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

Head is GOOD !!

Head is GOOD !!

good is head?

epic, classic, pure gold, thank you so much dogishead.

been waiting for this, awesome!

How do you get those stats VP_SB VP_BB etc? They aren't in the HEM player display tab

just made my day

been waiting for this, awesome!

How do you get those stats VP_SB VP_BB etc? They aren't in the HEM player display tab

oops nevermind, sorry about that. Tired, stayed up a little late to watch this : )

Head is GOOD !!

And the GMan is the BOMB !!

FIRE !!

LOL. I don't know what exactly is in the works but you guys will get lynched if you don't do a follow up series.

Just creammed my pants !!!!

Dog/Gman - regarding the two 3 barrel front bets from villain on JT8(two tone) and 79T what are you guys doing in villains shoes with 88 and 77 (bottomset on both boards) when it is perhaps possible from timing etc that you can sense weakness as the board runs out grosser with each successive card ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4pXfHLUlZf4&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4pXfHLUlZf4&feature=related

This link is f***** awesome, thanks

Dog/Gman - regarding the two 3 barrel front bets from villain on JT8(two tone) and 79T what are you guys doing in villains shoes with 88 and 77 (bottomset on both boards) when it is perhaps possible from timing etc that you can sense weakness as the board runs out grosser with each successive card ?

I don't exactly understand your question. Are you saying we are villain and lead out both times with bottom set?

dog is god

boom

I don't exactly understand your question. Are you saying we are villain and lead out both times with bottom set?

yes - what do you do with bottomset OOP in both those boards ?

whilst it is possible that villain flopped the nuts, it just seemed odd that he played similar boards in an identical fashion (yeah sample size of 2, I know but..)

"looks like we beat the crap out of that horse"

hahahahha

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4pXfHLUlZf4&feature=related

hahaha i can't stop watching this. it's catchy.

great series guys, thanks for all the effort.

In regards to the final discussion in this video (whether he should and does often check J/T hearts):

Gman makes the point that players will often check for a control/deception/WAWB reason, which Dog seems to mostly agree with. However you (Dog) make the arguement that he wins the same amount if not more by betting the turn with Jh or Th, and therefore he should be betting those hands even if it's only a small amount of added value. But you seem to be ingoring the benefits of deception and (occationally) pot control on his end. I think in this specific spot, he would need more reasons than what Dog gave for betting turn to outweight the benefits of checking. Like that he wants an image of being able to range-merge on the turn, or, I don't know....

Basically I'm just saying that it seems like a close decision for him, but I think Dog was simplifying it too much.

oh and lol @ the horse comment. really, i did lol

At 14:55 or so when you have Ah8d on the Qs5c3c board and decide to checkraise, what do you do when you pick up some showdown value if an 8 hits on the turn?

Also if in one of the last 2 episodes you could maybe discuss range-merging that would be awesome, it's a concept I struggle with and just don't seem to understand.

yes - what do you do with bottomset OOP in both those boards ?

whilst it is possible that villain flopped the nuts, it just seemed odd that he played similar boards in an identical fashion (yeah sample size of 2, I know but..)

I mean without a really amazing read to do something otherwise, with bottom set in both spots we are def. raising the flop and trying to get all in. If he flats our raise and the turn comes really ugly, obviously we're just going to check back and yell at our computer to pair the board on the river. If he bets the river, I usually would lean towards folding as he often would just check back a non-nut showdownable hand on the river.

In regards to the final discussion in this video (whether he should and does often check J/T hearts):

Gman makes the point that players will often check for a control/deception/WAWB reason, which Dog seems to mostly agree with. However you (Dog) make the arguement that he wins the same amount if not more by betting the turn with Jh or Th, and therefore he should be betting those hands even if it's only a small amount of added value. But you seem to be ingoring the benefits of deception and (occationally) pot control on his end. I think in this specific spot, he would need more reasons than what Dog gave for betting turn to outweight the benefits of checking. Like that he wants an image of being able to range-merge on the turn, or, I don't know....

