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

This episode puts a little more focus on the Yin than the Yang, unlike previous episodes. I felt it needed to be done, a lot of viewers want the basic lower stake spots as well as the other stuff.

Time Link to 00:21:39

Really like the series especially the 25nl hands. In this hand with the 89s, instead of villan just checking on the turn when the Jc comes what would you do if he bet again for 2/3 pot ?

Really like the series especially the 25nl hands. In this hand with the 89s, instead of villan just checking on the turn when the Jc comes what would you do if he bet again for 2/3 pot ?

Call. At least vs this guy, as far as I remember. Vs some other people it'd be an easy fold.

This is more of a general question. In the second QQ hand when we get to the flop and overs come + were oop This is a troule spot for me. I usually always cbet, get called and then ? What do you reccomend in situations like this vs uknowns.

Obviously with the reads in the 2nd QQ hand it makes the hand easier to play but it gets difficult earlie in a session withought reads.

The awesomeness just won't stop. Thanks for this.

Time Link to 00:44:59

I was thinking that if he can hand read, he's got to be pretty sure you have something like what you have. He's an unknown, so presumably you're an unknown to him (unless he's mined you). This kind of thing occurs to me a fair amount, where I pretty much know what my opponent has, but the real question is, will he fold it? I barrel sometimes and sometimes not based on whether I think a player is capable of folding. Should I be taking the barrel spot and going for it if my read isn't strong on what my opp will fold?

(BTW, the likelihood I would get called here by 44-88 is why I play the site I play.)

This is more of a general question. In the second QQ hand when we get to the flop and overs come + were oop This is a troule spot for me. I usually always cbet, get called and then ? What do you reccomend in situations like this vs uknowns.

Obviously with the reads in the 2nd QQ hand it makes the hand easier to play but it gets difficult earlie in a session withought reads.

There is no one answer. The answer is "it depends", which is the answer people don't like getting but the answer they need to look at differently because if they don't like the answer "it depends" it means they're not fully utilitisng their poker brain.

If we look at things from a FToP perspective, checking may be best vs an unknown. If we think villain is likely to bluff, checking may be best vs a non-unknown. If we think villain is a station or passive, betting may be best. I tend to bet simply because most people at the table realise that I'm bluffing in that spot almost always and therefore I can get a lot of value, however there may be cases where that is simply not true.

It can never hurt to ask yourself some simple questions to decide on your course of action. Can I get value if I bet? What would I do if I were bluffing? What does villain think of me? What will villain do with his holdings if I check? If I bet what is my plan if raised/on turns when called?

The correct answer for the situation should make itself apparent.

I was thinking that if he can hand read, he's got to be pretty sure you have something like what you have. He's an unknown, so presumably you're an unknown to him (unless he's mined you). This kind of thing occurs to me a fair amount, where I pretty much know what my opponent has, but the real question is, will he fold it? I barrel sometimes and sometimes not based on whether I think a player is capable of folding. Should I be taking the barrel spot and going for it if my read isn't strong on what my opp will fold?

(BTW, the likelihood I would get called here by 44-88 is why I play the site I play.)

We can have plenty of other things: All sets, all FDs, 9x, KdXd, any Kx that floated but generally I agree our range is reasonably face-up. However, villain is clearly thinking about his own hand a bit more than ours. It's not that likely I'd have a random Kx here as I'd be leaning towards folding/3betting preflop. I would have KK a lot more than KTo and our range does become somewhat polarised. He also probably isn't thinking that if Hero is a thinking reg he should realise that Villain's range is weighted in favour of having more big Kx when he opens UTG than when he opens from late position, giving him more FE vs another potentially thinking player. It would also be really annoying for him for Hero to x back a better FD.

Anyway, I am not advocating barreling blindly. If you feel that where you play the majority of people just don't fold s/d value on that river then don't bet. I would bet vs an unknown, but I do not tend to find too may random stations at my tables.

There is no one answer. The answer is "it depends", which is the answer people don't like getting but the answer they need to look at differently because if they don't like the answer "it depends" it means they're not fully utilitisng their poker brain.

If we look at things from a FToP perspective, checking may be best vs an unknown. If we think villain is likely to bluff, checking may be best vs a non-unknown. If we think villain is a station or passive, betting may be best. I tend to bet simply because most people at the table realise that I'm bluffing in that spot almost always and therefore I can get a lot of value, however there may be cases where that is simply not true.

