Poker Video: No Limit Hold'Em by sthief09 (Micro/Small Stakes)

Seeing the hole cards really hurts the discussion.

How cheap/good is the internet connections in thai?
Is rich the king of Bangkok?
Whats the visa situations?

How cheap/good is the internet connections in thai?
Is rich the king of Bangkok?
Whats the visa situations?

We pay 1,600 baht p/m for 10MB unlimited download and each have back up AIS 3G wireless for 5,000 baht a year which runs at 3MB.

No, lol.. or maybe I misunderstand the question!

Visa is dependant upon your country. I suggest that you contact your embassy. For us we have to do border run once every three months.

richbrown not the king i doubt that.

border run - expand.
what about the political situation?

We pay 1,600 baht p/m for 10MB unlimited download and each have back up AIS 3G wireless for 5,000 baht a year which runs at 3MB.

No, lol.. or maybe I misunderstand the question!

Visa is dependant upon your country. I suggest that you contact your embassy. For us we have to do border run once every three months.

Hey you say theres a bunch of guys in CM, Im coming to CM in july , Is there a skype group or way to chat to you guys?

send me PM I will add u skype and add u to the group

richbrown not the king i doubt that.

border run - expand.
what about the political situation?

The political situation is shaky, but so is everywhere right now.. thank the IMF, Bilderberg group, Trilateral commission and CFR.

Border run, you have to physically leave the country every 90 days. You can either fly to somewhere else like Kuala Lumpur or Macau or just get a private bus to the border at Mae Si

Time Link to 00:12:12

This is not very clear, josh says he would fold if villain pushes, you say its a great card for villain to push if Josh would have been weaktight and sits here with JJ. Does that mean that its a call if villain pushes?

Also, im pretty sure all you guys had to do is set hero as hero in HEM to see only hero's holecards...

Time Link to 00:14:01

I don't really like a shove here, depending on the villain, of course. First, our FE is not as strong since we are 3 way. Second, we are UTG and OOP, so villain will have a stronger range AND call our 3bet more often and make a decision on the turn. Many blank cards will be difficult to barrel effectively. Regardless of what level this villain is playing at, he has a very polarized range here most of the time (maybe there was some dynamic going on in this hand-quite surprised to see his actual hand). A 3bet will cause him to fold hands we have dominated, and he will rarely call with worse, but will never fold out a set. He should never have AK/KK/K4/K2 here (of course it would be helpful to have stats, but we can at least discount them) and if the CO is bad, he may not be able to fold KQ, so I don't see the point in 3betting-Even though we don't have great odds to call and are OOP, I think a call makes more sense, especially with the chance that CO can overcall with a worse FD. The turn is still going to be difficult to play if we miss (or hit an A) but if we hit we shouldn't have trouble getting paid by a strong hand and our hand will be invulnerable and may collect more aggressive dead money.

This certainly changes with a read on how villain plays flush draws, or even his Call open vs 3bet stats, but I think as an unknown, a 3bet can't be much better than a call here.

Time Link to 00:17:48

I don't like this lead on the Q97mono board with teh Kh flush either.

First of all, Josh is right-it's unnecessary since the 3better will likely cbet with all the hands that call or raise your lead (QQ/AcKx/AcQxAcAx, etc). In addition, if our opponents are thinking about our range (depending on our image) we look like we have 99/77 here almost always. I think it would be optimistic to expect a thinking player to see us flat a CO raise in the SB and then flat a 3bet and donk small wtih AQ here. Would you do this with AcQx here? Would you bet this amount?

We should be thinking about what our opponents are likely to have here and how we can get them to best put money in the pot. Most likely, the squeezer has a polarized range. He probably cbets here with AA/KK/QQ/AQ/ and any Acxc. He's not putting any money in the middle with total air unless he's a bit maniacal or both callers have a weak-tight image.

The PFRer could definitely have AQ. He flatted a squeeze IP, so he could also be slowplaying a premium hand or possibly have an implied-odds hand (like QTs).

If we check and EITHER of the players bet this flop, we can raise and get the money in. We don't want a 4th club or board pairing card to kill our action (or maybe our hand) and are almost guaranteed the bettor has a made hand. Donking out here just lets them off the hook, or lets them CALL with something like AA/KK rather than get the money in on the flop, unless we have a very stabby image.

While the play is certainly creative, I don't think it works very often vs a thinking player. Do you have a read on either of the villains? I kind of like it if the PFRer is a big aggro fish that can't fold top pair and fast plays draws-then it might work to your advantage if the 3better flats your donk!

