, so I usually can't resist jamming.

why

people 3bet a ton and it's very +ev to 4bet those hands for value and all the other stuff you're talking about can be accomplished with a different part of your range

Let's say you can profitably 5bet jam junk hands on a certain frequency. For example every fourth time you get 4bet and you have air. If you start jamming significantly more frequently than that, it will most certainly not be +EV anymore. So, assuming you can only do this profitably with certain frequency, why would you ever choose to do it with 25% equity hand (83s) when you could always do it with 30% equity hands like 76s and still maintain that same frequency?

Obviously this would be ignoring gameflow totally, but I think you get enough spots where you think shoving is OK gameflow wise that you never have to shove those hands with super low equity when called. 100bb deep that extra 5% is 10bb difference when called and that's just huge.

Also same could be applied to 3betting, why would you want to 3bet hand like 83s which is in the bottom 27% percentile of the hands when you are folding sooo many hands that have more equity and better playability? Good hands to 3bet bluff with should be the bottom of your flatting range or top of your folding range, not bottom 27% of all hands.

Obviously that 83s jam very early in the match can't be "huge mistake" like someone said and I agree that it could possibly even be breakeven in direct equity, but maintaining your image for folding equity to bluffjam hands with 5-6% more equity later in the match also has some EV. In my experience especially against lower stake regs showing down 1 or 2 bluffjams has really significant effect on your FE for future jams, many regs just get scared of 4bet/bluffing and start 4b/calling way wider, which usually is an adjustment I don't want them to make because I'm a scandi, so I usually can't resist jamming.

opening my ranges early in the match, ie 3betting 83s has value to see how he'll be reacting to 3bets more quickly. the 4.5% diff in equity when called really doesn't matter much. I would say that unless a guy is 4betting very often, game flow becomes a fairly dominant factor for me when deciding whether to 5bet shove.

Your frequency and equities arguments are very sound in general, I think they prob just discount gameflow too much.

people 3bet a ton and it's very +ev to 4bet those hands for value and all the other stuff you're talking about can be accomplished with a different part of your range

I'm not denying 4betting AQ is +EV. it obviously is. But a major reason why it is is that he will fold a lot (bluffs and depolarized value hands). Just seems better to keep all the dominated stuff in. +EV doesnt mean optimal.

which different part of my range?

thanks for the discussion btw

this is basically the same as flatting sometimes when u have good reasons and not random ones.. more or less adjusting. Every time u flop nothing with no info its gonna be tricky even IP.. .

i dont think flatting AQ/AK as a standard before theres any 4bet/5bet dynamic in order to keep in dominated hands is a random reason. it actually seems like a pretty good reason.

i also dont think its that tricky to play AK when you dont flop an A or a K. Depending on board texture/bet sizing, you can float (though often you have the best hand so its not really a float), you can raise, ect. On a lot of boards you will fold out a ton of the hands that would have folding to your 4bet pre, so you dont lose that much FE post flop (and you gain some against his AK hands). plus you have really good implied odds for hitting an A or a K since he will bluff them.

i dont really agree with the argument that you should 4bet if you dont know his post flop tendencies. If you dont know anything about his post flop tendencies, then you likely dont know anything about his 5bet jamming tendencies either. And AK is a very good hand to use to find out about his post flop tendencies in 3bet pots.

i agree you shouldnt be doing anything for random reasons, but I disagree that starting out flatting AK/AQ is based on random reasoning. seems like 4betting because you dont know anything about him postflop is more random of a reason than the ones I presented for flatting.

btw, thanks for the discussion, Jo

good video man. i dont even play HU and find these vids so awesome to watch. tons of interesting spots. seems like i could watch and rewatch and keep finding new things to think about! cheers!

I'm not denying 4betting AQ is +EV. it obviously is. But a major reason why it is is that he will fold a lot (bluffs and depolarized value hands). Just seems better to keep all the dominated stuff in. +EV doesnt mean optimal.

which different part of my range?

thanks for the discussion btw

AT/AJ do very well against that polarized range

AT/AJ do very well against that polarized range

but not as well against the depolarized part

but not as well against the depolarized part

well of course not. It's impossible for you to prove that flatting AQ/AK is optimal. Your argument is based mostly on speculation.

well of course not. It's impossible for you to prove that flatting AQ/AK is optimal. Your argument is based mostly on speculation.

i agree. i cant prove it. but by the same token, i dont think 4betting with no reads/history can be proven to be optimal either. that doesnt mean having a discussion about is bad/we cant learn from it, does it?

i agree. i cant prove it. but by the same token, i dont think 4betting with no reads/history can be proven to be optimal either. that doesnt mean having a discussion about is bad/we cant learn from it, does it?

