---

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

Not much on the content - but you asked on the 3 or 4 thing.
I think you two have a good flow and Syous LAG style and questioning every spot gives enough content.

sooo no change for mine.

Time Link to 00:22:25

I can def find spots vs. different guys and dynamics where I would both ship and flat on that board, but I think if you're going to take the raise route, esp w/no other dynamics, shipping has to look bluffier than a smallish raise imo. (which would make it a great spot to semi-bluff raise small, it just looks so strong).

Time Link to 00:26:25

I put him on the installment plan on the turn and bet like $50-60 so I can ship a lot of rivers. If he has a K he's stacking you anyway and I don't want to give him a free card when I think he has a lot of worse hands that will call down, just give him some candy and let him find the razorblades imo.

Nice calling 4b calling discussion!

I put him on the installment plan on the turn and bet like $50-60 so I can ship a lot of rivers. If he has a K he's stacking you anyway and I don't want to give him a free card when I think he has a lot of worse hands that will call down, just give him some candy and let him find the razorblades imo.

Meh, i don't really agree that he's got a lot of worse hands that are gonna stack off (I guess "a lot" is relative, so w/e). Yeah, I think his Qx hands stack off, but I think he gets away from 99-JJ either on the turn or the river.

I think in hindsight, we need to bet a bit bigger on the flop to set up a less than PSB shove. But if we do play it that way, I still like checking the turn. It's just the best way to get a hero call out of him IMO. Like if he has 99-JJ I think he's very likely to just dump it if we shove turn, but if we "show weakness" on the turn, his chance of hero calling us goes way up.

Time Link to 00:56:52

I think we're calling 74 to win 138 giving us a little worse than 2:1.. no?

Meh, i don't really agree that he's got a lot of worse hands that are gonna stack off (I guess "a lot" is relative, so w/e). Yeah, I think his Qx hands stack off, but I think he gets away from 99-JJ either on the turn or the river.

I think in hindsight, we need to bet a bit bigger on the flop to set up a less than PSB shove. But if we do play it that way, I still like checking the turn. It's just the best way to get a hero call out of him IMO. Like if he has 99-JJ I think he's very likely to just dump it if we shove turn, but if we "show weakness" on the turn, his chance of hero calling us goes way up.

I would think 99-JJ would go in preflop some % of the time. Even if he has those hands 100% if he's a loose fishy dude he can have AT/AJ/9T/TJ any flush draw/any Q etc. etc. and I don't think he's going to fold any of that for a cheap turn bet.

If you bet bigger on the flop I def agree with checking the turn.

I think we're calling 74 to win 138 giving us a little worse than 2:1.. no?

haha, yeah..pretty basic stuff. it's funny how my brain can't do simple math when under pressure like that. so yeah, clear fold imo.

49:00 - you beat or chop with all missed FDs unless they hit the king

Time Link to 00:32:48

OK wait a minute,

first you talk about the fact that lower SPRs favour the guy in position and that if you were playing Ivey you'd rather have 2bb stacks than anything higher, and now you wanna play 9-hi with an SPR of 1.9 to outplay the guy, clearly taking the worst of it even vs his bluffing range?

I've noticed a trend of regs calling 4bets recently and already wondered if there was a video out about how awesome putting in 20% of your stack with 9-hi is.
So, everybody thinks he's Jman now (who's playing in totally different games and is obv a way better player than all of us).

I admit that there's some merit to your point of calling our entire continue range, but I have trouble believing that this will yield a higher EV than NOT 3betting 97s in the first place (you know, high SPR, position, that sorta thing)

OK wait a minute,

first you talk about the fact that lower SPRs favour the guy in position and that if you were playing Ivey you'd rather have 2bb stacks than anything higher, and now you wanna play 9-hi with an SPR of 1.9 to outplay the guy, clearly taking the worst of it even vs his bluffing range?

I've noticed a trend of regs calling 4bets recently and already wondered if there was a video out about how awesome putting in 20% of your stack with 9-hi is.
So, everybody thinks he's Jman now (who's playing in totally different games and is obv a way better player than all of us).