Time Link to 00:22:35

You say you checked here with AA on the Q96tt to indicate you have nothing. Then you say the villain calls 3bets with a very tight range. I'm a little confused here. assuming villain is thinking about our range, wouldn't he want to bet for value with most of his premium hands only when he believes he can be called by worse (i.e. when we have SOMETHING)? Also what is his 4bet%? Our best play will change quite a bit if he can have AK/KK/AA in his 3bet calling range vs just QQ/JJ and maybe TT/AQ.

If we are checking/giving up here a lot, but may also check/raise with a FD or a set, isn't that going to make villain check back a good portion of his range on the flop, thinking there is no value in a bet, or do we expect him to bet/get it in with AQ on the flop?
If we have been 3betting his pants off, when we don't cbet, I think it looks more like we have TT/JJ/QQ/AKss rather than air. If this is the case, will villain bet a hand like JJ here when we check?

I would think betting here would be best considering he is rarely folding (he usually has a decent hand) and we can get value while also representing a weaker made hand like KQ or even a semibluff. What is our plan on the turn if villain checks back the flop? Bet and rep a bluff? check/raise?

edit: So villain does indeed check back the flop and we lead the turn blank. I think this is fine-it can rep a stab from a range that was ch/F on the flop, as well as JJ/TT for value if we expected him to bet AQ on the flop, or even AKss that was ch/Ring the flop and is now trying to take it down. However, when he raises, what is his range? It seems to me the only hand that we beat that checks back the flop when he thinks we have nothing and feels confident enough to raise the blank turn vs our perceived range is KK, and this is usually a 4bet preflop for most players. If he doesn't have any bluffs in his range, what else does he do this with besides QQ? I think AQ is a stretch, but possible depending on our image (if he can convince himself we have a semibluff or will get it in with JJ/TT vs his raise).

I suppose the real question is does he cbet the flop with AQ when we check to him?

This is not very clear, josh says he would fold if villain pushes, you say its a great card for villain to push if Josh would have been weaktight and sits here with JJ. Does that mean that its a call if villain pushes?

I think what I said was that against described villain I would probably call the halfpot push. The tighter the 3-betting range the easier a fold it is, because all the most common 3-betting hands (AA-JJ,AK-AJ) have JJ beat. Weak-tight was maybe not the best choice of wording. Moreso just a tight villain.

I don't really like a shove here, depending on the villain, of course. First, our FE is not as strong since we are 3 way. Second, we are UTG and OOP, so villain will have a stronger range AND call our 3bet more often and make a decision on the turn. Many blank cards will be difficult to barrel effectively. Regardless of what level this villain is playing at, he has a very polarized range here most of the time (maybe there was some dynamic going on in this hand-quite surprised to see his actual hand). A 3bet will cause him to fold hands we have dominated, and he will rarely call with worse, but will never fold out a set. He should never have AK/KK/K4/K2 here (of course it would be helpful to have stats, but we can at least discount them) and if the CO is bad, he may not be able to fold KQ, so I don't see the point in 3betting-Even though we don't have great odds to call and are OOP, I think a call makes more sense, especially with the chance that CO can overcall with a worse FD. The turn is still going to be difficult to play if we miss (or hit an A) but if we hit we shouldn't have trouble getting paid by a strong hand and our hand will be invulnerable and may collect more aggressive dead money.

This certainly changes with a read on how villain plays flush draws, or even his Call open vs 3bet stats, but I think as an unknown, a 3bet can't be much better than a call here.

I'm more concerned about the scenario when we miss on the turn after calling. There's basically 1 bet left at that point, and villain can force us to fold. I think we can pretty safely say that calling is marginally profitable. We're getting around 3-1 to call the flop, and stacks are such that villain will probably push the turn if we miss. Being out of position and drawing to the only real draw on the board, it's not going to be easy to extract full value. The question is whether 3-betting is more profitable.

Against a known tight or straightforward player, calling is likely best since we probably don't have any fold equity and might not have raised much more than 44 or 22. The more unknown villain is, the more likely we are to either have a bit of fold equity on the flop or to have good equity when all-in.

You say you checked here with AA on the Q96tt to indicate you have nothing. Then you say the villain calls 3bets with a very tight range. I'm a little confused here. assuming villain is thinking about our range, wouldn't he want to bet for value with most of his premium hands only when he believes he can be called by worse (i.e. when we have SOMETHING)? Also what is his 4bet%? Our best play will change quite a bit if he can have AK/KK/AA in his 3bet calling range vs just QQ/JJ and maybe TT/AQ.

