Poker Video: Limit Hold'Em by Joe Tall (High Stakes)

I'd like to discuss the Q5o blind defense from the beginning of the video. I realize that the hand doesn't play very well post-flop, but the pot is offering 3.5 to 1 direct odds. That figure indicates that we need about 28.5% equity versus the villain's range to continue. The actual number would be a bit lower due to other factors such as hero's post-flop edge against the villain, the villain's went to showdown % and villain's post-flop aggression (or lack thereof).

Assuming the villain raises with the top 25% of his range, our equity is approximately 33%. Even assuming (falsely) that he opens as tight from the button as from other positions (namely 12%), the hero's equity is still around 29%. It's certainly close, but assuming you have confidence in your post-flop skills this seems like a defense to me.

On the AKo hand vs BigMich 8 do you think he will also show up with some overplayed gutters like QK/KJ given his stack size? I think players like this will also show up with those sorts of hands as well as the occasional WTF desperation bluff.

I'd like to discuss the Q5o blind defense from the beginning of the video. I realize that the hand doesn't play very well post-flop, but the pot is offering 3.5 to 1 direct odds. That figure indicates that we need about 28.5% equity versus the villain's range to continue. The actual number would be a bit lower due to other factors such as hero's post-flop edge against the villain, the villain's went to showdown % and villain's post-flop aggression (or lack thereof).

Assuming the villain raises with the top 25% of his range, our equity is approximately 33%. Even assuming (falsely) that he opens as tight from the button as from other positions (namely 12%), the hero's equity is still around 29%. It's certainly close, but assuming you have confidence in your post-flop skills this seems like a defense to me.

I see your point and although I play smaller I do defend liberally in these spots vs perceived weaker players. Don't know whether it is a leak because I am playing at Cake atm and don't use PT. But I feel like I would call there too.

I like to give the impression that I don't give up my blinds easily as metagame and err towards being too loose early on. Not sure about that either but it's a thought.

A certain book (Stox's) that is based on empirical data suggests that you need about 35% equity in these situations OP to show a profit long term. The problem with empirical data of course is it is too general for these individual situations.

On the AKo hand vs BigMich 8 do you think he will also show up with some overplayed gutters like QK/KJ given his stack size? I think players like this will also show up with those sorts of hands as well as the occasional WTF desperation bluff.

This video is really long, do you have a time stamp?

great video,every hand was very interesting and is something i feel cant be discussed to much,i also like when its a lot of regular player in the videos.witch is something i feel i can miss sometimes.

i also would like to write one thing i would like to see in a video.and that is to see how you play when you 6 tables.beacuse that is what a lot of us do,and to see much more hands and without so much time to think at every hand.

thanks

I'd like to discuss the Q5o blind defense from the beginning of the video. I realize that the hand doesn't play very well post-flop, but the pot is offering 3.5 to 1 direct odds. That figure indicates that we need about 28.5% equity versus the villain's range to continue. The actual number would be a bit lower due to other factors such as hero's post-flop edge against the villain, the villain's went to showdown % and villain's post-flop aggression (or lack thereof).

Assuming the villain raises with the top 25% of his range, our equity is approximately 33%. Even assuming (falsely) that he opens as tight from the button as from other positions (namely 12%), the hero's equity is still around 29%. It's certainly close, but assuming you have confidence in your post-flop skills this seems like a defense to me.

The key to such a hand is your going to be OOP. It is close, but if you looked at all your positional stats you 'll see you'll have 5% more value in position with each hand. You can almost give this to the button, which puts us in a toughs pot at 3.5:1.

This video is really long, do you have a time stamp?

I think it was 3rd last where nWooch had unimproved AKo on the river getting 14:1 or so. About 17mins from the end.

I have to say this is great analysis. Really wonderful stuff and I hope you do more long videos like this.

I think Joe Tall is right about the issue of positional disadvantage. How that compares to the edge against a poor-playing villain is the key calculation, I think.

There are two other hands I had questions about.

1) In the hand where the hero opens Q7h from the button and gets three-bet by the SB aboo, I was wondering if you could envision a scenario where you would raise the flop. If aboo's WTSD % was too low, I would think that the J68 texture might be an excellent to stab at considering his pf 3-bet range. This would obviously depend on if he's capable of folding ace high, and how he reacts to various scare cards that may or may not help our hand.

2) I thought the discussion about the hand where the hero has AQo OOP post-flop against TROKA (Loose passive fish) was very interesting. I'm really torn between Joe Tall and DeathDonkey's lines, I think they both have merit. The thing I would add, though, is that some of these fish often play spazzier than their stats suggest. They are very bad players and it is difficult to understand how they think because their thought processes often make little sense. I don't want to be result-oriented about it, but I think random spazziness should be calculated into the post-flop decisions somehow.

Once again, awesome video. Keep it up!

About the unimproved AK on the river getting 14-1, this is around 75 mins in.