I admit that there's some merit to your point of calling our entire continue range, but I have trouble believing that this will yield a higher EV than NOT 3betting 97s in the first place (you know, high SPR, position, that sorta thing)

I'm unfortunately not a math guy but when ranges get that wide, you're pretty much looking to shove flop with any pair or draw. It'd be interesting to see how it works but the last time I talked to someone about it, he said some estimates he did out loud and it seemed pretty correct.

Sometimes you get bluffed, sometimes you push him off the best hand, sometimes you have odds to stick it in against his range, sometimes you pick up a big pot when he bet/folds... if anyone wants is willing to do some maths against ranges and flops it'd be a great discussion.

It's definitely an interesting experiment, if I played 6m regularly, it's how I would play against the small 4bettors, that or I'd min5bet them.



Also something you forget to mention is that this is the OOP player's tool to combat light 3bettors. By making them play out of position like this constantly, I would assume most players would stop battling you pre-flop because they're going to constantly be in sticky situations. That alone is worth calling 4bets w/our continuing range imo.

One of the best 6-max videos on DC Syous: occasionally you cut Chipchucker off a little, which is something you could work on; however, this is a minor thing and your contribution is in general excellent. Looking forward to more.

One of the best 6-max videos on DC Syous: occasionally you cut Chipchucker off a little, which is something you could work on; however, this is a minor thing and your contribution is in general excellent. Looking forward to more.

thanks, that means a lot!

I definitely have a bad habit of cutting him off, I'll do my best to work on it.

Btw guys, any interest in doing 3/6 and 5/10 or would you all prefer 2/4 content?

I would think 99-JJ would go in preflop some % of the time. Even if he has those hands 100% if he's a loose fishy dude he can have AT/AJ/9T/TJ any flush draw/any Q etc. etc. and I don't think he's going to fold any of that for a cheap turn bet.

If you bet bigger on the flop I def agree with checking the turn.

Yeah, 99-JJ shove some of the time..i think a passive fish is flatting them pretty often tho. You know, he wants to see a safe flop before committing, etc etc. Seems like a bit of a stretch for him to be calling turn w/ AT/AJ (but yeah i guess he's a fish, so he'll do that once in a while) and a BIG stretch to call w/ T9. But yeah, w/ FDs, JT and worse Qx, betting 60 on turn seems pretty good.

didnt understand the talk in the Q3 hand about betting him off missed flush draws.. the board is AAK62 - dont you beat all non-paired flush draws besides better Qx's? Would you still bet to fold 6x-TT or would you just check it back realizing you beat missed fds?

awesomeness!

I'm unfortunately not a math guy but when ranges get that wide, you're pretty much looking to shove flop with any pair or draw.

So instead of going into shove or fold mode preflop you go into shove or fold mode on the flop, basically playing fit or fold with 9-hi in an 80-90bb pot?

Apart from that I'm not gonna fold any pair or draw neither, and my pairs will more often than not be bigger than yours, unless I have something like K3s (as opposed to you I do not open K3o in the CO). I might not even cbet that, but that does not mean that I play c/f. My draws aswell will have you dominated more often than not. Hey, and then theres the thing that I in fact DO have value hands in my 4betting range, which have you smoked.

It'd be interesting to see how it works but the last time I talked to someone about it, he said some estimates he did out loud and it seemed pretty correct.

Sometimes you get bluffed, sometimes you push him off the best hand,

You won't push me off the best hand nearly often enough. For a bluff to work you need FE, and when I have even the slightest piece of the board I'm gonna bet/call you. Hell, I have bet/called AK-hi vs guys like you.

sometimes you have odds to stick it in against his range,

Odds based on dead money YOU created by putting in 20% of your stack with 9-hi (sorry if it appears I'm beating a dead horse here, but I just find this play atrocious)

sometimes you pick up a big pot when he bet/folds... if anyone wants is willing to do some maths against ranges and flops it'd be a great discussion.

It's definitely an interesting experiment, if I played 6m regularly, it's how I would play against the small 4bettors, that or I'd min5bet them.

And fold to a jam?

Also something you forget to mention is that this is the OOP player's tool to combat light 3bettors. By making them play out of position like this constantly, I would assume most players would stop battling you pre-flop because they're going to constantly be in sticky situations. That alone is worth calling 4bets w/our continuing range imo.

