---

Poker Video: No Limit Hold'Em by inavacuum (Micro/Small Stakes)

Excellent!!

I really love this video and the step by step look at how to get away from standard ABC poker at the micro's. ABC poker is great at the Micro's but there really are spots like these that come up all the time. This video is going in my Micro library and will be a good study video for anyone at the micro's IMO.

@42:42 with A9o in the BB.. This entire hand and all the explinations behind every part of it are pure gold! I really like the way you explain the differance between player types and bet size oat the river/end of the hand.

It was really cool to do this video with Inavacuum and I really like that he asked me for it.

I especially liked it because I hadn't seen the hands before we started the video, so I had all the changes in the world to say something dumb which will only make me, and with that, you guys, better.

thank you DC and inavacuum

In work, and cant use timing stamps, tho, you prob remember these hands that i have a few quick questions on......before the questions I should be adding, I liked this format, I loved how you put snappie under pressure and asked good questions, as snappie was thinking and answering i was too answering into myself, haha!!

1, first hand- triple barrel, king turn and jack river, if the river was a 2-9 would we be check/folding this? Just to clarify- We are only betting the river jack as a scare card?? If the river was another king would we check? Or bet?

2, When we flat the 3 bet with kk, whats the plans on a Axx board three way? I'm kinda meh in this spot, being OOP, I would prefer to 4 bet here and coolering the CO!

3, $12.5 on the river as a bluff, I think you get looked up a ton, but with reads vrs this player type, fair enough! Something i never tried before as a bluff! Will have to look into this!

4, last hand- 99 on 333xx, i think the river is a shove, any pocket pair snap calls imo!!! no one folds a full house, well fish anyway!

again, i really liked this format, and is this going to be a series?

Time Link to 00:03:39

I would say all A4 and A5 cominations would peel this board, especially the suited running flush + wheel + Ace-over hands.

BTW - this video is really good, Tim you are a great teacher and Snappie, you make for a great student, keep up the good work.

I would say all A4 and A5 cominations would peel this board, especially the suited running flush + wheel + Ace-over hands.

I think villain in the hand is very likely to fold or 3bet all low Ax. In fact I think he folds or 3bets all unsuited A2-A9. For suiteds he will prefer to 3bet but does have some combos in his range and those hands will peel, as you rightly point out. I didn't mention how often I think he'd be folding/3betting that portion of his range preflop in the video so you'd be right to include even more combos when analyzing the hand with the information you have.

And thank you for the encouraging words!

1, first hand- triple barrel, king turn and jack river, if the river was a 2-9 would we be check/folding this? Just to clarify- We are only betting the river jack as a scare card?? If the river was another king would we check? Or bet?

I don't want to cop out in any way but the answer is: It depends. Vs a lot of villains I simply wouldn't fire the 3rd barrel on a non-broadway river when I don't believe they'd be able to find a fold with a marginal hand. This particular villain I think would have folded to any river card that did not improve his hand as I feel he had a good understanding of how often I have to be bluffing there for his call to be profitable. As such I'd be betting any river vs that particular villain. You may ask "well how do I know the difference?" and that's a legitimate question. The answer is to use the sum of the knowledge you have. What have you seen him call down with before vs you and others? Does he view you differently to those he did or not did call down with hand X before? If you have a large sample look at his fold to river cbet %, something people rarely look at (because it requires a large sample to properly aggregate). It should be especially interesting if he has a low fold to flop and turn cbet but a high fold to river cbet. And of course we realise that fold to river cbet is not the same as fold to river bet.

2, When we flat the 3 bet with kk, whats the plans on a Axx board three way? I'm kinda meh in this spot, being OOP, I would prefer to 4 bet here and coolering the CO!

I think it's unlikely that BTN bluffs into both of us in that spot since he should expect AQ to be a large part of both ranges and CO can even have worse Ax in his range given the action and what we know about him. It is gross when you see an A high flop in this situation and have to get away from the hand but this will happen no more often than when you get all in preflop and an Ace comes on the flop when you don't want it to (only you lose more money when that happens).

again, i really liked this format, and is this going to be a series?

Thank you. There is another episode, as for anything beyond that I really can't comment at the moment, but if there is demand I will supply it.

http://www.deucescracked.com/videos/3321-Inavacuum-Yin?seek=1456

I agree that calling would look strong, but you don't really know if villain is good at hand reading. If he's value c/r'ing, he's going to shove pretty much every turn anyway. Why not at least give him a chance to continue bluffing?

http://www.deucescracked.com/videos/3321-Inavacuum-Yin?seek=1456

I agree that calling would look strong, but you don't really know if villain is good at hand reading. If he's value c/r'ing, he's going to shove pretty much every turn anyway. Why not at least give him a chance to continue bluffing?

I certainly don't think you have to raise and I don't mind calling at all, especially if there is a good chance villain will continue bluffing. In this case I didn't feel there was simply because I view his CR range in that spot as close to 100% air. Also we should realize that by raising we're not really repping much having just called the 3bet and this can induce all kinds of mistakes from the regs. I have a hand in to illustrate this point and will include it in the next episode.

I think for the people who were complaining about a lack of micro/small stake content or any sort of variety of concepts taught for them-this is exactly what we were looking for.

Thank you. There is another episode, as for anything beyond that I really can't comment at the moment, but if there is demand I will supply it.

Oh, there's demand alright. This format is amazing. Getting a great teacher like you grilling an actual player from the micro stakes really engages me a bit more than some other videos. I found myself really thinking through your questions rather than just listening passively. Also, the concept of illustrating when, and when not, to get fancy is just perfect.

Great video, guys.

Oh, there's demand alright. This format is amazing. Getting a great teacher like you grilling an actual player from the micro stakes really engages me a bit more than some other videos. I found myself really thinking through your questions rather than just listening passively. Also, the concept of illustrating when, and when not, to get fancy is just perfect.

Great video, guys.

+1

I could not agree more with this

File under...."Mentor" series?

BTW - this video is really good, Tim you are a great teacher and Snappie, you make for a great student, keep up the good work.

Thanks you. I tried to be the best student I could be in this video so it wouldnt be a disappointment. Real good to see Tim gets so many great responses about this format and I really hope he will get more DC time after this

Thank you. There is another episode, as for anything beyond that I really can't comment at the moment, but if there is demand I will supply it.

thanks for the answers

i hope theres a demand for it, i certainly want it

again, what i like abt this type of format is the tough questions u ask, the viewer answers them himself while snappie talks, then he rewinds to listen to his answer and ur answer to make sure hes on the right track!!

again thumbs up from me for more of these

Deserves an epic intro, IMO.

Nice video.

I like the question and answer style - a bit like balugaWhale or VanDweller with Veloblank. Can we have more like this - also for small stake tournaments (SNGs)?

Oh, there's demand alright. This format is amazing. Getting a great teacher like you grilling an actual player from the micro stakes really engages me a bit more than some other videos. I found myself really thinking through your questions rather than just listening passively. Also, the concept of illustrating when, and when not, to get fancy is just perfect.

Great video, guys.

+2 to this. I really like the Q&A style.

Hey inavacuum,

enjoyed the video so far, think its very good.

But can you just elaborate a little more on why check shoving the turn in the Q T hand is so bad? When you commented that the button was a habitual floater my first instinct was to check shove the turn. He's going to bet very often when we check to him, and his range is going to be very weak with a lot of floats in it. When we get called we have decent equity against anything but a boat which is very unlikely and the dead money we take down when he folds should make up for our equity disadvantage when we get it in.

