---

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

solid download speed imo

hahaha solid mindonk-fold to minraise

This series is really awesome, hopefully you'll continue doing semi-interactive stuff like this in the future!

you must be kidding about the AK utg ship it in > 4bet/c, call, fold
basically if he's at least halfway decent any of the other options (apart from 4b/f obv) is better, depending on image, gameflow, reads etc.

if we ship it in, our hand looks like exactly what we have, he can narrow our range to exactly one hand (the one hand thats stong enough to ship it in, but wants pps to fold because its only coinflipping with them) and play perfectly against it

he's just going to call with all hands that are ahead of us or flipping and fold everything else (like call TT+,AK fold AQ- etc.)

I liked Vanessa analysis on the 4bet ship vs 4bet/call. If he is squeezing he's probably never folding TT+, AK against our ship, and he is also never folding when we 4bet smaller. But if we do bet smaller (but still very big) we don't give him any fold equity, and he probably is still going to get it in with the same TT+, AK range. The difference is that he gains a nice edge with hands like TT-JJ to call and only ship non A non K flops.

That said: The option I liked the most is the option not in the quiz: 4bet way smaller, because 1. I do want to be able to make a 4bet bluff here once in a while (or very similair spots) 2. I do want to give the illusion of fold equity.

Sometimes it's going to suck if villain calls here in position, we have AKo, and we miss the flop. But we protect ourselfs from villain outplaying us by also having monsters in our range, and we are not going to cbet AKo ui 100% of the time, we will be bluffing some % of the time on A high or K high flops and we will be checking the flop with monsters also. And this gives villain a lot of room to make big mistakes pre and postflop against the sizable monster part of our range.

I'd also prefer raising to like 17$ in that spot, to balance my 4-bet bluffs and give my opponent the chance to ship it in with air. If he calls we're in position, so that's not that big of a deal

i strongly disagree
you'd need more reads and infos on history etc.
but assuming we have a standard tag image and he's also a tag, he'd normally fold mid pps against an utg 4bet (i mean with standard tag images he has to assume our 4bet range is AK,QQ+ and against that range he's toast with TT), whereas if we 4bet-ship he plays perfectly against our hand
another thing one might consider is, if we 4bet ship AK here, our normal 4bet for value range is going to be a lot smaller, so we can't really 4bet as a bluff that good (edit: but of course, we could mix it up etc. and it only matters when playing a lot against the same opponents, so its not that much of a big concern here)
however, i'd also like a smaller 4bet size, that allows to 4b/f with bluffs

i strongly disagree
you'd need more reads and infos on history etc.
but assuming we have a standard tag image and he's also a tag, he'd normally fold mid pps against an utg 4bet (i mean with standard tag images he has to assume our 4bet range is AK,QQ+ and against that range he's toast with TT), whereas if we 4bet-ship he plays perfectly against our hand
another thing one might consider is, if we 4bet ship AK here, our normal 4bet for value range is going to be a lot smaller, so we can't really 4bet as a bluff that good
however, i'd also like a smaller 4bet size, that allows to 4b/f with bluffs

If that's true, why don't we 4bet ship AA/KK 100% of the time? Sometimes villain follows your logic, but more often than not villain thinks on a different level. For example: he sees a big bet, so he's going to think that you have a big hand and fold. Or he thinks that you want your hand to look like AKo so that you want him to call you light. Or he thinks that you 4bet/ship your whole range here.

Vanessa: I understand your reasoning behind squeeze/folding TT in the final hand, but I think you are making a dangerous assumption about villains handrange to justify this play, because it's basically only a good play when his range is exactly JJ+,AK. After squeezing the pot is big, and you only need around 40% equity against his range to make a call +ev. If he once in a while spazzes out with AQ or some small pocket pair, or maybe he does the opposite and he thinks we are super strong and he folds JJ. My thinking here is basically that it's almost impossible to make a big mistake by calling here against most reasonable ranges, so I like to call to protect future squeezes with air.

Didn't have a chance to see all the hands yet, but at least one situation where I disagree:

Question 6, I pretty much 100% of the time like to raise KTo after a limper in this situation at a normal table, but not at a table that is described "Table is very loose, pots are often multiway". Usually the situation that unfolds at these kind of small stakes tables is just like in this case that you get a family pot and can't really value bet in almost any situation... I feel that when you Joe said in the video that they just happened to have hands is not true as they don't need hands to call... KTs would be a raise in my mind though...

I missed the 1st week of this think i might aswell of missed this week to i know i got lots wrong. Really cool format though loved it!

In the tens on AT3r I think you're less likely to get purely floated by a KQ/QJ/KJ type hand unless there is at least one call in front of them. But then you aren't getting pure floated, are you?