Like I said, that is the only point in your argumentation that I see a slight merit in, i.e. *IF* you want to flatcall 4bets, to do it with your whole range. That gameplan would need to be analyzed.

I still think your logic here is kinda flawed. You know who I stop battling with? I stop battling with guys who CONSTANTLY flat my CO raises on the BTN. These are the guys whom I have to play for three streets OOP with a flop SPR of ~14 (assuming 100bb stacks). I'm not scared at all of OOP play with just below two pots left. Especially not if I know someone is willing to call 97s pre.

So instead of going into shove or fold mode preflop you go into shove or fold mode on the flop, basically playing fit or fold with 9-hi in an 80-90bb pot?

Apart from that I'm not gonna fold any pair or draw, and my pairs will more often than not be bigger than yours, unless I have something like K3s (as opposed to you I do not open K3o in the CO). I might not even cbet that, but that does not mean that I play c/f. My draws aswell will have you dominated more often than not. Hey, and then theres the thing that I in fact DO have value hands in my 4betting range, which have you smoked.



You won't push me off the best hand nearly often enough. For a bluff to work you need FE, and when I have even the slightest piece of the board I'm gonna bet/call you. Hell, I have bet/called AK-hi vs guys like you.



Odds based on dead money YOU created by putting in 20% of your stack with 9-hi (sorry if it appears I'm beating a dead horse here, but I just find this play atrocious)



And fold to a jam?



Like I said, that is the only point in your argumentation that I see a slight merit in, i.e. *IF* you want to flatcall 4bets, to do it with your whole range. That gameplan would need to be analyzed.

I still think your logic here is kinda flawed. You know who I stop battling with? I stop battling with guys who CONSTANTLY flat my CO raises on the BTN. These are the guys whom I have to play for three streets OOP with a flop SPR of ~14 (assuming 100bb stacks). I'm not scared at all of OOP play with just below two pots left. Especially not if I know someone is willing to call 97s pre.

you're right that it's probably better shove 97s pf based on your 4b frequencies. It would also be a poor adjustment to 3bet you with 97s if you're going to 4b small a lot as well.

It's really going to depend on how often you 4bet me, if it gets ridiculous then I'll 3b small pairs to jam and possibly suited connectors to jam depending on how crazy it gets, but really this is getting more into HU adjustment than 6m.

6m it'd be simple enough to 3bet just broadways and AT+ or something like that if you were to really take 4betting to that level. Everyone's different and ranges should be designed to tailor to such diversity. If you're constantly bet/calling flops off, then we gain so much value from even a hand like TT that doesn't like to see flops, but if you b/c your whole range off a 1 facecard board, I find it hard to see it being -ev.

It would be a really interesting game to play, unfortunately I don't think we'll have the chance at that kind of dynamic

didnt understand the talk in the Q3 hand about betting him off missed flush draws.. the board is AAK62 - dont you beat all non-paired flush draws besides better Qx's? Would you still bet to fold 6x-TT or would you just check it back realizing you beat missed fds?

Yeah sorry, I was interested in the argument that betting will fold 6-TTx as well as busted flush draws since we're going to be here w/a busted draw worse than Qhi sometimes.

I'm not saying that it's better to shove 97s pre. When did I say that? There are 169 different Holdem hands in a 52 card deck. Some of them are awesome to 3bet with, some of them are not. Some hands play awesome postflop, some not really. 97s falls into the latter category. I don't even think that you should shove 97s once you 3bet him and got 4bet. Just fold, dude.

OK, Phil Galfond says that calling 4bets is viable 100bb eff. Hard to argue with that, cos 1. He's awesome and 2. I haven't seen the vid (I wouldn't be afraid to argue with him though if I truly disagreed, because you are prolly a better player than I am aswell and I'm arguing with you ). However, I've recently read or heard (maybe even in a DC vid?) someone quote him, that our aim is not to win pots but to win money. You know, sometimes folding is actually the best play.