The main concern I have with check shoving is that a decent handreader will put us on a lot of draws and may call with some weaker hands but it is quite credible that we want to get AK or KQ in here on the turn given that half the river cards that could come will be bad for a top pair type hand.

Really a great video, the format is just excellent and I hope there will be other episodes of that kind because it's just what we microstakes players need. A grat "Thank you" to invacuum for producing this video and to SnappieVouz for his constructive critic about DC's microstakes content.

Do you think that the play at NL10, NL25 and NL50 is comparable and that one can apply the same strategies? Or is there a large difference between NL10 and NL50, for example?

But can you just elaborate a little more on why check shoving the turn in the Q T hand is so bad? When you commented that the button was a habitual floater my first instinct was to check shove the turn. He's going to bet very often when we check to him, and his range is going to be very weak with a lot of floats in it. When we get called we have decent equity against anything but a boat which is very unlikely and the dead money we take down when he folds should make up for our equity disadvantage when we get it in.

Please leave a time-stamp or better yet, Watch this short video, and leave a time link!

That will be much easier for the coaches to find the hand and answer your questions, thanks.

Time Link to 00:16:08

I would call here as well. However, this is a spot where the recreational player slash fish shows me A-high all day long. He's simply not thinking there is no point betting A-high.

That sad.. it's still a pretty easy call IMO as there are 5 counterfeited pkt pairs, K highs that we chop with and some other random J/T highs possibly.

I enjoyed this video didn't watch the last 10 min but incase it was in there, don't freak out at me.

One thing I think videos like this needs is 25-35% of spots to be MISTAKES!!! You can show someone how to do something properly a million times but sometimes just showing them what they are doing once can make the difference.

I think you should show hands where taking a non-standard line would be bad and show you loosing the hand.

You should also show hands where a standard hand was bad and you lost the hand OR won very little compared to what you could have if you played it another way.

Some of these replay videos just make it seem like "play like this and you can never lose" and you need to also show mistakes IMO.

Nice video though, keep it up!

Time Link to 00:24:53

Not sure I agree that shoving the AA > than flatting here for a couple of reasons:

1. There are not that many draws that he can have here - maybe a couple of combos or AJ or AT for a gutshot or JTs that he maybe decides to 3bet (which is essentially a gutshot in any event since you hold AA). Given this, there is not much need to shove for protection here.

2. The chances are that he could do something spazzy with his air which must, given the stakes and your read on his check raise tendencies be greater than zero. If you flat the AA, you give him a chance to realise this "spazz value" (however minimal that is).


nice vid

Time Link to 00:28:35

I know you discussed it with Snappy - but would you mind elaborating why you think "check raising is not an option".

I agree that double barrelling here will be +EV.

However, given your read that he is very floaty, it is reasonable to assume that if you check he is going to bet with a very large percentage of his range. This will include some air (some of which is ahead of you such as Axs), some draws but it will also include made hands (Kx some pocket pairs).

Now let's think about check-shoving. Assuming your most of your outs are clean when called (which I think is reasonable with the K and 9 out and him probably being priced out of calling with most other Ax combos), you have have about 24% equity when called. If this is the case, you only need him to fold 49% of his range for a check-shove to be +EV. Your line looks super strong and I think you are going to fold out way way more than that. He will have a real hard time calling even with KQ I would think and if he would bet a hand like TT-QQ here he will fold those almost always.



If you

Time Link to 00:27:56

@INAVACUUM:

I can't see how a CR on turn would be "absolutelly ridic."

- When you mention "he will bet when we check, b/c he's a pathological floater "

In my point of view the collection of dead money outweighs the situation when we get it in behind. (still with reasonable equity though).

+ What are You planning to do when the RVR bricks off?

There's 15$ in the pot with 43,7$5 effective. Let's presume, he bets the same ammount: 11$ (which is reasonable IMO)

= 26$ in the pot
If we jam and he folds, we win 26$ right there. With the guy being a /pathological floater/ this should happen well over 50% of the time/ let's put in 50% - for the simplicity sake..

If we jam and he calls, we are almost always behind and likely up against:

Board: 9 8 K 9
Dead:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 25.909% 25.78% 00.13% 397 2.00 { QhTh }
Hand 1: 74.091% 73.96% 00.13% 1139 2.00 { 8c8d, 8c8h, 8c8s, KTs+, JcTc, Td9d, Ts9s, 9d8d, 9s8s, KTo+ }

(half the sets would raise the flop etc.)

We need 42,8% equity to get 43,75$ to be equal on the ship.

We get 25,9% equity which represents 26,5$

= we lose 43,75-26,5 = 17,25$ (50% of the time)


If my estimates are correct, we win 26$ and lose 17,25$ every time, we c/r the turn.

EDIT: formating
EDIT2: Very cool video format. Thanks!

Apologies - last post cut off trying to edit.

To sum up - Given you read, equity when called, fold equity and the possibility of getting value of a tonne of hands that will bet-fold that might fold to a double barrel (eg low pps), I prefer check-shoving here.


cheers, PS

Not sure I agree that shoving the AA > than flatting here for a couple of reasons:

1. There are not that many draws that he can have here - maybe a couple of combos or AJ or AT for a gutshot or JTs that he maybe decides to 3bet (which is essentially a gutshot in any event since you hold AA). Given this, there is not much need to shove for protection here.

2. The chances are that he could do something spazzy with his air which must, given the stakes and your read on his check raise tendencies be greater than zero. If you flat the AA, you give him a chance to realise this "spazz value" (however minimal that is).


nice vid

sorry just noticed that you responded to this higher in the thread

Time Link to 01:02:24

given his passiveness, do you think you could get away with betting a little bigger on the turn (say 11 or so) to set up stacks for river shove?

Some of these replay videos just make it seem like "play like this and you can never lose" and you need to also show mistakes IMO.

Nice video though, keep it up!

This is a fair point. The HH line-up for next episode is more or less solid now, and Hero doesn't win them all, but this is something I'll give more attention to for future videos.

But can you just elaborate a little more on why check shoving the turn in the Q T hand is so bad?

I'll use this reply to deal with the questions about CRing that turn, rather than replying to both of you individually. I should have gone into more depth about why I don't like a CR in the video so thanks for pointing the spot out.

First off, although he has a large number of floats in his range he also a number of legitimate made hands (like the one he ended up having, and better). If he has one of those he may choose to check back the turn specifically to avoid the CR when he knows I'm likely to CR often, his hand can't stand it and is only likely to get 2 streets of value in the first place and maybe I'll bluff my missed draws on a blank river. If he does check back the turn this is a big problem for us because he now just calls on a river that helps us (or worse, folds) and on a river that doesn't help us we have close to no fold equity. I do think however that I can move him off the majority of his weak made hands if I bet almost all rivers whether I get there or not. He likes to float but he's not a station - he realizes that, for example, KT is no good vs a river bet. Then we have the issue that he will do some hand reading if we do CR the turn and may come to the conclusion that the only possible range we'd CR would be draws and maybe some air and this may actually make him get it in even lighter than TP. If I'm checking the turn with a weak made hand he'll expect me to call, not CR, and he will rule out hands as strong as AK that he expects to always bet the turn.

given his passiveness, do you think you could get away with betting a little bigger on the turn (say 11 or so) to set up stacks for river shove?

I certainly don't mind that. The problem in my eyes is that his range is so incredibly wide that a larger bet may just force him to fold everything but his range of middling pairs. I think he'll call the smaller bet with his middling pairs and also all of his overcards and any draws and then also call a river bet with those middling pairs, leaving us earning more overall. I'm not sure he calls a river shove after a larger turn bet with a good % of his weaker pairs. If I had more information I could easily decide on taking a different sizing line.