Basically I'm just saying that it seems like a close decision for him, but I think Dog was simplifying it too much.

oh and lol @ the horse comment. really, i did lol

Ya this was mostly what I was getting at, although you articulated it much better than I did.

At 14:55 or so when you have Ah8d on the Qs5c3c board and decide to checkraise, what do you do when you pick up some showdown value if an 8 hits on the turn?

Also if in one of the last 2 episodes you could maybe discuss range-merging that would be awesome, it's a concept I struggle with and just don't seem to understand.

I would almost always check here and reevaluate. We are rarely getting called by worse and it obviously sucks when he shoves on us.

As for range merging, your probably best off taking that word out of your vocabulary entirely. When you bet, your primary goal should almost always be to either get your opponent to fold a better hand or get him to call w/ a worse one. No matter what crap you have read on 2+2, you will do yourself a favor by knowing if you are bluffing or valuebetting when you put money in the pot. Sure sometimes you end up bluffing with the best hand and vice versa, but a "2 way bet" or a "value-bluff" is just not a good way to think about betting as you are moving up the stakes. Hopefully we'll have time to talk about that in more detail in a later episode.

This series is the fuggin nutz You guys pair up VERY nicely and both bring very good analysis to the match. Because of how good the series is though leads me to a lot of questions since I found the video pretty thought provoking and whenever something comes up I have a question on I just write it down as I'm watching...

This first hand why can't he be leading QT/QJ/Q9? I didn't really understand why it was so hard to put him on a Q since I feel as though leading QJ is better on the flop than check raising it because the lead gets calls from hands that would otherwise not call a c/r or try to just check behind to take a free card. If he check raises that particular board it's going to look super strong and somewhat be turning a QJ hand into a bluff wouldn't it?

Why did we 3bet the Q7s around 8min mark or so.. was waiting for explanation on that although I think I know what it is. Same thing for around the 13:30 min mark with the 78o 3bet... I have trouble sometimes deciding when to 3bet even though I know its obv I should be balancing my 3 betting ranges. I was hoping to hear in the video an explanation for why it was done at that particular time but didn't catch it. Guessing it's just kinda arbitrary since it's early on in the match and we should get a lot of credit and just need to be 3 betting something?

The JTs re shove hand, how do we differentiate between spots where even though the player has been folding to all 3 bets... the first time he wakes up and 4 bets. If you just look at the #s thus far the stats would indicate a fold, but i know that we recognize he's a good player and isn't going to adjust at some point... but how do you decide what to do to that first 4 bet. This is a spot I find myself in a lot that feels like a guessing game where i'm wondering if the guy is actually adjusting or if because he's just folded everytime I should take the obvious route and give it credit?

Also around the 85min mark on the board with all hearts where you guys disagreed, it sounded to me like Dogishead was just leveling himself a bit because he's a good player. I don't think a lot of players at 2/4 and 3/6 are aware they should be going for two streets of value with the J and T of hearts there and are mostly checking behind the turn for the reasons Gman mentioned. What you said made a lot of sense for wh going for 2 streets of value is good (something ill be incorporating) but I don't think most players re doing that. When the hand was playing out I felt like he def was checking back a lot of the medium type hearts ont he turn like TT/99/JJ/88 w/ hearts on the turn to call river bets or value bet river if you check to allow you to stab at a "4 heart board" because he's checking and looks weak. I know that's not too high of level thinking but think that's a very common thought process in this spot.

@29:50

We 3bet ATs and the flop comes AQT mono we have none of the suit. We cbet. What are we doing if we get raised? (stacks are about 100bb).

Is there an argument for not cbetting this flop?

@29:50

We 3bet ATs and the flop comes AQT mono we have none of the suit. We cbet. What are we doing if we get raised? (stacks are about 100bb).

Is there an argument for not cbetting this flop?

do you mean going for a check raise instead of leading here ? I feel we are almost always ahead here, and at worst should be betting for protection/value from any one card draws and AJ/QT/J9 type hands.

