---

Poker Video: No Limit Hold'Em by threads13 (Micro/Small Stakes)

I think that better line with T3o is reraise flop because there is a lot of draws on that flop and if same scary card would came on turn we wold have tough decision, he plays 35/5 and he is not even full stacked and we are far ahead with two pairs to his range.

Time Link to 00:06:03

I'm not so sure his donking range is so weak when he donks into 4 people as opposed to just heads up. But even if his range is only Jx and sets when we get to the turn, we have approx 36% eq on the turn which would give us a slight profit on a shove even if he never folds

Time Link to 00:11:53

I don't like this line because what is the best hand you would c/c this flop and then check the turn w/ on this specific board. You think there is any merit to leading the turn?

I'm not sure if we talk about the same hand.

Time Link to 00:23:07

AQ hand - i wouldnt raise in this spot. With a player left to act i think your calling here with most draws so when you raise you really are repping a very strong range of 2pair+. I wouldnt expect the pfr to be very happy in this spot with AK and had it been me i could find a fold here vs alot of players.

I'm not so sure his donking range is so weak when he donks into 4 people as opposed to just heads up. But even if his range is only Jx and sets when we get to the turn, we have approx 36% eq on the turn which would give us a slight profit on a shove even if he never folds]

I think you'd be surprised how often guys will take this line and then fold to the raise on the flop.

The bolded statement is incorrect. Any time that we are and underdog when called we need FE(either now or later, but in this hand there will be no more betting so it has to happen now) for the bet to be profitable(unless we can make up money later which is not possible in this example).

Let's say we have 35% equity. I think this is a fairly reasonable guess. We are actually risking 30%(his 65 % equity - our 35% equity is a 30% equity dog) of every bb going into the pot on the turn because of our equity when called. We would be shoving 52 to win about 47. Since we are risking 30% of 52bb we are actually risking 15.6 to win 47. So we are getting laid (47-to-16) about 3-to-1 on a bluff. We need him to fold 25% of the time to be true give we have about 30% equity.

Speaking directly to the bold statement...If he never folds then our EV is simply:

(.35)(47+52) + (.65)(-52) =
28.89 - 33.8 = -4.91

I was estimating our FE in this spot as pretty low. I felt like it was somewhere around 30%. Let's say that is indeed the case and see what our EV is and then we can compare that to the EV of checking.

We can substitute the EV when called from above in here.

(.30)*(47) + (.70)(-4.91) =
14.1 - 3.44 = 10.66

Now for the EV for checking I'm going to just put a flat out guess in that we will win the rest of his stack about 70% of the time that we hit. It's just an estimate, but I think it's reasonable. (If you don't like my estimates use your own, but I don't imagine I'm too far off) When we miss we lose the pot.

(.30)(0) + (.70)(47+52) = 69.3

So, as we can see checking is pretty superior in this spot. The main reason is we put him on a range that is fairly strong and we are going to be able to have little FE and huge implied odds. (In NLHE we are often comparing FE/steal equity versus implied odds/pot equity. That is why I so often speak about equity in hands as compared to stuff like "value betting" and "bluffing" because equity paints a much clearer picture.)

For one last bit of fun, we can calculate how much FE we need to make it neutral EV between betting and checking given we have the EV of checking.

We set our EV to the 69.3 of checking and set our FE to x.

(x)(47) + (1-x)(-4.91) = 69.3
47x + 4.91x - 4.91 = 69.3
51.91x = 74.21
x = 1.43

Since x is greater than 1(him always folding) then checking is always better in this spot. Frankly, I'm a bit surprised at how not close it is. My intuition was REALLY off on this spot.

I don't like this line because what is the best hand you would c/c this flop and then check the turn w/ on this specific board. You think there is any merit to leading the turn?

Versus a player like this? AK.

I would totally play a like that that way. It's actually going to be a fairly significant part of my range once I c/c the flop.

Having said all that, I don't think you need to worry about these things much at these stakes and especially not versus this player type.

I think a c/c lead turn line is pretty interesting though. I hadn't considered it at the time, but I think it's a pretty solid line to get value from the plethora of draws in his range. I think we c/c a brick river though as he will probably not value bet that many combos of better hands, but he will have a lot of combos bricked draws.