Do you think that the play at NL10, NL25 and NL50 is comparable and that one can apply the same strategies? Or is there a large difference between NL10 and NL50, for example?

I have never put in a significant volume at NL10, nor do I have any NL10 students (for obvious reasons) so I can't give you a definintive answer. My feeling would be that NL10 would be quite different to NL50. Though site by site the skill gap can vary wildly between the stakes.

There are some good regulars at 10nl where you can try it against.
I know some solid players at 10nl and I have spend a lot of time at 10nl myself, not saying I was super solid when I played 10nl but I was capable of folding.

You really need to observe, like Tim says later in the video. I would say that most regulars at 10nl are not capable of hand reading, but I wouldn't say that nobody is capable of folding or hand reading.

This ratio changes at 25nl from my expierence.

thanks for the reply

...legitimate made hands (like the one he ended up having, and better). If he has one of those he may choose to check back the turn specifically to avoid the CR when he knows I'm likely to CR often, his hand can't stand it and is only likely to get 2 streets of value in the first place and maybe I'll bluff my missed draws on a blank river.

Agreed - if your read is that he knows you will be check raising the turn with a decent regularity. But will a "pathalogical floater" really be thinking on this level?

My thinking was that if he loved floating as you say, he will be floating all sorts of hands like AT, AQ, QT, 67s, Axs, 22-77. What will he be doing with those hands if you check to him? Checking back and hoping to get to showdown/ hit the gutshot on the turn? Or taking a stab. If he is taking a stab at a large percentage of these hands surely there is more value in check raising thereby earning a bit more from this (significant) air portion of his range (remembering of course that you only need approx 50% FE to break even on the C/R).

Then we have the issue that he will do some hand reading if we do CR the turn and may come to the conclusion that the only possible range we'd CR would be draws and maybe some air and this may actually make him get it in even lighter than TP. If I'm checking the turn with a weak made hand he'll expect me to call, not CR, and he will rule out hands as strong as AK that he expects to always bet the turn.

Agreed that you are to an extent polarizing your range here if you check raise. But if he is worried about us check-raising, doesn't that mean that he won't bet these hands at all? And that his range is therefore polarised between strong made hands and air which must, because of his floating tendencies be skewed more towards air?


I dunno, I think it is a really interesting spot. I think it must boil down to the amount that he is betting the turn rather than checking it back with hands like JTs, and 22-77.

Inavacuum and SnappieVouz, just wanted to add to what everyone else is saying - this is great content for micro, and the format is excellent. Barreling is something I struggle with, and you gave me some great ideas to think about. Raising the turn against thinking regs seems so ldo after you pointed it out, so I'm feeling pretty dense never to have thought about it quite that way.

Oh, and immediately after watching, I trapped a good reg in a spot where I flatted pf a hand that I would've auto 3bet normally, and got to play for stacks (and win) in a spot that (knowing his hand now) I would've only won his pf open raise - thanks for getting me to think!!!

I dunno, I think it is a really interesting spot. I think it must boil down to the amount that he is betting the turn rather than checking it back with hands like JTs, and 22-77.

I think a key point is that yes, he will bet/fold the hands you mention, but if we bet he will also often float again with the intent to bet most rivers. This means we get him to shove as a bluff when we hit (as happened) and he will also fold those hands when we bet the river ourselves if we need to bluff and we earn the same as when he folds to a turn CR, the difference being he doesn't level himself into a light call as often.

I think a key point is that yes, he will bet/fold the hands you mention, but if we bet he will also often float again with the intent to bet most rivers. This means we get him to shove as a bluff when we hit (as happened) and he will also fold those hands when we bet the river ourselves if we need to bluff and we earn the same as when he folds to a turn CR, the difference being he doesn't level himself into a light call as often.

I think this is the best explanation you've given, it makes a lot of sense.

Still don't think a turn check/shove is ridiculous though, I think its definitely +EV.

Very nice video, looking forward to next week. And thanks for the responses!

Extremely good video.

I think a key point is that yes, he will bet/fold the hands you mention, but if we bet he will also often float again with the intent to bet most rivers. This means we get him to shove as a bluff when we hit (as happened) and he will also fold those hands when we bet the river ourselves if we need to bluff and we earn the same as when he folds to a turn CR, the difference being he doesn't level himself into a light call as often.

This is great plan IMO.

- providing we got the info he floats 2 barrels often enough

Thanks for clarification

Time Link to 00:35:45

If the villain shoves over our reraise are we folding here? Running some equity calcs vs his range it looks like we're around 33% equity at best.

However we'll have to call around $27 to win $71. Which means we need around 38% equity. So our 33% equity is close. If we throw in a single bluff we get real close to 38%. He may be never bluffing here though.

Also, awesome video so far! Great job guys. Definitely digging the format.

If the villain shoves over our reraise are we folding here? Running some equity calcs vs his range it looks like we're around 33% equity at best.

However we'll have to call around $27 to win $71. Which means we need around 38% equity. So our 33% equity is close. If we throw in a single bluff we get real close to 38%. He may be never bluffing here though.

Also, awesome video so far! Great job guys. Definitely digging the format.

Vs this particular villain I would call. I think he has multiple bluffs in his range. Vs some other villains I'd be folding.

Vs this particular villain I would call. I think he has multiple bluffs in his range. Vs some other villains I'd be folding.

Thanks for the response. That makes sense. So basically it comes down to whether or not the villain has any bluffs in his range here. That's what the equity calcs seem to show when I was playing with ranges.

this is one of the best videos i've seen on DC. nice job guys.

I think this is the best explanation you've given, it makes a lot of sense.

Still don't think a turn check/shove is ridiculous though, I think its definitely +EV.

Very nice video, looking forward to next week. And thanks for the responses!

+1

I hope to see many more of these in the future. Excellently done guys.

My bet river is 36% this month and I'm one of the tighter value bettors imo.

My bet river is 36% this month and I'm one of the tighter value bettors imo.

You may value bet tight, but how often do you bluff? 36% is 36% whether you feel you're tight or not. Also, better players can have a larger bet river % and get away with it because they are capable of picking the best spots to bluff in and those spots can arise often. A weaker player will bluff with little regard to whether or not it makes sense.

Time Link to 00:51:07

vs a typical "pot odds" TAG, what bet size would you use on the river in the A9 hand?

<edit> Maybe I v-bet ligher and bluff rivers more than I think I do. It's all relative I guess but I'm trying to find even more spots to get to where the people are with the upward sloping non-sd winning lines are.

I have just watched this vid and was very impressed how the format was laid out and the content, i think inavacuum did a great job in setting out and presentation i am a big fan of this type of video, also it was great to watch SnappieVouz be put in some tough spots 5 stars for this and please make some more.

Jacob

vs a typical "pot odds" TAG, what bet size would you use on the river in the A9 hand?

$24.

Time Link to 00:31:19

the QThh hand. If you had AK or KQ are you playing flop and turn the same and shoving river?
I would be surprised to see villain call down with a worse hand considering we were UTG cbet 3way on draw heavy flop and barrel a bad 'barrel' card then shove river when flush card hits. The reason I assume you would play it this way is you comment about villain maybe putting us on a weak K like KT, implying you shove the river w better K's.

