Poker Video: No Limit Hold'Em by danzasmack (Mid Stakes)

Krantzed IMO

Great commentary--Nice 1

Quick question:
If you were holding the JJ in his spot were he got stacked- is that a raise-call for you also? 200 bbs deep he cant like your bet-shoving range can he? It seems to me that its a slightly ahead WAY behind situation vs your range...results aside. Krantz spoke earlier about people talking themselves into calling in spots were its a pretty obvious fold vs certain players 'cause they would never do X' but it seems that this opponent didnt pick up on the fact that u were 'controlled crazy' and that you would very likely not felt light despite 3-betting 60% of hands. Did he not step up to your level or was his stack off standard?

Thanks.

haha

"seriously?"

Epic. This was the type of match I've been wanting to see; exploiting an opponent who rarely gets his stack in the middle, where it seems like a cooler is the only way to stack them. Some very good points made, imo, especially about knowing when opponent is playing back compared to when they actually have a big hand. 60% 3b stat deserves some sort of trophy coming out up 200bb's at the end.

the villain knows his image so if the JJ hands are reversed he could be semibluffing draws using his tight image, otherwise I agree. He doesnt shove worse for value like TT or whatever and we re either close to flipping or dead vs a set.

Great commentary--Nice 1

Quick question:
If you were holding the JJ in his spot were he got stacked- is that a raise-call for you also? 200 bbs deep he cant like your bet-shoving range can he? It seems to me that its a slightly ahead WAY behind situation vs your range...results aside. Krantz spoke earlier about people talking themselves into calling in spots were its a pretty obvious fold vs certain players 'cause they would never do X' but it seems that this opponent didnt pick up on the fact that u were 'controlled crazy' and that you would very likely not felt light despite 3-betting 60% of hands. Did he not step up to your level or was his stack off standard?

Thanks.

completely standard for him given he has the effective nuts postflop against a 60% 3-bet range and is playing against a seemingly insane opponent.

it would be nearly impossible for him not to stack off here, and it would actually be really bad for him not to, unless he changed the way he was playing enough at some point to realize that chuck was only playing so aggro preflop because he was folding to every single 3-bet... not because he just wanted to 3-bet every hand.

i just realized i might have misunderstood your question. if he reraised and we held JJ the play would probably be to just call the c-bet and control the size of the pot. i likely wouldn't have advised stacking off with JJ on that board with those stack sizes vs that particular opponent.

Wow that was just like an exciting heads up limit match, without the unnecessary excitement!

Seriously, it was pretty interesting watching you play against such an opponent, but I would shoot myself if I had to play against such people on any kind of semi-regular basis.

Perhaps you could elaborate on the continued use of somewhat large 3bets out of position, when it seems like he would have either (1) folded the same hands for say a raise to $35 [and still stacked off with the same range postflop] or (2) played a wider range of hands out of position where you were going to successfully bluff him off the pot most of the time. Seems like the only benefit of raising to $44 is that you steal a little bit more those times when he does call preflop and fold later in the hand -- is that why you are making such a big raise? If so, as you got deeper, why not bump it up even more to say $50 or $55?

Wow that was just like an exciting heads up limit match, without the unnecessary excitement!

Seriously, it was pretty interesting watching you play against such an opponent, but I would shoot myself if I had to play against such people on any kind of semi-regular basis.

Perhaps you could elaborate on the continued use of somewhat large 3bets out of position, when it seems like he would have either (1) folded the same hands for say a raise to $35 [and still stacked off with the same range postflop] or (2) played a wider range of hands out of position where you were going to successfully bluff him off the pot most of the time. Seems like the only benefit of raising to $44 is that you steal a little bit more those times when he does call preflop and fold later in the hand -- is that why you are making such a big raise? If so, as you got deeper, why not bump it up even more to say $50 or $55?

As you might have noticed, later on we started adjusting by reraising smaller (mainly to his minraises) with hands that were playable postflop. I think if we had more time we probably would have experimented with reraising smaller with our entire range to see if he continued to fold to all those 3-bets, but for the hour or so that we played, 3.6x or so was working well enough and keeping us balanced.

ilu krantz

ilu krantz

I promised you guys krantz! Here he is!

Seriously great session jay thanks so much for sitting in.

ilu too Danza

Wow...Looking at your avatar, it didn't even click pr1nnyraiding and prinnys. (Yeah I know that's Danzas avatar not Krantz's it just made it click)

I'm like uber retarded.

best video game ever imho.