The hand that started the whole discussion was you 3betting J4s CO/BTN. Now, while I also don't particularly love this play, I think it is WAY superior than doing it with 97s, because you're not unhappy at all when you get 4bet, you just muck and move on with a slightly more aggro image. On the other hand, if you 3bet 97s (which sucks imo), get 4bet and have to fold (which is the best play imo), then you think, why oh why didn't I just flat this hand?

Everybody hates shortstackers with a passion and there's a BIG controversy going on in the 2p2 forums since stars split the playerpool into 20-50 and 40-100 tables. Yet every 2nd 100bb reg anyways wants to play a preflop, or low SPR flop game. I don't, and tbh, probably won't get this.

I'm not saying that it's better to shove 97s pre. When did I say that? There are 169 different Holdem hands in a 52 card deck. Some of them are awesome to 3bet with, some of them are not. Some hands play awesome postflop, some not really. 97s falls into the latter category. I don't even think that you should shove 97s once you 3bet him and got 4bet. Just fold, dude.

OK, Phil Galfond says that calling 4bets is viable 100bb eff. Hard to argue with that, cos 1. He's awesome and 2. I haven't seen the vid (I wouldn't be afraid to argue with him though if I truly disagreed, because you are prolly a better player than I am aswell and I'm arguing with you ). However, I've recently read or heard (maybe even in a DC vid?) someone quote him, that our aim is not to win pots but to win money. You know, sometimes folding is actually the best play.

The hand that started the whole discussion was you 3betting J4s CO/BTN. Now, while I also don't particularly love this play, I think it is WAY superior than doing it with 97s, because you're not unhappy at all when you get 4bet, you just muck and move on with a slightly more aggro image. On the other hand, if you 3bet 97s (which sucks imo), get 4bet and have to fold (which is the best play imo), then you think, why oh why didn't I just flat this hand?

Everybody hates shortstackers with a passion and there's a BIG controversy going on in the 2p2 forums since stars split the playerpool into 20-50 and 40-100 tables. Yet every 2nd 100bb reg anyways wants to play a preflop, or low SPR flop game. I don't, and tbh, probably won't get this.

well if u have high bluff frequencies, jamming 97s isn't a bad play in this spot. Not saying I would personally do it but it can be defendable.

On 3betting 97s - personally, it's going to be minus ev for some to call (weaker postflop players or just nits), that's why it's not that bad to 3bet, but I get what you're saying.

J4s is definitely sexy like that

100bb regs definitely need to start more tables.

100bb regs definitely need to start more tables.

Now here's something on which we 100% agree (and I do it constantly).

Now here's something on which we 100% agree (and I do it constantly).

and therein lies the peace.

I'm glad you start tables. In actuality any 6m reg who does should probably take some HU lessons. I already said it in the video but to anyone reading it, by taking HU lessons you can work on giving yourself a neutral if not +ev edge on other regs looking to start tables AND generally tables you start will be soft since they only run if a fish or two join. I had a fish donate me 40bbs while I was trying to get this vid going, it was a nice gift.

Unfortunately Stars really should start giving out some incentives for starting tables. They probably don't care and prefer 20-50bb tables to keep fish in the game longer but yeah....

Hahah, you're definitely a good businessman. Maybe I'll even take a few HU lessons from you one day, because apart from how it might have sounded, I like the way you think about the game (you are certainly creative and so am I). tbh I wouldn' even have commented if I thought you just sucked. I just like arguing when I see players who I think are good make what I think is a shitty play

That's what'll make us all better players in the end.

Lol I really wasn't meaning to imply myself. There are plenty of cheaper HU coaches.

I completely agree w/what you're saying. This discussion was definitely interesting and needed. Just because I spouted during that video what I believe is the correct counter-play (mind you I came up with it right then) doesn't make it correct. That's my intuition speaking, however both of our arguments are very close imo.

But what our discussion did serve is a template for the players reading this. Should they choose to take part on either side, at least there are arguments for what we think is bad/good.

Who wants a cheap HU coach if you can get an expensive one who likes to take unorthodox (albeit shitty) lines

I really mean that. You don't wanna know how many stacks I've spewed trying shitty lines.