48mins, if he is 4bet bluffing why aren't we just calling? we hit soooo much flops

@29:50

We 3bet ATs and the flop comes AQT mono we have none of the suit. We cbet. What are we doing if we get raised? (stacks are about 100bb).

Is there an argument for not cbetting this flop?

This is a pretty terrible board not to cbet. There are a bunch of cards (any flush card, K or J) that will either give our opponent the best hand or eliminate our action. By your question it seems like you are unsure if our hand is strong enough to want to get in on the flop, and the answer is yes for sure it is. I would feel comfortable bet/calling here w/ AK no FD either.

48mins, if he is 4bet bluffing why aren't we just calling? we hit soooo much flops

Because: a) JTss has pretty good equity against a 4bet/calling range
b) Even though our hand looks pretty, we still flop a very weak hand most of the time
c) We are out of position and will be in a pretty tough spot when the flop comes KJ8 or something similar
and d) There is so much money in the pot, that we would be more than happy to just win the pot w/ J high if we think he has air here a good % of the time

By your question it seems like you are unsure if our hand is strong enough to want to get in on the flop,

Yes, this is what I'm thinking. I've tried Stoving a few ranges, bearing in mind that villain is playing quite tight to 3bets, 4betting QQ, TT, AK, and I get results of 33% to 39% for our hand. The 39% figure is being quite generous I think, giving him things like KQ no fd.

Obviously if we bet and he raises then with 33-39% we have enough equity to put the money in at that point with the money already in the pot. But given that villain isn't often going to flat a cbet on this board (hands like 77 would just fold I assume) I would be inclined to look to get it in on the turn (non-4flush of course) with better equity against all his pair+combo draw hands.

Is this reasoning bad? Am I missing something?

Yes, this is what I'm thinking. I've tried Stoving a few ranges, bearing in mind that villain is playing quite tight to 3bets, 4betting QQ, TT, AK, and I get results of 33% to 39% for our hand. The 39% figure is being quite generous I think, giving him things like KQ no fd.

Obviously if we bet and he raises then with 33-39% we have enough equity to put the money in at that point with the money already in the pot. But given that villain isn't often going to flat a cbet on this board (hands like 77 would just fold I assume) I would be inclined to look to get it in on the turn (non-4flush of course) with better equity against all his pair+combo draw hands.

Is this reasoning bad? Am I missing something?

If your stove ranges were correct, then no you would be right w/ the above. But from experience I know we can fairly comfortably get it in on this board texture, so your ranges are just way too nitty. But to back up this claim, I did some work in pokerstove, and obviously had to make some assumptions, so I'll go over them here. This will be the range of hands that he will continue w/ after the flop (either calling or raising) and obviously we are assuming that he is flatting a 3 bet w/ them as well.

Assumptions:
He would continue w/ only the pairs KK/AA. Arguably he would have 4 bet or folded everything else. I'll also assume that PP <TT w/ a diamond either didn't flat PF or are folding this flop.
AA isn't folding, KxKd (3 combos) isnt folding, and I assumed that 2 of the other 3 combos of KK would continue as well.
All AK/AQ are 4 betting PF.
All KJ continue
No KQ suited continue. All KQ w/ a d continue and 1/2 of the KQ no d continue.
No QJ suited continue. All QJ w/ a d continue and 1/2 of the QJ no d continue.
No JT suited continue. 1/2 JTo call PF. Those w/ a d continue, no d folds.
All QT suited continue. 1/2 of QTo continue assuming the other 1/2 folds PF.
No KT suited continue. All KTo w/ a d continue and 1/6 of the KT no d continue.
K9dd continues, other K9 suited folded. All K9o only w/ a diamond continue.
Q9 suited folds. Q9o only w/ a diamond continues.
J9dd continues. 1/3 other J9ss continues.
1/3 of J9o call PF. Of those 4 combos, the 2 w/ d continue, and 1/2 w/o a d continue.
AJ-A9o continue.
AJss-A6ss continue.