I missed the 1st week of this think i might aswell of missed this week to i know i got lots wrong. Really cool format though loved it!

But are you learning stuff from it? I know I am learning a ton and wish I had taken part in the first week, I might go a redo that test when the season ends.

This is one of the best learning tools I have ever used.

Excellent.

ps, stop including KT hands, my first love (from 23 years ago but still comes into my life to monkey it around from time to time even though she is married) drives around with personalised plate that starts K10 and that hand always puts me on tilt.

I dont agree with the AA slowplay at all on 236.
Missing so much value from the pair+draw hand like 34 or 44 or ton of hands like that, they will check behind on turn and then dont give any action on the river when they miss.
I think that by far should overweight the value of calling and having guy ship air on turn with what seems like no folding equity. I think it is pretty rare that this happens, It will take a really stupid guy for that to ever work.

We need 2p for shove and maybe 1p for call?

awwwwwwww not shoving the KT is pretty bad in my opinion.
My understanding of fish in general is that its pretty rare for a guy to slowplay turn ever in this spot when you POT, POT. I dont think he will show up with AQ on the river at all, he would prolly given you that minraise on the turn then.
And we clearly beat 50% of his value raising range that he ofc is calling with if this is true at all (even just a little bit).

If that's true, why don't we 4bet ship AA/KK 100% of the time? Sometimes villain follows your logic, but more often than not villain thinks on a different level. For example: he sees a big bet, so he's going to think that you have a big hand and fold. Or he thinks that you want your hand to look like AKo so that you want him to call you light. Or he thinks that you 4bet/ship your whole range here.

yeah it would be a better play here to ship it in with KK or sth. because our hand just looks like AK , and i think we can all agree that it's definetly not a good thing if our hand looks to our opponent exactly like what it really is

now we obv. can't 4bet ship AA/KK 100% of the time because we need to balance our 4bet-bluffs with it, plus we give our opponent the chance to 5bet with thinking he has got fold-equity (which would be obv more relevant with some history and in a BvB situation), so i think it's also better with AA/KK to 4b/c

and it's unlikely that he thinks we want our hand to look like AK to trap him with a big pair because he had to know very much about us and we about him to make such a play, in the beginning he's just starting with thinking what kind of hand we represent (and he would be correct in doing so), it's just silly to assume an unknown will start thinking like oh he thinks i'm going to think that he thinks that i think he wants to trap me etc.

Hey it's me sitting out! lol

I dont agree with the AA slowplay at all on 236.
Missing so much value from the pair+draw hand like 34 or 44 or ton of hands like that, they will check behind on turn and then dont give any action on the river when they miss.

I think you over estimating the players range. He doesnt have 43, etc here, often enough, if ever.

On the AQs 3 bet hand when we are OOP on JTx with a backdoor flush draw. The conclusion was to bet small and ship over a min raise.

There was very little comment about the player OTB but in the absence of reads I am more likely to CR all in here because my push in this situation is nearer to pot size rather than the 1/2 pot push we get after he makes a min-raise. In addition, if he makes a raise much greater than min we have (almost) no fold equity at all on the flop.

Is my analysis way off base here and if so why?

Great series. I'll actually try to remember to enter the next one :-(

T

In the ATs hand against the nit you mentioned that the plan on this board when villain check/calls flop is to double barrel a lot of turn cards, but I guess that in this case we mean shoving considering the awkward stack sizes after our squeeze (villain has exactly a psb behind after a 9.5$ cbet on the flop).

I think you over estimating the players range. He doesnt have 43, etc here, often enough, if ever.

Really? I would consider the majority of his range a hand like a gutshot, a pair or a combination of those. He can also have a hand like 77 or 88 or maybe even AX that he is going to call of the extra 22 dollars with if you ship it in on the flopp!

All of these hands are going to take the free card and might not give any action on river unless improved, while there is no way he will fold any of these hands on the flopp. Some pairs he has might ship turn a descent precentage of the time but alot of stuff is going to check back.


I guess im wondering what the benefit of the slowplay is? I guess to get lucky and let him actually hit a pair when he doesnt have one already and ship it in with that. I think its almost never going to happen that the guy shipps turn with any air, unless he is just very stupid. I simply think that when he get called he is simply going to try to improve and check most of his stuff.
Its so bad when he has one of all these hands that will call the all in raise and then just checks behind and doesnt improve and wont call river.