Yeah I get what you're saying. I do think it's much more important to learn the basics and master them before moving on to a lag play. I started tight hu and once I had a better understanding of the game I became ridiculously loose. It's just so important to understand tag play and not just mimic it before being able to move on farther than that. If someone can't understand tag, how can they understand lag?

Time Link to 00:04:22

the T9s hand - i think the c/r is bad and that's discussed on video, but you guy's gloss over calling once he reraises. why is a set a call and not T9s? the only hand between those holdings you discuss is KT. there are only six combos and a 3b with this hand seems insane.

One of the best 6-max videos on DC Syous: occasionally you cut Chipchucker off a little, which is something you could work on; however, this is a minor thing and your contribution is in general excellent. Looking forward to more.

Couldn't agree more great series but Syous please let Chipchucker finish his sentences

Ok, so this calling a 4bet IP thing is super complicated, so I'll do my best to just give you guys some things to think about. And I have taken some info from Galfond's vid on BFP fwiw.

So there's basically two types of hands that we may want to consider calling a small 4bet w/ 100bbs IP, and for this example we'll use A8s and 75s. And we'll assume we 3bet to 36, villain 4bets to 82..so we need 27% equity to breakeven on the call.

So our hands have the following equities vs various ranges:
A8s has 30% equity vs TT+, AKs, AKo
A8s has 37% equity vs TT+,AKs,AKo, 98s, 87s, 76s

75s has 27% equity vs TT+,AKs,AKo
75s has 30% equity vs TT+,AKs,AKo,98s,K4s,A4s

So clearly for these to be unprofitable calls, we must be at a disadvantage postflop. Galfond believes that we are NOT at a postflop disadvantage vs some avg/weak opponents. And that we may be at an advantage w/ a hand like 75s because of our perceived strong range, and the fact that this can create very good deceptive postflop situations.

Let's look at some flops w/ our two hands vs the uber tight 4betting range. So w/ A8s (these flops assume we have a backdoor FD) we have the following equities vs TT+,AKs,AKo:

70% on A53r
59% on AT3r
42% on J83r
20% on 763r

Another thing to consider is that when we have A8s, villain will flop less than TP about 50% of the time w/ TT+, AK. So when we have a hand like 75s, there should be a lot of good bluffing opportunities since a lot of flops won't be good for our opponents range.

Now let's look at a couple flops w/ 75s (again assuming we have a BDFD).

75s vs TT+,AK
42% on J73r
29% on 983r

These can be good situations particularly if our opponent is likely to be cbetting small (extremely common in 4bet pots), and will be likely to give up on bluffs and/or be turning his hand faceup on later streets.

Now I'm obv not saying "don't ever fold to 4bets IP!" I just wanted to provide you guys w/ some things to think about. And I suspect that some of these numbers may be pretty surprising to you wrt how much equity we may have..esp keeping in mind that we assumed basically the tightest 4bet range possible for villain in most situations.

So gl, and thanks for all the feedback..please keep it coming

Obv we will flop some sort of equity some of the times. What I still don't understand is why we want to flop that sorta equity with less than two pots left to play. Why do we want to get into the spot in the first place? I'm simply not sold on the assumption that 3betting 75s is gonna be more profitable than calling. Yeah, there might be situations where there's squeeze monkeys in the blinds, but I can only say it again: Sometimes folding is actually the best play. The general trend in today's games is that regs are moving more and more into the direction of a win-every-pot-syndrome. A lot of those guys are breaking even over big samples.

Don't get me wrong, I'm far from being a nit, but I do have one of the lowest 3bet stats among winning SSNL regs. I do understand the reason why a lot of my opponents 3bet 12%-13% overall (17%-23% of those out of the blinds). They simply play a gazillion tables and wanna reduce SPRs so they can have easier decisions. FPPs are a hulluva drug I guess... (I actually have guys in my DB who's blind VPIPs are higher than their BTN VPIP, lol)

I obviously know that not a lot of people are agreeing with me, otherwise 100bb cash wouldn't look more and more like SNGs nowadays. However there are good winning highstakes regs like Samoleus whom I've heard saying similar things. There's also one guy who's sitting at your tables in this video, and who's crushing SSNL/MSNL who plays a fairly low 3bet%. whenever I PTR a preflop warrior all I see is massive swongs hovering around +/- 0. I don't think that's a coincidence.