Well maybe 2nd, not sure.

lol most annoying opponent of all time

lol most annoying opponent of all time

Lol yeah - If you see AAziatik kill him

Say you got AA in the BB and he open, would you still 3bet him?
Since he was folding 90% it has to be better to call? Is the strategy with rr working so well that you dont want to let him see you call with AA, and then maybe start to adjust?

Nice video. Love the hit and run on him. LOL

haha

"seriously?"

SRSLY? :'[

Hi I am new here - trying to learn HU game

lol most annoying opponent of all time

I found that this opponent has a blog and let's look inside what he was thinking about this match

02 October 2008 @ 12:58 pm

Played one session yesterday with an opponent I have not played with before. After I stacked him he was steaming pretty bad, 3-betting a ton and I had an interesting hand to end the session I want to talk about.

http://www.pokerhand.org/?3268863
This is the cooler which happened in the middle of the match.

Lot of other smaller to medium pots not really worth blogging about but here is the big pot that ended the session.

http://www.pokerhand.org/?3268878
Analysis: So up to this point he was just playing like an aggro-tard, raising every button and relentlessly 3 betting me. I tightened my opening range and tried to stay cool and patient, and pick up JJ on the button and he 3 bets to me. I thought to myself with my unpaired hands like AK/QJ I was going to try to just call and look to flop TP or make a move on a dry board. With QQ+ I would more than likely 4 bet to hopefull get him to spazz. When he 3 bets me I am kind of 50/50 call/4 bet. I had 4 bet him like 2 or 3 times and he had folded to them so I thought it would be a real tough spot if he 5 bet me so I decided to take a flop and probably stack with an over pair. So flop comes 474hh and he cbets. With the texture of this flop I decided to raise/call a jam + that happened and he had K5hh for an over and the flush draw + my hand couldn't hold as a 58/42 fav.
Notes: Was thinking about this hand a lot after I played it. I think I might of being a little results oriented here because I think at the worst case here I am flipping. The one benefit to 4 betting pre flop is that is makes it easier to commit when you flop an over pair. After I raised his c-bet and he jammed in on me, I had to call an additional 772$ for his all in. I wasn't getting the odds for a flip, but I really thought I could have his like A7o smashed and I was flipping at worst. Over all, can not be displeased with how this hand played out and was just unfortunate I couldn't win it as a little more than a coin flip favorite.

As you might have noticed, later on we started adjusting by reraising smaller (mainly to his minraises) with hands that were playable postflop. I think if we had more time we probably would have experimented with reraising smaller with our entire range to see if he continued to fold to all those 3-bets, but for the hour or so that we played, 3.6x or so was working well enough and keeping us balanced.

Someone musta watched Spaceman in a Cowboy hat episode 4!

WoT

As a follow up about the JJ hand - what's our plan if we have a slightly worse hand than JJ - ie: TT- 88 or even with slightly superior hands like QQ-AA?
You mentioned that you would 3-bet smaller with the nut flush draw to induce a smaller flush to shove - does the same logic apply with AA or do we want to extract more from bluffs when we aren't very vulnerable (specifically, AA with the heart I would think would be a good candidate for this) by just calling?
Also - would you ever be flatting small pairs like 22- 77 to any of his raises or are we reserving flatting for more connected type hands like QT, 89, etc?.

WTF dude? He started the hour with $807, and left with $903.50. You re-bought in with a shitload of money; and unless I missed something, he never rebought once. All you did was win back most of your money and leave him $96 dollars ahead.

This was not a winning session, i.e. you left with less than you put in. He completely sucked ass as a player and still got $96 out of you. Doesn't anyone find this problematic? PLEASE tell me I missed something...

WTF dude? He started the hour with $807, and left with $903.50. You re-bought in with a shitload of money; and unless I missed something, he never rebought once. All you did was win back most of your money and leave him $96 dollars ahead.

This was not a winning session, i.e. you left with less than you put in. He completely sucked ass as a player and still got $96 out of you. Doesn't anyone find this problematic? PLEASE tell me I missed something...

who gives a damn does it matter? they are surely +ev against this guy

good video enjoyed it.. i use the leprechaun also, I'm gonna have to do that confused face quit!

Well, all I can say is hell yes, winrate matters. Bottom line: are you a winning player (i.e. in the black making a profit) or are are you not? That's ALL that matters, as far as I'm concerned. It was entertaining as hell, but who cares how much of a monkey you make of someone when, in the end, they're the ones leaving the table with your money.

I just don't see much to crow about when, after an hour of play, you leave IN THE HOLE. Was this style of play really +ev? I know the guy seemed totally weak, but if they really had the superior strategy, why did they have to keep rebuying? If it were a no-rebuy match, they would have been the loser multiple times.

Umm, I don't know about you... but i don't win every session even though I only play people over which I have an edge.