AQ hand - i wouldnt raise in this spot. With a player left to act i think your calling here with most draws so when you raise you really are repping a very strong range of 2pair+. I wouldnt expect the pfr to be very happy in this spot with AK and had it been me i could find a fold here vs alot of players.

I think it very much depends on what he does with stuff like pair+draw hands. Thinking back on it now, this player might be too tight to expect him to call a flop raise and a turn bet with those AK/QJ type hands so a call goes up in value, for sure.

(.35)(47+52) + (.65)(-52) =
34.65 - 33.8 = +.85 = slight profit


(.35)(47+52) = 34.65 not 28.89 or am i doing something wrong

Now for the EV for checking I'm going to just put a flat out guess in that we will win the rest of his stack about 70% of the time that we hit. It's just an estimate, but I think it's reasonable. (If you don't like my estimates use your own, but I don't imagine I'm too far off) When we miss we lose the pot.

(.30)(0) + (.70)(47+52) = 69.3

So, as we can see checking is pretty superior in this spot.

Isn't 69.3 our ev when we actually hit the river? Since we only hit our "nut" outs on the river 35% and are c/f ing 65% shouldn't this be (.65)(0) + .35((.30)(47) + (.70)(47+52))= 29.2

Also I do disagree that we stack him 70% when we hit. I think a big portion of his range is Jx. And on a spade and/or A river as well as still fearing the Q fold more often than you seem to think. But even if he always folds when we hit, our ev will still be 47(.35)= 16.5 which is still > 14.7 (the ev of shoving the turn w/ 30% FE)

But I don't think we have to move our FE and stacking off assumptions up and down that far outside of the relm of possibilites to have shoving > checking

Isn't 69.3 our ev when we actually hit the river? Since we only hit our "nut" outs on the river 35% and are c/f ing 65% shouldn't this be (.65)(0) + .35((.30)(47) + (.70)(47+52))= 29.2

Also I do disagree that we stack him 70% when we hit. I think a big portion of his range is Jx. And on a spade and/or A river as well as still fearing the Q fold more often than you seem to think. But even if he always folds when we hit, our ev will still be 47(.35)= 16.5 which is still > 14.7 (the ev of shoving the turn w/ 30% FE)

But I don't think we have to move our FE and stacking off assumptions up and down that far outside of the relm of possibilites to have shoving > checking

haha! D'oh! That totally explains why I was like "man... that's a big number!" Yeah, you're right. That's what I get for doing math early in the morning. I screwed up a lot of math in my post. My apologies.

I don't think that 70% is that optimistic so we'll have to agree to disagree about that number. I do agree that he has Jx a lot, I just don't think he folds them a lot to some random backdoor draw coming in. I think he's committed. If he was a TAG, sure, but this guy just bet a silly small amount into 4 players and called. He has a PSB left, I doubt he's folding very often.

Even if you say he'll only call 30% of the time(which isn't very often at all) checking has an EV of nearly 19. Comparing that to the EV of betting(15), it is indeed close and I wouldn't fault a shove, but I stand by my play of checking back the turn. Give me 6x the pot left in the stacks and I like betting the turn for sure.

Threads, why didn't you 3b/call the flop with that T3 hand from the blinds vs a 35/5 limper on a QT3 two-toned flop? I don't think he's ever folding Qx or a good draw to a 3b and I don't think a 35/5 is going to continue barreling with complete air after you call his raise.

Threads, why didn't you 3b/call the flop with that T3 hand from the blinds vs a 35/5 limper on a QT3 two-toned flop? I don't think he's ever folding Qx or a good draw to a 3b and I don't think a 35/5 is going to continue barreling with complete air after you call his raise.

Could you time link to the hand?

Time Link to 00:02:32

It's very early in the session.

Threads, why didn't you 3b/call the flop with that T3 hand from the blinds vs a 35/5 limper on a QT3 two-toned flop? I don't think he's ever folding Qx or a good draw to a 3b and I don't think a 35/5 is going to continue barreling with complete air after you call his raise.

Before we had started recording the video this guy had min-raised me in a somewhat similar spot so I felt that his range was weighted towards bluffs. That being the case I felt it was best to call and give him a chance to continue bluffing. Also, if he is raising Qx on the flop he will often bet it on the turn.