I mean I think he is almost never going to fold for the 22 extra dollars on the flopp. Think about it, he is snappcalling with AT if that's what he has. I dont know what you wanna put in his range here that he is going to fold? And even if there is stuff I dont think the slowplay is gaining the ammount of value you loose from the hands he is going to snappcall with. If he has A high he is snappcalling, any gutshot, any pair, KJ offsuit he is even calling. While if you call and he doesnt improve he can check it back and have nothing by the river. Also a pair of sevens might check back on a king or something and then fold on a river jack.
On the flopp the fish is going to be embarrased to minraise and then fold for so little extra. He will herocall with whatever he minraised 90%+ of the time in my mind. Never folding 2 brodway cards if he did raise them.


I love Vanessa's analyzing and reasoning in poker! But we all get a little fancy at times. I'm not trying to give her any crap here but that slowplay is a little fancy I think. Look, he is calling with his crap! gogo!

Really? I would consider the majority of his range a hand like a gutshot, a pair or a combination of those. He can also have a hand like 77 or 88 or maybe even AX that he is going to call of the extra 22 dollars with if you ship it in on the flopp!

We 3-bet preflop, a lot of the hands you are considering are going to be eliminated.

On the AQs 3 bet hand when we are OOP on JTx with a backdoor flush draw. The conclusion was to bet small and ship over a min raise.

There was very little comment about the player OTB but in the absence of reads I am more likely to CR all in here because my push in this situation is nearer to pot size rather than the 1/2 pot push we get after he makes a min-raise. In addition, if he makes a raise much greater than min we have (almost) no fold equity at all on the flop.

Is my analysis way off base here and if so why?

Great series. I'll actually try to remember to enter the next one :-(

T

We did 3-bet preflop, so I would think check-raising after 3-betting on a board like this does not fit to many hands in your range. If we do have a hand, we never want to check to give a chance a a free card so we should stay in balance with a continuation bet.

you must be kidding about the AK utg ship it in > 4bet/c, call, fold
basically if he's at least halfway decent any of the other options (apart from 4b/f obv) is better, depending on image, gameflow, reads etc.

if we ship it in, our hand looks like exactly what we have, he can narrow our range to exactly one hand (the one hand thats stong enough to ship it in, but wants pps to fold because its only coinflipping with them) and play perfectly against it

he's just going to call with all hands that are ahead of us or flipping and fold everything else (like call TT+,AK fold AQ- etc.)

When I saw the quiz results all voting ship preflop from:

FoxwoodsFiend
whitelime
Krantz
WiltOnTilt
DJ Sensei

I couldnt wait for Vanessa's analysis and really enjoyed her explanation.

We 3-bet preflop, a lot of the hands you are considering are going to be eliminated.

Really? well if we consider him only having hands you are supposed to call with preflop he is going to call your ship 100% on the flopp. He wont be folding any 2 brodway cards or ace high and no pairs for sure? So that would make the slowplay even worse.

But I think he can have anything if he is a fish, right?

Anyway I love this series and its very educatinal and fun for alot of people. In poker people are always going to have different ways of thinking about situations and all of wich can be profitable.

Its nice beeing able to chat and learn about other people's reasoning.

Im simply trying to get it into my head why I would slowplay in this spot.

When I saw the quiz results all voting ship preflop from:

FoxwoodsFiend
whitelime
Krantz
WiltOnTilt
DJ Sensei
Clicktyclick

I couldnt wait for Vanessa's analysis and really enjoyed her explanation.

FYP duh!

My first attempt maths was wrong, so I edited and this is the second go, feel free to correct it...

you must be kidding about the AK utg ship it in > 4bet/c, call, fold
basically if he's at least halfway decent any of the other options (apart from 4b/f obv) is better, depending on image, gameflow, reads etc.

if we ship it in, our hand looks like exactly what we have, he can narrow our range to exactly one hand (the one hand thats stong enough to ship it in, but wants pps to fold because its only coinflipping with them) and play perfectly against it

he's just going to call with all hands that are ahead of us or flipping and fold everything else (like call TT+,AK fold AQ- etc.)

If he calls the shove with the hands you gave, TT+,AKs,AKo, then that is 3.5% of possible hands.
Each time we shove and he calls and we win it is +$55.25, ($12+$43.25)
Each time we shove and he calls and we lose it is -$49.25, ($6+$43.25)

0.4x($55.25)- 0.6($49.25) = -$7.85

22.10-29.55, so if he does call with that range then we lose $7.45 every time we shove and he calls.

Opponent is 19/18, 7.9% 3bet, fold to 3bet is 70.6% over 667 hands

So, if he 3bets 7.9% and only calls the shove with 3.5% of possible hands then more than 50% of the time he is folding, but lets call it 50% and give him a bit because its an easy figure to work with... (fudge alert!)

$12 in the pot when we make the shove and he folds half the time.
So, when we make the shove...