Time Link to 00:42:05

My question is if were happy shipping over his cold 4bet range, it seems we would have been delighted back raise 4betting over his squeeze range. KQs would actually be at the top of our range unless villain thinks we were flatting as a trap because we know how often he squeezes. I think if we flat, he squeezes, button folds and we small 4bet, his range for getting it would be quite wide because he might think we are standing up to his aggression w small PP's or another relatively weak hand, or just 4bet bluffing. I am kinda leaning towards flatting this hand and back-raising if BB squeezes, but maybe im not looking at the whole scope of this hand.

the QThh hand. If you had AK or KQ are you playing flop and turn the same and shoving river?
I would be surprised to see villain call down with a worse hand considering we were UTG cbet 3way on draw heavy flop and barrel a bad 'barrel' card then shove river when flush card hits. The reason I assume you would play it this way is you comment about villain maybe putting us on a weak K like KT, implying you shove the river w better K's.

Given what we know about this villain I'd be happy to c/c most Kx on the river, the strength of our Kx becomes less important when his range is so skewed towards bluffs.

My question is if were happy shipping over his cold 4bet range, it seems we would have been delighted back raise 4betting over his squeeze range. KQs would actually be at the top of our range unless villain thinks we were flatting as a trap because we know how often he squeezes. I think if we flat, he squeezes, button folds and we small 4bet, his range for getting it would be quite wide because he might think we are standing up to his aggression w small PP's or another relatively weak hand, or just 4bet bluffing. I am kinda leaning towards flatting this hand and back-raising if BB squeezes, but maybe im not looking at the whole scope of this hand.

The issue I have is that I think his range for stacking off is lighter when we call and backraise than when we 3bet and shove but I don't actually think his squeezing range and his cold 4betting range in this particular spot vary too much. I don't mind taking the backraise line, it's a line I'd often take with a 99-AA, AQ type hand, though I probably shove rather than small 4bet - as I do expect to get looked up fairly light. Here's an example of a hand played that way vs a villain I view as similar to the villain in the hand in question. The reason I slightly prefer the backraise here is that 99 does somewhat better vs what I percieve his range to be than a hand like KQ and I also expect in this particular instance for the BTN to call any squeeze but not be able to call a shove when he does this, leaving more money in the pot.

Full Tilt Poker $100.00 No Limit Hold'em - 6 players
The Official DeucesCracked.com Hand History Converter

Bolle Berto (CO): $186.05
NiceCallPre (BTN): $100.00
Hero (SB): $100.00
Fishfood4U (BB): $98.50
Daquinpe (UTG): $276.45
HyperAggrDonk (MP): $101.00

Pre Flop: ($1.50) Hero is SB with 9 9
2 folds, Bolle Berto raises to $3.50, 1 fold, Hero calls $3, Fishfood4U raises to $14, Bolle Berto calls $10.50, Hero raises to $100, Fishfood4U calls $84.50 all in, 1 fold

Flop: ($211.00) T J 3

Turn: ($211.00) 7

River: ($211.00) K

Final Pot: $211.00
Hero shows 9 9
Fishfood4U shows 6 6
Hero wins $208.00
(Rake: $3.00)

Time Link to 00:07:33

I have a couple of questions about how this is played.
1> How do we proceed if he flats our reraise?
2> Would you say that flatting Villains raise is stronger than reraising him again. i.e. using your logic that he is never raising here with a QX or 22 then why would we?
3>If we know he is going to stab at this pot what do you think about check raising the flop?

Also which deity is the preferred deity of choice in order to flop quads? Sure Thor has a hammer but Jesus was a carpenter so im sure he knows a few counter hammer manouvers

I have a couple of questions about how this is played.
1> How do we proceed if he flats our reraise?
2> Would you say that flatting Villains raise is stronger than reraising him again. i.e. using your logic that he is never raising here with a QX or 22 then why would we?
3>If we know he is going to stab at this pot what do you think about check raising the flop?

Also which deity is the preferred deity of choice in order to flop quads? Sure Thor has a hammer but Jesus was a carpenter so im sure he knows a few counter hammer manouvers

1. Shut down because I don't believe he'd fold anything often enough.

2. A couple of points on this. A) flatting is dangerous because our hand is so vulnerable. His raising range is almost exclusively air and almost all of that air will be dangerous for our hand. B) the fact that our line makes little sense almost as much as his doesn't matter because he can't do anything about it. He won't reraise us again with air, which is close to 100% of his range. He has the "raise dry flops lol easy money" move in his arsenal but when it doesn't work there is no Plan B. This is not true for everyone, as we saw with the 99 hand, some people WILL ninja reraise us when we rep air (which is a good reason not to do it vs them), but not this guy - he's too limited.

3. CRing will likely produce the same results, but is perhaps a little less credible (which probably doesn't matter at all). If in monetary terms it's roughly the same I'd rather not give him the option to check back with hands that do well equity-wise vs us.

You do know Thor also has a chariot pulled by GOATS, right?

This video kinda sucked.





I mean, everyone knows that Greek mythology pwns Norse. Hopefully Ep 2 won't make the same mistake and I'll be able to focus on the poker.

sorry, if I remember correctly I believe Tim did talk about Thor in the second episode,
i suggest you don't watch it or become open minded about all mythology out there

Watched this video yesterday morning.

Then yesterday afternoon I flopped Quads on a TTQ board and decided to go with an unconventional line and raise the flop. It allowed me to still get 3 streets of value against KK but had I raised the turn instead, villain might have just given it up on the turn.

So Thank You Yin and Yang for some different thought processes that I would not normally have thought of.

Would be nice if you showed a few hands where you lost as well as all of the ones where you won though.

Time Link to 00:16:38

KJ hand:
Against 77- and a 3 we should check-call. If he has Ace high we should bet(unless he will hero call too much Ace highs). Does 77- and a 3 really out weigh the number of Ace high combos he can have here, or is it the opposite? Also, how often does he check a gut shot on turn? Thanks, Yojimgari

Time Link to 00:42:14

KQ hand:
KQs has less equity to call an all-in than 99 does, after we back 4bet small. But do our blockers make up for this? What about back 4betting all-in? Thanks, Yojimgari

Time Link to 00:51:43

A9 hand:
I like a 70%(maybe 65%?) pot bet on the river. He won't fold a flush or a straight. We are trying to get him to fold a set, two pair, over pair, and top pair. Those hands may crying call a smaller bet. Shouldn't we bet 65%-70% pot? Thanks, Yojimgari

Time Link to 00:56:59

T7 hand:
I wonder about floating the turn again? Sometimes he will triple barrel, which lowers the value of floating. Although we lose more money to a straight/set if we raise-fold the turn, instead of calling and folding the river. On the other hand, once we raise and villain calls, we can think that he will generally be folding the river, so maybe raising the turn to shove all(or nearly all?) rivers is best?

Great video! Please continue with the hand history format. Please do some 25nl 6max rush videos. Thanks, Yojimgari

KJ hand:
Against 77- and a 3 we should check-call. If he has Ace high we should bet(unless he will hero call too much Ace highs). Does 77- and a 3 really out weigh the number of Ace high combos he can have here, or is it the opposite? Also, how often does he check a gut shot on turn?

He's betting far more than just A high and counterfeit pairs, so yes the combos are in our favour, especially when he won't bet all of his Ax combos. I have no idea how often he checks a gutshot on the turn and in all likelihood neither does he.

KQ hand:
KQs has less equity to call an all-in than 99 does, after we back 4bet small. But do our blockers make up for this? What about back 4betting all-in?

I've dealt with this extensively, if you read through the past replies you should find the answer you're looking for.