Time Link to 00:34:33

i'm not sure you understand the meaning of exploitive (syous). 4b to $84 from $36 is not necessarily exploitive or balanced - we need to know his range to determine this. our opponent is risking $72 to win $64. he's laying himself a bit worse than 1:1, so he can do this as a bluff 53% (72/136) of the time and be balanced. if he bluffs more or less, he's taking an exploitive line.

in all likelihood, you're not facing a balanced 4b range here, since you make videos showing yourself 3b J4s!

great series so far, keep it up!!! already looking forward to the next episode

i'm not sure you understand the meaning of exploitive (syous). 4b to $84 from $36 is not necessarily exploitive or balanced - we need to know his range to determine this. our opponent is risking $72 to win $64. he's laying himself a bit worse than 1:1, so he can do this as a bluff 53% (72/136) of the time and be balanced. if he bluffs more or less, he's taking an exploitive line.

in all likelihood, you're not facing a balanced 4b range here, since you make videos showing yourself 3b J4s!

Yeah you're right. So far I'm not worried about being bluff/rebluffed. I haven't noticed or seen anyone really trying to make my life miserable. If that's a bluff from him, cool, but no one's doing it nearly enough for me to consider changing my 3b ranges.

Obv we will flop some sort of equity some of the times. What I still don't understand is why we want to flop that sorta equity with less than two pots left to play. Why do we want to get into the spot in the first place? I'm simply not sold on the assumption that 3betting 75s is gonna be more profitable than calling. Yeah, there might be situations where there's squeeze monkeys in the blinds, but I can only say it again: Sometimes folding is actually the best play. The general trend in today's games is that regs are moving more and more into the direction of a win-every-pot-syndrome. A lot of those guys are breaking even over big samples.

Don't get me wrong, I'm far from being a nit, but I do have one of the lowest 3bet stats among winning SSNL regs. I do understand the reason why a lot of my opponents 3bet 12%-13% overall (17%-23% of those out of the blinds). They simply play a gazillion tables and wanna reduce SPRs so they can have easier decisions. FPPs are a hulluva drug I guess... (I actually have guys in my DB who's blind VPIPs are higher than their BTN VPIP, lol)

I obviously know that not a lot of people are agreeing with me, otherwise 100bb cash wouldn't look more and more like SNGs nowadays. However there are good winning highstakes regs like Samoleus whom I've heard saying similar things. There's also one guy who's sitting at your tables in this video, and who's crushing SSNL/MSNL who plays a fairly low 3bet%. whenever I PTR a preflop warrior all I see is massive swongs hovering around +/- 0. I don't think that's a coincidence.

So you advocate always flatting hands like 75s or 97s? You are just not going to profit much with those, and they are even loosing calls vs tighter opening ranges. And no, I definitely dont want to emulate punketty flatting 86s in the SB vs an UTG open
I completely disagree when you say that 3-betting a lot is a bad thing to do, and saying winning players mostly have low 3-bet % while aggro 3-bettors are mostly breakeven is just false and completely ridiculous.

That discussion on flatting 4-bets is interesting, it comes from the fact that regs are 4-betting smaller and smaller, because 3-betting regs used to always shove/fold va a 4-bet, so 4-betting regs figured out that they could 4-bet bluff a lot smaller with the exact same result. If you are always shoving/folding to a 4-bet why should the guy do anything other than a mini 4-bet? Vs people who 4-bet kind of a lot and very small I think it's correct to flat quite a bit of hands and they usually bet 1/4th or 1/3rd pot on flop. I also think it's prolly best to flat AA and KK 100% vs small 4-bets. If he opens 3bb you 3-bet 9bb and he 4-bets like 19-20bb it looks pretty obvious that we should have a flatting range, and I'm never folding 97s or KQo vs that small of a 4-bet.

It's a very interesting topic as its still somewhat of an unexplored territory.

Time Link to 00:31:39

How can we call These M4Bs w/KJ or even 97s? We know he is super polarized and will prolly CB alot so we spew x % of the time wen we flop a small peace and fold when we have air? I feel we have to play pretty str8 forward here post given SPRs.