Text results appended to pokerstove.txt

84,150 games 0.005 secs 16,830,000 games/sec

Board: Ad Qd Td
Dead:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 55.826% 50.64% 05.19% 42613 4364.50 { AcTc }
Hand 1: 44.174% 38.99% 05.19% 32808 4364.50 { AA, KcKd, KcKh, KdKh, KdKs, KhKs, AJs-A6s, KJs, Kd9d, QTs, Jd9d, Js9s, AJo-A9o, KcQd, KcQh, KcQs, KdQc, KdQh, KdQs, KhQd, KhQs, KsQd, KJo, KcTd, KdTc, KdTh, KdTs, KhTc, KhTd, KsTd, Kc9d, Kd9c, Kd9h, Kd9s, Kh9d, Ks9d, QcJd, QcJh, QcJs, QdJc, QdJh, QdJs, QhJd, QhJs, QsJd, QcTd, QcTh, QcTs, QdTh, QdTs, QhTs, Qc9d, Qd9c, Qd9h, Qd9s, Qh9d, Qs9d, Qs9h, JcTd, JdTh, JdTs, Jd9c, Jh9c, Jh9d }

Against this range, which represents 10.9% of hands, we have 55.83% equity. Arguably, he is calling 3 bets w/ about 1/3 of hands in the deck (This is assuming he opens 80ish% and calls 40% of 3 bets 0.8*.4=32%. In that case, 2/3 of the time we take down the 20-24BB already in the pot as an added bonus. Finally, the above assumes that our opponent floats or raises the flop w/ a hand weaker than those mentioned above exactly 0% of the time, which imo is pretty ridiculous in a MSNL HU match, even though this board texture is obviously not a typical one to make plays on. Hope that helps.

That does help, thanks.

Your range assignment isn't too different from what I came up with. I had more flushes in his range assuming he'd call a 3bet with 78s and the like. And I didn't include Aces without a diamond less than AT. Interesting that that would make such a huge difference in equity.

Because: a) JTss has pretty good equity against a 4bet/calling range
b) Even though our hand looks pretty, we still flop a very weak hand most of the time
c) We are out of position and will be in a pretty tough spot when the flop comes KJ8 or something similar
and d) There is so much money in the pot, that we would be more than happy to just win the pot w/ J high if we think he has air here a good % of the time

Ok this was a pretty interesting concept for me, and you kind of touched on it more in episode 5 about dealing with a guy who 3-bets a ton, you just open up your 4-betting value range and not 4-bet bluffing as much. So tonight I'm playing this guy HU who is a pretty wild 3-better. Like 22-24% over 150+ hands (he wasn't terrible, i mean obviously way to aggro, but was an ok player). So I decide to decide to start four-betting like A8+ any pp and KQ, KJ. I know some of these hands play well in position, but we weren't deep and I figured taking down 13bbs now is enough to make these hands 4-bets against this guy.

Before these two hands came up, I had four-bet him three separate times over like the last 100 hands so I def wasn't going wild, I expected him to respect them somewhat (obviously not too much since he has to kinda play light given how much he three-bets). Anyway, over those three hands I once getting it AI for 150bbs my KK to his 77, and the other two he folded. These two hands then came up and I felt real dirty calling. Am I misapplying this concept or just run into a couple better hands at the wrong time.

Poker Stars $5/$10 No Limit Hold'em - 2 players
The Official DeucesCracked.com Hand History Converter

Hero (BTN/SB): $2049.25
BB: $1139.50

Pre Flop: ($15.00) Hero is BTN/SB with A 8
Hero raises to $30, BB raises to $100, Hero raises to $250, BB raises to $1139.50 all in, Hero calls $889.50



Poker Stars $5/$10 No Limit Hold'em - 2 players
The Official DeucesCracked.com Hand History Converter

Hero (BTN/SB): $2847.50
BB: $1279.00

Pre Flop: ($15.00) Hero is BTN/SB with T A
Hero raises to $30, BB raises to $100, Hero raises to $250, BB raises to $750, Hero raises to $1810, BB calls $529 all in

Ok this was a pretty interesting concept for me, and you kind of touched on it more in episode 5 about dealing with a guy who 3-bets a ton, you just open up your 4-betting value range and not 4-bet bluffing as much. So tonight I'm playing this guy HU who is a pretty wild 3-better. Like 22-24% over 150+ hands (he wasn't terrible, i mean obviously way to aggro, but was an ok player). So I decide to decide to start four-betting like A8+ any pp and KQ, KJ. I know some of these hands play well in position, but we weren't deep and I figured taking down 13bbs now is enough to make these hands 4-bets against this guy.