A9 hand:
I like a 70%(maybe 65%?) pot bet on the river. He won't fold a flush or a straight. We are trying to get him to fold a set, two pair, over pair, and top pair. Those hands may crying call a smaller bet. Shouldn't we bet 65%-70% pot?

I think you're missing the point about our reads on the villain and villain coming to the conclusion that we are never bluffing ever. If this is the case, which it is, it's far more +EV for us to make this tiny bluff that doesn't have to work as often as a larger bet, but it will always work given the conditions we've outlined. Vs a different opponent I would have bet bigger.

T7 hand:
I wonder about floating the turn again? Sometimes he will triple barrel, which lowers the value of floating. Although we lose more money to a straight/set if we raise-fold the turn, instead of calling and folding the river. On the other hand, once we raise and villain calls, we can think that he will generally be folding the river, so maybe raising the turn to shove all(or nearly all?) rivers is best?

I would agree that raising the turn to shove almost all rivers is best. Which is why we did that.

Time Link to 00:08:36

Question about the 44 hand.

Recap: Hero raises to 44 in sb, bb calls. Hero c-bets on QQ2 and BB raises to 6. Hero reraises to 14.

Inavacuum, you say that villain isn't repping anything credible when he raises us on that board. But isn't is also the case that we are not really repping anything when we reraise him on that board. So this move becomes a game of chicken where both players know that opponent often doesn't have anything here but you're basically asking him if he's got the balls to come over the top of you again.

Which seems fine here as you mention that villain is a tight TAG. But what do you do in this spot against different player types? Would you do this against a player who was fairly loose/aggro? Are there any kinds of players who you just fold to the reraise here?

Inavacuum, you say that villain isn't repping anything credible when he raises us on that board. But isn't is also the case that we are not really repping anything when we reraise him on that board. So this move becomes a game of chicken where both players know that opponent often doesn't have anything here but you're basically asking him if he's got the balls to come over the top of you again.

Correct.

what do you do in this spot against different player types? Would you do this against a player who was fairly loose/aggro? Are there any kinds of players who you just fold to the reraise here?

I wouldn't rebluff someone I thought was going to play back (assuming we have 44 still) or who I thought was capable of raising for value to induce a bluff from me. Those player types, especially the latter, require a little more finesse. As for folding to the raise, the most obvious candidate for this would be the loose passive low AF category of fish.

i love the video, thanks fellas

Correct.



I wouldn't rebluff someone I thought was going to play back (assuming we have 44 still) or who I thought was capable of raising for value to induce a bluff from me. Those player types, especially the latter, require a little more finesse. As for folding to the raise, the most obvious candidate for this would be the loose passive low AF category of fish.

Thanks for the reply Inavacuum. I've a couple of more questions about the 44 hand and they're kind of related to the 99 hand where you play the nuts similarly to induce a bluff from a laggy thinking player.

For the 44 hand (Recap: Hero raises 44 in sb, bb calls. Hero c-bets 2 on QQ2 and BB raises to 6. Hero reraises to 14):
1) What do we do do if villain clicks it back to us here? In the 99 hand where we had the nuts, we clicked it back to induce a shove because we look bluffy. In the 44 hand, If villain clicks it back here after we reraise, is he still repping nothing, and if so do we shove?
2) How do we approach this hand if we have a hand with a bit more value/less vulnerable. We c-bet and BB raises to 6. What would we do in this spot with hands like AQ, 99, KK. Does our approach change for each of these hands? If we are raising vs this opponent as a bluff because we think he always has air, do we call with stronger hands and hope he will bluff again at a later street?

Also, I'll echo what other people have said. I really enjoyed this video and found the format really good.

1) What do we do do if villain clicks it back to us here? In the 99 hand where we had the nuts, we clicked it back to induce a shove because we look bluffy. In the 44 hand, If villain clicks it back here after we reraise, is he still repping nothing, and if so do we shove?
2) How do we approach this hand if we have a hand with a bit more value/less vulnerable. We c-bet and BB raises to 6. What would we do in this spot with hands like AQ, 99, KK. Does our approach change for each of these hands? If we are raising vs this opponent as a bluff because we think he always has air, do we call with stronger hands and hope he will bluff again at a later street?

We don't believe villain is capable of reraising us a bluff, so we fold, even to a clickback. If we have a stronger hand, it depends how strong. I'd be quite likely to call with most of the hands you mention since they are not nearly as vulnerable to his bluffing range as 44 is. Again, this is for that villain in particular.

In the A9 hand at 42:30...

Recap: Hero has Ac9s in the BB. SB opens, BB calls. Flop: 2h5c6c. Villain bets 2. Hero calls. Turn is 3h. Villain bets 4 into 7. Hero raises to 12. Villain calls. River is Kc.

In the video (around 49:00) you say that villain is the type of player where if we shove on the river here he could conclude that our range is either flush or we were bluffing the turn.

But do we really play a flush draw like this. I could see us raising a heart draw on the turn when we turn extra equity with hands like heart overcards or heart straight draws.

But with a club flush draw, which is the one that got there on the river, are we calling the flop, and then raising the turn? If he's only going to put us on flush or bluff there, is a bluff much more likely?

In the QT hand at ~25:40...

Recap: Hero is UTG w QhTh. Hero raises, MP and BTN call. Flop is 9h8cKh. Hero bets 4.5, MP folds, BTN calls. Turn is 9c. Hero bets 11, BTN calls. River is 4h. Hero checks, villain shoves, Hero calls. Villain shows TdTs.

In the video (around 29:50) you ask what does our hand look like to villain? And put our perceived range as air, hands like QT(clubs?), QJ, JT, even weak K hands that we won't shove the river with because they won't get called by worse. And you say that villain is good enough to know that.

You also say that you don't see anything bad about his play. Can you explain this a bit more? Given that he shows up with TT here I don't see how his river shove to turn his hand into a bluff is good.

If he puts us on the range mentioned above... TT has good showdown value - he beats our missed draws, which we will fold to the shove anyway. Also, when we check the river there with a lot of our Kx range, where we know a 3rd barrel can't get called by worse, aren't we checking to catch bluffs rather than to check-fold. So he can expect us to fold our bricked draws, check-call our stronger Kx hands and maybe fold some of our weaker Kx hands.

In the A9 hand at 42:30...

Recap: Hero has Ac9s in the BB. SB opens, BB calls. Flop: 2h5c6c. Villain bets 2. Hero calls. Turn is 3h. Villain bets 4 into 7. Hero raises to 12. Villain calls. River is Kc.

In the video (around 49:00) you say that villain is the type of player where if we shove on the river here he could conclude that our range is either flush or we were bluffing the turn.

But do we really play a flush draw like this. I could see us raising a heart draw on the turn when we turn extra equity with hands like heart overcards or heart straight draws.

But with a club flush draw, which is the one that got there on the river, are we calling the flop, and then raising the turn? If he's only going to put us on flush or bluff there, is a bluff much more likely?

I view villain as a good player, surprisingly good actually. This is why I think the river bluff size will work. It's also why I think he can put a flush in my range if I did shove the river and raise the turn rather than flop. Obviously this doesn't make a whole lot of sense if villain is HUDBot #501,602,301.

If he puts us on the range mentioned above... TT has good showdown value - he beats our missed draws, which we will fold to the shove anyway. Also, when we check the river there with a lot of our Kx range, where we know a 3rd barrel can't get called by worse, aren't we checking to catch bluffs rather than to check-fold. So he can expect us to fold our bricked draws, check-call our stronger Kx hands and maybe fold some of our weaker Kx hands.