It can never hurt to ask yourself some simple questions to decide on your course of action. Can I get value if I bet? What would I do if I were bluffing? What does villain think of me? What will villain do with his holdings if I check? If I bet what is my plan if raised/on turns when called?

The correct answer for the situation should make itself apparent.

Thank you for the detailed answer, you break it down very nicely. Do you have any Northamerican students/accept them ?

I do have some students from North (and South) America. The only issue would be one of timing. I generally don't coach after 5:30pm GMT, or before 11am GMT.

plz bring SnappieVous back =/

plz bring SnappieVous back =/

awww sorry if I haven't lived up to scrappy for you, hope you still got something from the episode.

For my part constructive critisism is most welcome from anyone (hopes I dont get hammered now lol).

Honestly though it's been a great learning experience, so thanks very much to Inavacuum for the opportunity

Time Link to 00:15:04

Based on your reads, what would you do if villain:
1. Minraised
2. Shipped it

Thanks. Excellent series.

Time Link to 00:35:50

What would you do if the river was a:

1. T,J,Q
2. 3-7

If we put him on small pair, I would be inclined to barrel a TJQ, but check/fold 3-7.

What would you do if the river was a:

1. T,J,Q
2. 3-7

If we put him on small pair, I would be inclined to barrel a TJQ, but check/fold 3-7.

I don't think this villain is planning on folding to any river card very often at all. I will respond to your other question when I have more itme.

http://www.deucescracked.com/blogs/acombfosho/27561-What-I-learned-so-far-in-Yin-and-Yang-by-Inavacuum

Based on your reads, what would you do if villain:
1. Minraised
2. Shipped it

Thanks. Excellent series.

I don't have the reads, but if villain is a reg I'm shoving either way. If I know villain is a passive fish it's always a call vs the minraise and probably a fold vs a shove.

Time Link to 00:18:15

I would always check this turn. Beacause I do not put many draws in his range so I don't mind giving a free card.
A turn bet very very rarely gets looked up by worst than TT.... I think checking and re-evaluating is best.

Time Link to 00:48:33

Isn't check shoving the best option? I think that if we check he will probably shove almost always his range that didn't hit (AT+,KJ+,... and a lot of other stuff since he called a 4bet with J4s) whereas if we bet the flop maybe he will fold the majority (maybe not the majority but it's always worse than the first scenario) of the time that portion of range we crush.

Isn't check shoving the best option? I think that if we check he will probably shove almost always his range that didn't hit (AT+,KJ+,... and a lot of other stuff since he called a 4bet with J4s) whereas if we bet the flop maybe he will fold the majority (maybe not the majority but it's always worse than the first scenario) of the time that portion of range we crush.

This is a common misconception. It can be difficult to get behind why betting is best because of exactly the reasons you stated, however if we are going to be checking we need SOLID GOLD reads on how often villain bets the flop with missed overs+ and if he will do so again in the current situation. Mostly we do not have those. We do not have them in that spot. In which case betting is going to best because we WANT villain to fold those hands that are getting close to 30% vs us. We're attacking his equity share.

thanks for the quick answer and sorry for my possibly not good english.
2 points:

1°: I think we want him to get in with that range of overs with 30% of equity since if he folds we get +50$ whereas if get in our EV will be 140$ (200$pot *0,7), so +65$. correct me if i'm wrong

2°: If villain is totally unknow what percentages do you think he checks and shoves with that range?. I usually assume thant most of the time (think more than 2/3 of the time) he is going to shove since the pot is so big and the stack behind is 1,5x the pot.

BTW great videos.

We do want to get in vs the 30% equity, the problem is he can realise a good portion of this equity when we give him the option to check back. We don't want to give him this option if he is actually going to take it some of the time. When villain is relatively unknown and has called the 4bet we're either doing very well or very bad on the flop in question - checking gives him the chance to realise his equity, unless of course we know he will always bet. I do not think most people just shove when checked to here, especially when they hold something like AQ. It would be difficult and probably impossible for me to come up with a %. I would be surprised if it were more than 49%. People are far more likely to bet a range of bluffs when the SPR is not so close.