If we are checking/giving up here a lot, but may also check/raise with a FD or a set, isn't that going to make villain check back a good portion of his range on the flop, thinking there is no value in a bet, or do we expect him to bet/get it in with AQ on the flop?
If we have been 3betting his pants off, when we don't cbet, I think it looks more like we have TT/JJ/QQ/AKss rather than air. If this is the case, will villain bet a hand like JJ here when we check?

I would think betting here would be best considering he is rarely folding (he usually has a decent hand) and we can get value while also representing a weaker made hand like KQ or even a semibluff. What is our plan on the turn if villain checks back the flop? Bet and rep a bluff? check/raise?

edit: So villain does indeed check back the flop and we lead the turn blank. I think this is fine-it can rep a stab from a range that was ch/F on the flop, as well as JJ/TT for value if we expected him to bet AQ on the flop, or even AKss that was ch/Ring the flop and is now trying to take it down. However, when he raises, what is his range? It seems to me the only hand that we beat that checks back the flop when he thinks we have nothing and feels confident enough to raise the blank turn vs our perceived range is KK, and this is usually a 4bet preflop for most players. If he doesn't have any bluffs in his range, what else does he do this with besides QQ? I think AQ is a stretch, but possible depending on our image (if he can convince himself we have a semibluff or will get it in with JJ/TT vs his raise).

I suppose the real question is does he cbet the flop with AQ when we check to him?

I agree the tighter villain is preflop, the less we need to check here.Checking AA here is mostly to induce stabs on a board on which we often c/f. It looks like hero is giving up. Still, even against a tight reg, it's good to be balanced. We don't want to fold every time we check and stack off every time we bet. And beyond that, almost no one these days is really that tight in position against a 3-bet.

The goal isn't to get villain to bet with JJ or AQ. It's to get him to bet with AJ, 55, and other such hands that will fold if we bet, but bet if we check.

The goal isn't to get villain to bet with JJ or AQ. It's to get him to bet with AJ, 55, and other such hands that will fold if we bet, but bet if we check.

ok-so we are hoping he bets for protection/to collect dead money, not for thin value-this makes more sense, thanks.

As played on the turn, am I wrong to think we are beat too often to bet/get it in vs his raise? Again, I suppose this depends just how tight he really is (and how deep we are), but the fact that he DIDN'T stab at the flop makes me think he's got a monster or a marginal made hand, and when he raises our turn lead, it seems to make marginal made hands quite a bit less likely, unless we have some aggro dynamic going on or if he is the type that can show up here with AKss or some other semibluff (and there aren't that many players at this level who take the check behind/raise turn line as a semibluff).

Time Link to 00:07:04

People don't like to fold chops. At 40NL, this is an easy ship on the river imo. He's never folding a boat period so there's a lot of missed value by just calling w/ quads. What am I missing here?

People don't like to fold chops. At 40NL, this is an easy ship on the river imo. He's never folding a boat period so there's a lot of missed value by just calling w/ quads. What am I missing here?

I think you have the positions reversed. Villain has quads, hero has a Q. If the positions were reversed I'd agree with you that our opponent would most likely not be able to let go of a Q.

ok-so we are hoping he bets for protection/to collect dead money, not for thin value-this makes more sense, thanks.

As played on the turn, am I wrong to think we are beat too often to bet/get it in vs his raise? Again, I suppose this depends just how tight he really is (and how deep we are), but the fact that he DIDN'T stab at the flop makes me think he's got a monster or a marginal made hand, and when he raises our turn lead, it seems to make marginal made hands quite a bit less likely, unless we have some aggro dynamic going on or if he is the type that can show up here with AKss or some other semibluff (and there aren't that many players at this level who take the check behind/raise turn line as a semibluff).

I think it's possible that the turn raise is just an outright bluff. It's a very screwy line he took and I don't think we can be certain enough that he has a set to fold. I'm pretty happy getting my money in at that point.

Uncheck show known cards, next time.

Uncheck show known cards, next time.

Yeah it was abit of a shame, especially as this was my first attempt at a video, sorry people The problem was I sent the HH's to Josh and he imported them, when they got into his HEM they got messed up. Mai pen rai (never mind eh) if I do another video will make sure that stats, notes are available and villains holecards are concealed. again, sorry about that