I think he rightly expects me to be able to fold all my Kx because he knows that I know against a standard range (which he is not in possession of) it's not going to be profitable as all Kx play much the same against the river shoving range of BTN. He doesn't know that I think he's floating so often (or I wouldn't have played the hand the way I did) and if that's the case his play becomes pretty good if he can expect me to fold everything he beats as well as all my Kx, of which I have less combos when I don't bet the river - leaving me with more of the ones that are more likely to fold (even though I've said I view most Kx as the same vs his shoving range villain probably knows people will still fold KJ more than AK in my spot).

Cool video that last hand was interesting,
any reads on what villain is doing with overpairs on all streets?
Is he raising your donk on the flop? are you calling on and check folding which turns?
or are you just folding flop because he is only raising flop with hands that you are drawing to two outs against?
Cheers,
BEN

Cool video that last hand was interesting,
any reads on what villain is doing with overpairs on all streets?
Is he raising your donk on the flop? are you calling on and check folding which turns?
or are you just folding flop because he is only raising flop with hands that you are drawing to two outs against?
Cheers,
BEN

He's calling with all his overpairs for the most part. He might raise the river with KK+ and better, he might also raise the flop with KK+. If he raises the flop we'd have to strongly consider ditching the hand because of how passive villain is.

I like this coaching, it's calm, and very easy to follow. Awesome video. I really liked a lot of these plays.

wicked video. Love the style

Any more episodes?

Any more episodes?

Be on the lookout next season

Great video. Thank you guys. I like your style and it's also "slow enough" so I have time think what would be my own moves in those situations.

Time Link to 00:03:26

Q6 hand (3barrel):
when we barrel the K we basically only rep Kx. And if we had Kx we would not 3barrel knowing that the other dude has some weakish hand. I guess it still works cause they just fold but a smart player will be aware of his weak perceived range and also knows that we would check back the turn with TT or 8x, so I think by checking back the turn and betting the river we actually sell a hand that wants thin value from 8x 77 a lot better which doesnt mean that you actually get the folds.

Even though the 3barrel might work a lot vs 77 type of hands i still dont like it cause it is totally unbalanced. Why would we ever bet 3 times when we know he only has a weak pair for value and then 16 into 20 on the river?

Time Link to 00:07:31

44 hand:

So if his raise on the flop reps absolutely zero your 3bet actually reps less than that. I mean , yeah it is kind of tough to try to get to SD with 44 here oop but why would we ever 3bet for value here knowing he bluffs 80-100 %. Now it still probably works cause people won't shove cause they don't think about all these things but if his flopraise only can be a bluff your 3bet is the bluffiest line ever.

Time Link to 00:24:54

AA (induce c/r)

I like how you played it pre and even though it is hard to imagine he keeps bluffing i still think flatting is better because:

- he reps Kx or better and you get the money in anyway on later streets
- if he has air he might try to bluff you off JJ or Qx even if it is only 10 % of the time because you would not really bet this on the flop, but maybe in the heat of the fight he doesnt think about this
- no need for us to rep JT and get a call of Qx cause Qx doesnt c/r flop, i know you did not stated this as a reason

- otoh we get it in vs his JT, hm i guess it s really close

AA hand (same timelink as above)

you say you would be much more inclined to 4bet AQ preflop vs him. Can you explain why? I was thinking about this lately and i came with calling AQ cause i cant call a 5bet and why turning it into a bluff, i might aswell you know 4bet 53o.
I guess there is also merit in just taking it down pre giving his aggro postflopstyle and we only flop 30 % but hey you really dont need AQ then imo.

Time Link to 00:35:30

This hand was really nice because it shows that people take different lines with bluffs compared to their value hands.

- i can see him rather calling with an overpair vs your donkbet
- i can see you not leading a set here obv, and not bet/3bet 77

I still like the donk/3bet a lot and I am always unsure in these spots in terms of leading or c/r ... what if he calls and i brick. But leading leads to less tougher spots as i just learned although it would be a rly nice spot for him to shove A high but nobody does that and so do i but if you really think about it you end up with figuring out that a bet/3bet can only be a draw here and Ahigh beats these.

Maybe I watched too much Grindcore Btw where is he? Doesnt look like there will be another episode of TTRL?

Q6 hand (3barrel):
when we barrel the K we basically only rep Kx. And if we had Kx we would not 3barrel knowing that the other dude has some weakish hand. I guess it still works cause they just fold but a smart player will be aware of his weak perceived range and also knows that we would check back the turn with TT or 8x, so I think by checking back the turn and betting the river we actually sell a hand that wants thin value from 8x 77 a lot better which doesnt mean that you actually get the folds.

Even though the 3barrel might work a lot vs 77 type of hands i still dont like it cause it is totally unbalanced. Why would we ever bet 3 times when we know he only has a weak pair for value and then 16 into 20 on the river?

I think it is a mistake to try and be balanced vs a NL50 reg. He will fold less often vs a line where we actively try and rep a thin value hand simply because, although he is aware of what cards we may want to bluff, he's still playing off his own hand strength. He is a lot more comfortable folding a bluffcatcher on the river vs a 3barrel than deciding what our range for going for thin value on the river is after pot controling the turn.

Now it still probably works cause people won't shove cause they don't think about all these things but if his flopraise only can be a bluff your 3bet is the bluffiest line ever.

You are correct and also answered any questions in the process. It doesn't matter that we're repping a bluff because his gameplan does not include continuing beyond his flop raise.

I still like the donk/3bet a lot and I am always unsure in these spots in terms of leading or c/r ... what if he calls and i brick. But leading leads to less tougher spots as i just learned although it would be a rly nice spot for him to shove A high but nobody does that and so do i but if you really think about it you end up with figuring out that a bet/3bet can only be a draw here and Ahigh beats these.

I don't think we should lead with only draws - do you? On many boards a lead can rep more hands than a CR where villain will be inclined to put us on a draw if possible and take what he percieves to be the appropriate action if we did have a draw, which usually involves calling and waiting for blanks. I find leading a wide range allows us to more easily take control of the hand.

Re Grindcore, I have no idea. I would recommend asking in the R&D forum.

I don't think we should lead with only draws - do you?

I am not saying that. I said bet/3bet is only draws. A bet can be a draw or medium hand, rarely a set. But you dont 3bet the medium hands.

I am not saying that. I said bet/3bet is only draws. A bet can be a draw or medium hand, rarely a set. But you dont 3bet the medium hands.

So a lead can not be a strong hand? If your opponent thinks you only bet/3bet draws, should you not bet/3bet strong made hands?

Be on the lookout next season

Woohoo!

So a lead can not be a strong hand? If your opponent thinks you only bet/3bet draws, should you not bet/3bet strong made hands?

Your opponent doesn't think that. That's why you dont have to make that adjustment. I like this line because most people will not figure it out. I didnt say the line is bad. It is just polarized but that's ok cause people who raise donkbets here very likely will not know that. And if you donk a lot of weakish hands and GSs than leading with a strong hand makes sense, sure. Or if your opponent floats your donkbets a lot and then bets overcards on the turn cause he puts you on a weak small pair, but these are all adjustments. This is an unknown. You don't know if he floats you or puts you on 67s. So the standard is to check here with a set imo.

Time Link to 00:25:50

why fold AQ pf IP when he is 3bet happy? aren't we ahead of his range?

why fold AQ pf IP when he is 3bet happy? aren't we ahead of his range?

eduardoaki he said "four bet", not "fold it" - you might have misheard it?