50% of the time we win $12
50% of the time we lose $7.45

So we win $4.55 every time we shove. Making the shove a sexy choice.

Yeah regarding the AK ship.
I defenitly put in the wrong answer here.
Some of you guys who doesnt like the ship seem to be a little bit strung up on this balance concept. You have to remember that you do not need to balance if people are not going to pick up and try to take advantage of what you are doing. And you can not set up things the same way with people that are not thinking that deeply about what you are doing.
Also keep in mind when you are thinking about this balance concept that it's what happens in your opponent's mind that is relevant and how you actually play the different hands in your range is irrelevant.

If you play $50NL I would say you can still 4bet bluff small while in this spot you want to shove AK.
- "I want to be able to 4bet bluff here small!"
That argument simply doesnt apply here.

Other then that I did enjoy Vanessa's reasoning alot, got my head working a bit. Shipping is best option.

When I saw the quiz results all voting ship preflop from:

FoxwoodsFiend
whitelime
Krantz
WiltOnTilt
DJ Sensei

I couldnt wait for Vanessa's analysis and really enjoyed her explanation.

I found that analysis very interesting and hadn't really considered that option before. Wondering why none of DC's videos have covered this before when it's what all the coaches would have done? You guys holding out on us?

I found that analysis very interesting and hadn't really considered that option before. Wondering why none of DC's videos have covered this before when it's what all the coaches would have done? You guys holding out on us?

Oh, I think you could digg and find
So much material here.

I found that analysis very interesting and hadn't really considered that option before. Wondering why none of DC's videos have covered this before when it's what all the coaches would have done? You guys holding out on us?

It is all inside wiltontilt maths of NLHE series.

I have said before, and you can see it in the whitelime/jman PLO series, the difference between the top pros and us little folk is they bother to work through the equity of hands away from the table often enough so when these things come up they can spot them and we are thinking "what do we do now?".

Which means I probably got it wrong lol!

So we win $4.55 every time we shove. Making the shove a sexy choice.

the question is whether a 4b/c is more +EV

and of course i might be wrong but then prove me wrong instead of saying krantz etc. did it so it must be right

"You have to remember that you do not need to balance if people are not going to pick up and try to take advantage of what you are doing."

if i were in villains position , had no further reads on us aside from tag stats and i had TT i'd call a ship but fold to a normal 4bet
of course, i don't know what it's like on nl50, it's just what i'd do

You are making the assumption that most people play and think like you. They don't. Really.

the question is whether a 4b/c is more +EV

and of course i might be wrong but then prove me wrong instead of saying krantz etc. did it so it must be right

This is going to sound a bit harsh, and it really is not meant to. I think your question is a great one, someone should prove which is best.

This is the thing though, and this is where your probably going to hate me. The person who should prove you wrong is not me. It is you. You see, "krantz etc" have done the hard work in the past. They have sat down and worked through our villains possible range and what the most profitable range of each play actually is. This is why they know the answer after giving it a little thought.

Now, if I go away, and do all the maths on this hand (which I intend to) for each possible move and then print them up here. What do you think you will learn? You will learn exactly what you have learned so far about about this hand I expect. That it was most likely a shove.

But if you do all the maths yourself you will understand "why" it is a shove. Then, if you do the same sort of calculations and analysis on other hands you will start to notice what makes this hand a shove and what makes others that are similar a 4bet.

Do it enough times and eventually you will start to notice little signals that make it a shove, and, when you reach this point then instead of replying to someone who is saying "krantz etc." I can be replying to someone saying "TLLL etc."

Seriously, go and do the maths then come back here with it and tell us all it is a 4bet.

You might be right, I know it is +ev to do the shove because I worked that bit out, eventually I will work out how well a 4bet does. But I am not telling you what the answer is because I think it would be robbing you of your poker education. It is a bit like someone letting you look at their answers in an exam. Sure you will know the answers, but you will still be just as dumb and if the question is altered slightly you will not know what to do.

I am not saying this is the answer because the pro's say so, I am saying go and watch WoTs maths on nlhe series. The answer is inside I am sure.

(damn I hope that did not sound terrible, I just wanted to enforce that the answer is not that important, it is more important to prove it to yourself as that is how you learn).

epic comment, gg

nevertheless this is more a matter of psychology than math because it depends on how we view his range and how he views our range

the math part is actually quite basic, and if his 4bet-shove calling range is the same as his 5bet-pushing range the ev of 4bet-shoving and small 4b/c is obviously the same

so it all depends on how we think he views our range for small 4bet/c and 4bet-shoving and the point is, that he is more likely to give us AK if we 4betshove then small 4b/c, because our hand just looks like AK
(and lol @ he can exploit us by calling our 4bets)