Villain raised UTG and then called a cap from the BB. When DD made his stove he included all QJo, but the non-ace unsuited broadway hands are hands that a LOT of players fold facing 2 bets pre-flop. The maniacal player in the HJ and villain beeing short perhaps changes his calling range in that spot but it's definitely something to take into consideration.

I made a stove where I remove the offsuit brodway hands except ATo. And I also remove PP's below 99. By the way, I started with a UTG rasing range of about 15%.

Board: 9h 9s Td 7d 6d
Dead:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 93.907% 94.01% 00.00% 1459065 0.00 { 99+, ATs-A9s, KTs-K9s, Q9s+, JTs, ATo }
Hand 1: 06.093% 06.10% 00.00% 94671 0.00 { AhKd }

So factoring in the times he elects to see the flop with QJo it looks like a call, albeit a close one since he probably isn't playing QJ this way post flop 100% of the time.

The T8s hand that starts around the 80 min mark.

We cc, cc, cc a J8744 board and you guys hate the fact that villain bets river, but couldn't he even be value betting AK or even AQ against your AQ, AT, A9? If he's a player who does that he's also betting all pairs of course making it an easy call.

And also, absolutely fantastic video!

Great video.

I think I agree and follow almost everything you guys said, which is a testament of how well you guys taught poker, not just this one but all the videos and forum discussion I have been following.

The AK hand I'd call because of the shortstack. I think it's a lot tougher if he's not short.

The T8 hand, I don't think he should be betting AK here because he only beats AQ, AT, but is losing to all the pairs out there. So the river bet looks pretty strong. That said I'm a SD monkey which means I'll call until I get better reads.

Just wanted to say excellent video guys, probably one of the best I've seen here for quite a while. I hope you three can get together again some time in the future for another one of these.

Really an excellent video.

DD, does this game really come this easily for you?
Someone who does something/anything at a high level/very well,
is able to make it look so easy,
that everyone thinks they can do it.
You make it look easy DD.

I enjoyed the metagame envolved at the higher stakes.

have a suggestion....allow the student, in this case a high level player to begin with, have his thoughts first. Then a higher opinion, then let DD talk and clear things up.

nWooch...5 tabling 10/20 15/30....I am so jealous!

Great work, guys, and I'm like iplaylimit, I pretty much was in synch the whole way--or at least where I stopped to write this. Truly a nod to how much I've learned from you.

Mickey, knowing how hard DD has worked and the hours he's put in, he has earned his knowledge the hard way. He does make it look so easy. (He's also known as a bit of a prodigy, with incredible natural talent. Which sucks, btw.)

At about the 50 min mark: Q7s on the button and the J68r board--

I immediately decided I'd fold to the SB's c-bet. He's a TAG (esp for this game) and he's probably raising with a pretty good hand, and c-betting pretty tightly. Our reverse implied odds here are a killer. Any card that comes that improves our hand makes it more difficult to get away from the hand, but not improve us enough to feel great about the prospects of winning. A queen or a seven, and we might not even be ahead. Even not likely, given that a player like the villain might not even c-bet AK or AQ, and that might be the bottom of his 3bet pf range. A queen might even improve any draw he has and still not help us as much, at the very bottom end of what I feel would be his raising range.

I just can't see where we win long-term by continuing with this hand, to the point where I might argue that continuing is borderline spew?

Q7s is right on the line for me as a straight-out steal. The showdown value isn't all that great when called all the way down. In a straight-out steal situation, I either take it down pf or with a c-bet on a dry board and give up if I'm called. I'm giving up on this hand.

Now, with regard to meta-game, I don't think we give up too much image by folding here. I doubt seriously whether this villain would open his range even slightly. His TAG nature is to bet his hand, not yours. He will be happy to win this hand, as TAGs do, more than thinking he's got your number and will 3bet more liberally in the future. When I think of meta-game issues, I look at also what I think the villain thinks and not what I'd think if I were the villain.

Don't meta-game considerations have to be based somewhat on the villain? You play differently vs a LAG than vs a TAG, right? So the meta-game decisions should be based this way as well. And if the others at the table misread my play vs a TAG or LAG as how I'd play them, all to the good. If they think my folding is weak in the case, then come get me, boys. So far, I haven't heard this talked about at all. I'll be listening for it over the last 40 minutes.

Good shtuff, gents.

CJ

Very good points CJ ,good post. Regarding the Q7s hand I think its generally an easy steal on the button vs. anyone but that flop is one that hits a defending range very well. I'd generally peel with a backdoor flush draw (as I have BD straight draw too of course) and my Queen overcard, giving myself around 4.5 outs.

-DeathDonkey

very great video nice work!

Chris,

@75 min you guys also need to take into account weighting when discussing the AK UIed hand vs the guy's stove range. While I'm leaning toward calling probably still being right, the QJ hands need to be discounted to some extent where clearly AA or TT (basically all hands that beat us) will play like this 100% of the time.