Time Link to 00:34:35 - I think a C/R is always better here, on a 3 diamonds turn, obviously check fold, however thats such a small part of the turn cards that can come that it makes the example seem better than it truely is. If you c/r and get called you can always bet any club, Ace, 2, 7, on the turn as well.

At the same time I like this line IF you know he will raise donks with marginal TP / 2 overcard type hands, however, how do you balance this? Always donking sets too? Surely against these regs they will come to know that you are always donk/stacking off with draws/sets and adjust - by simply not raising donk bets at all, or only with hands that have you crushed.

adjust - by simply not raising donk bets at all, or only with hands that have you crushed.

I would absolutely love it a reg made that adjustment against me.

Time Link to 00:11:36

Don't you think leading is better, though because we let him raise us and keep raising turn + river and get cards to improve while we rep a weak range? On this flop, if we 4-bet, he'd probably give us credit for the monster but if we lead/call and c/c turn, we can get potentially more value. What do you think?

Don't you think leading is better, though because we let him raise us and keep raising turn + river and get cards to improve while we rep a weak range? On this flop, if we 4-bet, he'd probably give us credit for the monster but if we lead/call and c/c turn, we can get potentially more value. What do you think?

The whole point is that with gameflow this particular villain won't give us credit for a monster. Vs other people with different gameflow you could play the hand a number of different ways.

Where the hell are you finding these players with such ridiculous and predictably aggressive tendencies? Basically my point is that I think these examples are super contrived.

Where the hell are you finding these players with such ridiculous and predictably aggressive tendencies? Basically my point is that I think these examples are super contrived.

On the sites I play on and the sites my students play on. If you would like a list, please do ask. Thank you for your feedback.

Time Link to 00:41:16

Yup, I've had doubts about a play I've made before against a aggro monkey in a similar situation with AQs:

(all fullstacks)CO opened to 3bb, a pretty tight reg with a very high fold to 3bet, so I didn't change my hand into a bluff and called expecting to get squeezed, the SB monkey plays a squeeze, however he plays it to 17bb, so it rather makes the cold call unprofitable, so I decided to backraise-shove my AQs with 100bb against 24bb already in the pot.

One of the best videos ever. I found the hand analysis and thought process that went into some of the decisions extremely helpful - that A9 hand was just sick - you are a witch!

Just about to download some more of your videos. If not already covered would love to see you do a video on the theory / thought process of hand reading.

Oddsoneout

Hi Inavacuum
with 44. What makes you suspect that his gameplan does "does not include continuing beyond his flop raise."?


What if the position were reversed?
Lets say you open from CO and he calls in BB, and he check-raises. Do you now flat?

and once you flat whats your plan - let says he bets out pot on A,K,J turn? what if he bets out pot on anything else lower - does it change much? are you still flatting?

In one hand I played an agro TAG villain raised me on a QQx board and then potted an A turn. I initially flatted the flop raise, but folded the turn. But we were 300BB deep... so our interpretation of this move might change based on stacks?

If he's a fish and he raises you while he's in position - do you 3B again? what if the fish is OOP?

I've once raised a fish in a situation exactly like this and he got it in with 55..

Hi Inavacuum
with 44. What makes you suspect that his gameplan does "does not include continuing beyond his flop raise."?

I say this specifically because of the ultra taggy nature of villain. Raising dry flops is something he does because it often works and he has a rudimentary understanding of why it works (villain always cbets, villain only has something 1/3 of the time). He hasn't planned out what to do if he gets reraised because invariably villain either folds or calls.

What if the position were reversed?
Lets say you open from CO and he calls in BB, and he check-raises. Do you now flat?

I don't flat with 44 because it's so easy for our hand to become dominated. I would be much more likely to flat with overs/other backdoor equity.

and once you flat whats your plan - let says he bets out pot on A,K,J turn? what if he bets out pot on anything else lower - does it change much? are you still flatting?

I very much doubt he's leading out for pot any turn. If he is, it's not particularly likely to be a bluff (if we assume we're still talking about the ultra taggy villain).

In one hand I played an agro TAG villain raised me on a QQx board and then potted an A turn. I initially flatted the flop raise, but folded the turn. But we were 300BB deep... so our interpretation of this move might change based on stacks?

The stack sizes most definitely influenced his play ("oh, we're deep, I better shovel in as much money as I can as quick as I can!")

If he's a fish and he raises you while he's in position - do you 3B again? what if the fish is OOP?

It really depends on what type of fish and what I know up to that point about their game. I could fold, reraise or call for a wide number of different reasons.

Firstable - great vid!
But I have a lot of questions : )


http://www.deucescracked.com/videos/3321-Inavacuum-Yin-and-Yang-Part-1?seek=707

How do you play AQ/TT/88 here?

http://www.deucescracked.com/videos/3321-Inavacuum-Yin-and-Yang-Part-1?seek=888

I think that he doesn’t except from us anything(especially not folding Ahigh), he probably looks at cards, at board and then he smash the random button. Maybe he is a type of player who is drawing with Ahigh(or FD or gs or runner runner trips) to the river and bluff when missed.
I don’t want to say that ch/c is bad, I want to say that I think his range is stronger than u said and contains a lot of Ax.

http://www.deucescracked.com/videos/3321-Inavacuum-Yin-and-Yang-Part-1?seek=1103

How do you play here QQ, TT-JJ, AK,AQ ? How position change it ? (let’s assume this is MP vs CO and we are OTB)
What is the good callingrange & 4bet/c range fot Referent (or even 4b/f?) preflop?
How do you play if he bets this mentioned 8$ ?
How gertjan66 should play here? cbet/c or cbet/f?

http://www.deucescracked.com/videos/3321-Inavacuum-Yin-and-Yang-Part-1?seek=1403

What if we have here AQ, QJs,JJ,TT,air on the flop?

http://www.deucescracked.com/videos/3321-Inavacuum-Yin-and-Yang-Part-1?seek=1795

You said that checking range here on river looks weak and the top of it is a weak king. In fact I see really often that regulars check here strong kings or even 9x. So should we shove in this kind of spot if we are in position or not?

http://www.deucescracked.com/videos/3321-Inavacuum-Yin-and-Yang-Part-1?seek=2132

What if he shoves? We need ~27% EQ so we can call here:
Board: 9c 3c 4s
Dead:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 30.849% 30.37% 00.48% 21648 341.00 { 6h5h }
Hand 1: 69.151% 68.67% 00.48% 48950 341.00 { 99+, 44-33, AcKc, AcQc, AcJc, AcTc, A9s, Ac8c, Ac7c, Ac6c, Ac5c, Ac4c, Ac2c, KcQc, KcJc, KcTc, QcJc, QcTc, JcTc, 8c7c, 7c6c, 6c5c, 43s, A9o }
But what if we were 130-140bb deep? Then we can’t so what line u prefer then?
How to play here TT,98s,77?

http://www.deucescracked.com/videos/3321-Inavacuum-Yin-and-Yang-Part-1?seek=3276

I disagree with that he will not pay us on the river when the flush comes (if we call). Imo people don’t believe in backdoor flushes.
I have also a question about our perceived range on turn. From my experience most of nl50 regulars are not raising TP here, so they also don’t perceive it in other ranges. Then, for him 9Q = AQ in this spot and he can calldown us lighter. Am I leveling ? : D
Last question about this spot. If we are repping sets/str8 and mentioned TP then what if the clubs comes? Then this is the similar spot to the A9o so should we make a small depolarized bet ?

How do you play AQ/TT/88 here?

I would play TT and 88 the same way vs this particular villain. AQ I probably just CC/decide.

