---

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

Oink, have you thought about doing the voice-over format for videos? It allows you to play at your typical pace to avoid timing tells.

Excellent video. Best one so far in the series and I look forward to the rest.

MrBug

No, I like the idea but it will take me twice the time to make the videos then which will cut my hourly from doing so in half - LDO.


xhgrising

tyty. The next one will be a 15/30 and I can promise you sick amounts of action. Felt like every pot was 3-4 way and capped. Whether or not it will be educational remains to be seen

Oink...
I just love the way you play, and the way you think.
and your ability to convey your thoughts.
you are an excellent teacher Oink.
I sure hope you continue to do lots of videos.

I have a general question on ranges.
At one point in the video you mentioned that a 32/22 type player had a 20% range from UG.
Is this something you have memorized?
Have you also memorized what 20% is? So you can visualize these hands in your head and then play accordingly, adding in reads,game type, player type, board texture, etc?

I guess what I am asking for is advice on how to study ranges, so I can focus on the important issues and get the best results possible. Please help.

Oink I'm wondering if you'd expand your thoughts on the hand where you 3-bet PF vs a SB steal with Ad7d. Flop is Td Tc 4d and you get check raised. My thinking is that vs most opponents this is never trips and is at most a pair of 4's or a mid pair. My thoughts are that most of the time all your aces and sevens are live, and you may have the best hand currently, so you have enough equity with the FD to 3-bet and bet the turn with position. Care to expand on your flop call in this context?

Mickey

Experience I suppose

Most 25/18 guyes will hae Stox range and maybe a little tighter which would be around 66, ATo, A8s, KJo, KTs, QTs, JTs, T9s +/-, Thats about 14%.

27/20 guys will then often have around 55, A9o, A7s, KJo, K9s, QTs, J9s, T9s, 98s +/-. Which is about 16%.

32/22 guys will then often end up around 44, A8o, A5s, KTo, K9s, Q9s, J9s, T8s, 98s, 87s +/-. Which is around 20%


You kinda learn that from posting alot on forums and debating PF ranges with other people.



@ jcamdog

I think 3-betting the flop is an option. I disagree that most wont have trips there but I may be influenced by how i would play trips myself in that spot (I would def c/r it). If we somehow hve reason to believe that villain wont have trips then its never a mistake to jam because we have 15 outs and thus 50% eq when behind and we may be ahead - tho its tough to see which worse hand will call us down.

Oink, just watched your vid. awsome stuff as always....
in minute 55 there is a hand where you coldcall A8s in the SB after BTN raises 2 limpers and flop a FD. Wouldn't it be much better to donk there instead of checking? Letting the flop check through feels like lost value...

Yup agreed!

I think there should be more discussion on the hand where Oink defends A3o in the BB vs CO and check-calls an (AK)K flop reasoning that we're not getting any action from worse hands when raising for value, and also a competent player should realize his peeling range is fairly narrow and therefore should play accurately on turn/river.

To me that alone is a big argument for raising. If villain is rarely ever putting in more bets with either play, then check-raising is clearly better in mind, since we would like to check-raise our gutters and flush draws. That would seem to meld our distribution a lot better, and also, a good player probably SHOULD give us action with all or most of his pairs, and don't forget that they will flop gutters too for which we're getting value from on the flop and not allowing them free-cards on the turn!

Cliffnotes: I need someone to give me a stronger argument for ever playing WA/WB out of position in most of these spots! I'm just not so sure anymore that a situation exists where I would want to.

Hey KPR

I didnt find the hand but i think I remember it.

Overall I agree completely with your views and points. This is a spot where playing against mediocre opposition is a lot different than playing vs strong opposition against which you have tons of history.

Btw I think you can also balance your play by c/c'ing. This also allows you to c/c small pairs and Q high. I have no idea what is bets tho

I agree about WA/WB being overused for the most part. People don't fold any more and tend to not believe flop raises. The WA/WB line came from a time when even KK would lay down on an A high flop. Now, people will call with K high or less in that spot (I know I have against certain opponents). It's the same thing on trip flops. People love to make loose calls on trip flops so they are actually good flops to raise for value (same thing goes for highly coordinated flops where you flop a pair).

u mentioned in the video that the probability of one of the 3 people capping with 6% of their range was 22%.
but the formula is 1-(1-P1)*(1-P2)*(1-P3) where P1, P2, P3 is 6% so it's ~17%, isn't it?

It is. i think the 22% number I talked about was something I got from having 4 players behind you. Which fits well

yeah, this number appears when there are 4 probababilities

I think there should be more discussion on the hand where Oink defends A3o in the BB vs CO and check-calls an (AK)K flop reasoning that we're not getting any action from worse hands when raising for value, and also a competent player should realize his peeling range is fairly narrow and therefore should play accurately on turn/river.

To me that alone is a big argument for raising. If villain is rarely ever putting in more bets with either play, then check-raising is clearly better in mind, since we would like to check-raise our gutters and flush draws. That would seem to meld our distribution a lot better, and also, a good player probably SHOULD give us action with all or most of his pairs, and don't forget that they will flop gutters too for which we're getting value from on the flop and not allowing them free-cards on the turn!

Cliffnotes: I need someone to give me a stronger argument for ever playing WA/WB out of position in most of these spots! I'm just not so sure anymore that a situation exists where I would want to.

If CO raises 35% he will have an Ace or King in his around 25% of the time. Against this part of his range it would be better to checkcall all way. If flop got 2 flushcards he will have a flushdraw or a gutter like 20% of the time. Against this range we want to attack. Against his pairs (around 15%) it depends on if he will fire with them again UI on turn and if he is prepared to take them to showdown if we cr flop. But lets say its EV neutral. That leaves us with 40% hopeless hands and against this range there is a chance to win a bet on one of the bigger streets if we checkcall, but a very small chance to do it if we checkraise.

All in all a passive line seems better.

But more important. U say that a competent player in CO will understand that BBs checkcall range is narrow. If this is so (which wouldnt be correct against Oink), Im pretty sure BB plays suboptimal. Overall, when u defend ur BB out of position against a handrange that is significantly better then urs, its probably more important to have a balanced (and pretty bigranged) checkcall strategy, then a balanced checkraise strategy. Since we often are out of position with weak hand we dont want the pot to grow. And also, since pot is so small defending our weak made hand against draws is much less important then if it was bigger.