Before these two hands came up, I had four-bet him three separate times over like the last 100 hands so I def wasn't going wild, I expected him to respect them somewhat (obviously not too much since he has to kinda play light given how much he three-bets). Anyway, over those three hands I once getting it AI for 150bbs my KK to his 77, and the other two he folded. These two hands then came up and I felt real dirty calling. Am I misapplying this concept or just run into a couple better hands at the wrong time.

Poker Stars $5/$10 No Limit Hold'em - 2 players
The Official DeucesCracked.com Hand History Converter

Hero (BTN/SB): $2049.25
BB: $1139.50

Pre Flop: ($15.00) Hero is BTN/SB with A 8
Hero raises to $30, BB raises to $100, Hero raises to $250, BB raises to $1139.50 all in, Hero calls $889.50



Poker Stars $5/$10 No Limit Hold'em - 2 players
The Official DeucesCracked.com Hand History Converter

Hero (BTN/SB): $2847.50
BB: $1279.00

Pre Flop: ($15.00) Hero is BTN/SB with T A
Hero raises to $30, BB raises to $100, Hero raises to $250, BB raises to $750, Hero raises to $1810, BB calls $529 all in

Yes, you are misapplying the concept a bit here. Remember it isn't like he can have all the cards in this spot; even if he is very aggressive, he is going to usually have something reasonable here when he 3 bets, and when he 5 bet shoves. his range is going to obviously be even stronger, proven by the fact that he has folded to a couple 4 bets already.

Long story short, you should never be 4 betting hands like 22-55 and KQ/KJ. 22-55 just don't have enough equity against even the lightest of 5 bet shoving ranges, thus your 4 bet there really isn't for light value and you would be better off just shoving over his 3 bet (if he really is 3 betting enough to make that profitable) to create some fold equity w/ a hand you don't want him to shove against. With KQ/KJ, you also are not doing that well against a 5 bet shoving range: any weak Ax hand will be 5 bet shoving there as a bluff, and even that hand is ahead of what you thought was a value 4 bet! Plus KQ/KJ are great hands to call a 3 bet w/ position.

To summarize: in aggro HU matches, it is fairly standard to 4 bet 99+/AQ+ for value. In the most crazy of those matches I will make extremely thin 4 bets for value with hands as weak as AJ/77, but almost never worse than that unless I have an extremely strong read that my hand is ahead of his 5 bet shoving range, which is pretty rare tbh.

To summarize: in aggro HU matches, it is fairly standard to 4 bet 99+/AQ+ for value. In the most crazy of those matches I will make extremely thin 4 bets for value with hands as weak as AJ/77, but almost never worse than that unless I have an extremely strong read that my hand is ahead of his 5 bet shoving range, which is pretty rare tbh.

thanks for the response gman, but i'm still a little confused. do you recommend 4-bet folding these two hands in this example. should i just be calling them and playing post-flop. remember i've been three-bet like a mofo, and at some point feel compelled to do something more than just calling and sometimes floating or raising c-bets. and obviously these hands are ahead of somebody's range who is 3-betting 23% of hands, but probably not ahead of his shoving range.

Do you suggest i 4-bet more with hands that can't call a shove? since his shoving range should still be pretty legit. It's also just soul crushing to get 3-bet relentlessly and then finally make a 4-bet bluff and get shoved on and fold.

Time Link to 00:33:35

whats the relationship between a read that your opponent check/calls a lot of your cbets and bluffing this river?