I think its a good discussion btw, and a good question.

I am still in the 4b camp vs total unknowns w/AK and flatting AQ.. but I am def flatting AK sometimes for sure, especially later on when I know i'm gonna gain more from it with more info. I like flatting AQ cuz u will still dominate the same parts of his range that AK would.. KQ/QJ/AJ/AT etc.. I can think of some smaller reasons, such as when u 4b someone who is planning to 3b u a lot from steal positions it may discourage him from doing it as much etc...seems like flatting AQ and 4b AK gives u a nice balance of both things.. ima think about this more good discussion

i agree. i cant prove it. but by the same token, i dont think 4betting with no reads/history can be proven to be optimal either. that doesnt mean having a discussion about is bad/we cant learn from it, does it?

again, of course not. i'm just not sure what your hoping to get out of the discussion. Most of your replies indicate that you want to convince others that flatting AQ/AK vs 3bets is optimal in a majority of situations. If this is wrong, my apologies.

However, calculating the ev of calling with those hands is nearly impossible. There are some situations where I prefer calling because I feel getting the money in is -ev, but given the rampant 3betting in today's games and the fact that calling could actually lead us to make some very -ev plays with postflop mistakes, I believe 4betting in most situations to be best. Outside of me saying that you are right, I can't imagine this 'discussion' ever ending.

again, of course not. i'm just not sure what your hoping to get out of the discussion. Most of your replies indicate that you want to convince others that flatting AQ/AK vs 3bets is optimal in a majority of situations. If this is wrong, my apologies.

However, calculating the ev of calling with those hands is nearly impossible. There are some situations where I prefer calling because I feel getting the money in is -ev, but given the rampant 3betting in today's games and the fact that calling could actually lead us to make some very -ev plays with postflop mistakes, I believe 4betting in most situations to be best. Outside of me saying that you are right, I can't imagine this 'discussion' ever ending.

I apologize if my posts came off as my trying to 'convince' others that i was right. That certainly wasnt my intention. Rather, I was trying to present the other side of the coin as well as probe for more concrete justification for 4betting than was initially presented. I feel like that leads to educational discussions where arguments against my initial opinion could be presented, resulting in my learning.

I hope Jo didnt take my posts that way as well, but if so, I apologize.

I apologize if my posts came off as my trying to 'convince' others that i was right. That certainly wasnt my intention. Rather, I was trying to present the other side of the coin as well as probe for more concrete justification for 4betting than was initially presented. I feel like that leads to educational discussions where arguments against my initial opinion could be presented, resulting in my learning.

I hope Jo didnt take my posts that way as well, but if so, I apologize.

not necessary.

Time Link to 00:25:11

Lol he said ouhhhh when he flopped 2 pair.

I feel sorry for you having to have some people trash talk certain plays (like the 83s) as if you do them every single time you get the hand against any opponent at any stakes in any game. To go from a steady 2bb/100 player to someone who can crush and have 10bb/100+ you need to rely on a lot of instinct and feel for the game/opponent. These are some of the factors i feel make coaching HU cash harder than others because u have a lot more decisions that are very marginal and i a lot harder to play without 'feel' (which is something almost impossible to teach). I think the video was very good and no matter what u played your game only tweaking certain aspects in order to counter what the opponent was doing and in turn walking off with more money than a lot of others probably would have.

I feel sorry for you having to have some people trash talk certain plays (like the 83s) as if you do them every single time you get the hand against any opponent at any stakes in any game. To go from a steady 2bb/100 player to someone who can crush and have 10bb/100+ you need to rely on a lot of instinct and feel for the game/opponent. These are some of the factors i feel make coaching HU cash harder than others because u have a lot more decisions that are very marginal and i a lot harder to play without 'feel' (which is something almost impossible to teach). I think the video was very good and no matter what u played your game only tweaking certain aspects in order to counter what the opponent was doing and in turn walking off with more money than a lot of others probably would have.

thanks man