You can be better, outplay them and still lose money. If it was not that way, poker = chess

*plus vids would be pretty unrealistic and boring if all the coaches ever did was take cookies and never get them took. Nobody is immune to variance.

Sure, but when I see someone get busted again and again and again, what evidence do I have that they're the ones who's playing style has the edge? "weak-tight vs. jackass" can't be optimal, in any event...I think a few of their catastrophic mistakes were due to overconfidence in their read on this guy as someone they could steamroll.

In the words of the immortal Richard Nixon, "Never underestimate your opponent's willingness to underestimate you."

Maybe variance got the better of them because that's the natural, logical outcome of playing a hyper-LAG high-variance-dependent style of poker. I'll watch it again with an eye to exactly where and when they lost the most money. Lots to learn, any way you look at it.

I think one of their opponent's worst flaws of all was that he didn't know when to quit. For all we know, the dude was sitting there saying "Awesome, these donks keep rebuying! I wonder how much I can get them to spew to me..."

Note to self: play short-stacked, double up and get the hell out of there.

dont be so results oriented man, the outcome of a 45 minute heads up session doesn't mean a whole hell of a lot.

ratel - trust me. you can choose to believe that i know what i'm talking about or you can choose not to. the choice is yours baby!

Well, all I can say is hell yes, winrate matters. Bottom line: are you a winning player (i.e. in the black making a profit) or are are you not? That's ALL that matters, as far as I'm concerned. It was entertaining as hell, but who cares how much of a monkey you make of someone when, in the end, they're the ones leaving the table with your money.

I just don't see much to crow about when, after an hour of play, you leave IN THE HOLE.

I have had losing sessions before.
I have had HUGE losing sessions.
I have quit games a loser.
I have had people quit me as winners.
I am a winning player.
I have played tons of hands and won heaps of money.
I have one of the best heads up winrates in the world.

All of those statements are true.

re: the KQ hand @ 46 mins-

he limps, we raise with KQ, bet call QTx and checkfold a blank turn.

Two questions:

1. Would our play here be any different if we were 100bb deep rather than 200bb?

2. Does your reasoning here not contradict your reasoning 10 mins later with the Kxs bet/3bet shove? In this hand you say that this player is not making a stand, but is just patiently waiting for a hand. But 10 mins later the reasoning for 3betting the flop with the fd+over is that you think he could be making a stand against your relentless aggression.

re: the KQ hand @ 46 mins-

he limps, we raise with KQ, bet call QTx and checkfold a blank turn.

Two questions:

1. Would our play here be any different if we were 100bb deep rather than 200bb?

2. Does your reasoning here not contradict your reasoning 10 mins later with the Kxs bet/3bet shove? In this hand you say that this player is not making a stand, but is just patiently waiting for a hand. But 10 mins later the reasoning for 3betting the flop with the fd+over is that you think he could be making a stand against your relentless aggression.

1. We might stack off 100bb deep, but I'd hate it.

2. Different type of situation. The first is a raised pot where we bet and call a raise. We always have a hand there. The second is a reraised pot that occurs 10 min later (which may or may not affect bluffing frequency, we can't be sure) where we have been c-betting nearly 100% of the time after reraising at an extremely high rate. We never have to have a hand there, which makes it very profitable for him to bluff and very exploitable for us to fold a hand that has that much equity in the bigger pot. Now, the caveat is that all of that just might not matter, but what it comes down to is that it's really impossible to know until we get to showdown and we've got a hand with enough outs and enough suspicion for fold equity that we can get all in now and figure it out for certain afterwards. Getting to showdown is the best way to turn good reads into rock solid ones, or solidify general assumptions into good reads.

+ i'm a monkey.

Wow that was really awesome.

But about the 42 hand on the 6442T board, do you guys really think his range is ANY wider than 66/64/22? I think you can comfortably rule out any other hand 95+% of the time and just flatcall his riverbet. Given his tendencies he's not playing anything else that way ever, and since you have a 2 there's more 66+64 than 22 combo's so I thought this'd be a pretty clear flatcall. I think I'd almost rather fold than jam there. I know that sounds ridiculous but we're talking about a guy who's folding over 90% to 3bets, thinks you guys were a totally insane monkey and wasn't gonna bluff pretty much ever.

His line is c/c near potbet, c/r turn and bet big on river...

Especially with the flush hitting i'm quite certain that he would c/c a flush or A4...
It's pretty unlucky but you guys could have saved yourself 370$ i think

Awesome video though, really amazing how far you guys could push this guy around without him just playing back at all. And spot on analasys, and just great sense of humor. 5/5 and everyone else agrees