How do you play here QQ, TT-JJ, AK,AQ ? How position change it ? (let’s assume this is MP vs CO and we are OTB)
What is the good callingrange & 4bet/c range fot Referent (or even 4b/f?) preflop?
How do you play if he bets this mentioned 8$ ?
How gertjan66 should play here? cbet/c or cbet/f?

I am much more likely to raise TT-QQ because of the inherent vulnerability of those hands. They also fall much more into my perceived cold calling range, so I try and avoid cold calling them if viable.

Position doesn't really change the dynamic much at all, except for making the hand easier to play postflop.

Referent can call with any pair. I don't see much value in him slowplaying a huge pair. He has to have a very clear idea of my cold call/folding range for a 4bet bluff to be good. It may be ok for him to 4bet KQ+ if he's comfortable putting me on a range and happy with the idea that the person in my position may call the 4bet.

If BTN bets $8 I can't fault a jam anyway, but I would probably call to allow the Referent the biggest opportunity to make a mistake and to rep weak showdown value. I'd be a lot more likely to shove regardless of bet sizing if it was Referent betting and not BTN.

gertjan66 played it fine.

What if we have here AQ, QJs,JJ,TT,air on the flop?

I'm not sure I show up with TT-QQ in this spot often at all. AQ and QJ is a CC/decide.

You said that checking range here on river looks weak and the top of it is a weak king. In fact I see really often that regulars check here strong kings or even 9x. So should we shove in this kind of spot if we are in position or not?

Shoving would be fine as long as you're not repping a ton of bluffs. Villain plays in a way that specifically places many floats in his range on the river which means he's a lot more likely to be bluffing than some rando reg with a clean image.

What if he shoves? We need ~27% EQ so we can call here

I don't believe he shoves 9x and random 43s, I'm not sure 43s is even in his range to begin with.

I would not lead in 9x myself unless he never cbets, same for 77. TT I may lead, but I do plan to stack off with it for 100bbs if I do, so I must have some other read that allows for this.

I disagree with that he will not pay us on the river when the flush comes (if we call). Imo people don’t believe in backdoor flushes.
I have also a question about our perceived range on turn. From my experience most of nl50 regulars are not raising TP here, so they also don’t perceive it in other ranges. Then, for him 9Q = AQ in this spot and he can calldown us lighter. Am I leveling ? : D
Last question about this spot. If we are repping sets/str8 and mentioned TP then what if the clubs comes? Then this is the similar spot to the A9o so should we make a small depolarized bet ?

I think if you assume someone's range can't be that tight in that spot and you call down Qx you'll just see a set and A3 the vast majority of the time. If you have specific reads, that is different.

The board is a little too dry for a depolarised bet to be effective unless you are extremely sure in how your opponent plays his showdown value. Even if the board were wetter, you'd want to know your opponent can turn down attractive pot odds.

Thanks for fast reply. Time for EP2

Time Link to 00:30:41

Hey, I'm little late to the party lol. I have a question about villain's river play here. We view him as a "floater" but we see he was calling with some value. Do you think in villain's spot, vs. the "give up" range that you're repping, he misplayed by jamming the river rather than taking his free showdown value here? Why rep a flush with a made hand that's beating worse and not folding out better? Is it reasonable for him to think you'd fold a lot of Kx here? I guess you could have JJ/QQ as well which you'd have to fold. hmmmmm

Hey, I'm little late to the party lol. I have a question about villain's river play here. We view him as a "floater" but we see he was calling with some value. Do you think in villain's spot, vs. the "give up" range that you're repping, he misplayed by jamming the river rather than taking his free showdown value here? Why rep a flush with a made hand that's beating worse and not folding out better? Is it reasonable for him to think you'd fold a lot of Kx here? I guess you could have JJ/QQ as well which you'd have to fold. hmmmmm

It's not at all unreasonable for him to think that 1) we've checked the river with Kx and that 2) we're going to fold it to a shove. Despite his timing being bad, I don't think he made a big mistake because it's just going to work on most people most of the time. In fact the only times it won't work is when the person in our spot checking the river has the reads we have, or is someone with FPS.

It's not at all unreasonable for him to think that 1) we've checked the river with Kx and that 2) we're going to fold it to a shove. Despite his timing being bad, I don't think he made a big mistake because it's just going to work on most people most of the time. In fact the only times it won't work is when the person in our spot checking the river has the reads we have, or is someone with FPS.

Interesting, thanks for the quick response. Also, I'm liking this series so far (I watched ep 12 first and decided it's worth checking from the start).

So, I understand the logic behind the shove if he does hope to fold out better hands (although I personally prefer the bluff shove with more air floats). I guess my question to you is whether you think checking back in his spot is better or worse than shoving? Do you think it's wrong to just take your showdown value in these kind of spots?

It depends what you think your opponent is checking with and why. It's far more likely we're checking with Kx or worse to give up or get to showdown, so it doesn't matter if he sometimes wins anyway with his TT, because he can win the same amount only add in the times we then fold Kx/better than TT.

He should ask himself if he thinks we can fold Kx (he shouldn't shove vs a station) and how likely it was we were checking the river to induce. If we're unknown to him he should assume it's pretty unlikely because people tend to just fastplay when they get there in this spot expecting to get value from worse often (which isn't bad thinking at small stakes).

Great points. Thanks!

On the sites I play on and the sites my students play on. If you would like a list, please do ask. Thank you for your feedback.

always 1 person that says this in every Yin Yang episode you made havent watched it yet, will do in future. GL with the upcoming series!

Agree I like a flat after his c/r - the maniacs will usually keep firing if you just call there c/r

Very good video - best Low Stakes vid I seen thus far.

Time Link to 00:25:19

absolute terrible check raise spot

Best low stakes video i`ve seen on dc.Real eye opener, when it comes to thinking outside the box.

One of the best videos on low stakes.

watch all of them- twice!

Time Link to 00:46:49

So we are raising as a bluff/fold out hands with equity?

If villain shoves, we are folding.
If villain calls do we:
1) Shut down and put no more $$$ into pot on a / rivers, but shove "blanks"
2) Shove any river?

Should have kept watching video...I got my answer

Shove any river except for s and cards that pair the board. Why do you think that is?

Given: Our perceived range on the turn is 4x, two pairs, and / flush draws (although weighted towards 's)

River reasons not for shoving:
- It polarizes our range to include missed s, and weights our hand range away from two pairs/4x hands

River pair the board:
- our busted draw can shove
- now our perceived two pair range two pair range has to be "boats" which is less combos
- our two pairs become counterfeited if villain has overpairs which makes it more likely to get a call from villain (but would we ever shove our counterfeited two pair on river?)?

I don't think we'd ever have 2 pair for betting the river. Unlikely to bluff with a turn 2 pair on a paired river. Villain can easily CC the turn with sets/heart draws/pair+heart draws. Overall good analysis!

I don't think we'd ever have 2 pair for betting the river. Unlikely to bluff with a turn 2 pair on a paired river. Villain can easily CC the turn with sets/heart draws/pair+heart draws. Overall good analysis!

I did overlook villain calling with sets. I autopiloted my thought process which defaults to: villain would raise a set on such a wet board! BUT we are reppin 4x hands; therefore, sets are in his turn calling range.

Hi, just wondering if this series is still relevant/accurate in today's 2013 game? I removed most of my old series from my playlists, but after watching the first 2 episodes really like this series.

Thanks in advance for your reply.

Some of it will be and some of it won't be. I certainly think any of the micro content is going to be useful to micro players.

Thank you for your reply.