---

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

Oooooooooooh very excited.....never too much FWF!

My god, the dutch accent is so ugly in english. I know, because I am dutch

looking forward to the serie!

Might be a problem with this video cuts out mid-sentence - and its 40mins.........

Umm anybody got any idea if this was intentional or if there is a remedy?

My god, the dutch accent is so ugly in english. I know, because I am dutch

looking forward to the serie!

I'm pretty sure an english accent in dutch is just as bad

Might be a problem with this video cuts out mid-sentence - and its 40mins.........

Umm anybody got any idea if this was intentional or if there is a remedy?

Yeah, that was not intentional, but unfortunately the last few minutes of the camtasia recording contained some sort of error.

I can't sleep without knowing the outcome of the last hand!!!! :-)

Time Link to 00:06:39

Hand with AQo SB vs BTN.
Say he opens to 18, you 3b to 50 (a little bit smaller as you mentioned) and hit a K9x board like this one. Pot is around 100 and he has around 250 left, do you cbet/fold around 60?

Awesome video by the way, just 100% quality comments from FWF, the way you explain things makes it really clear. Can't wait for the next episodes!

I can't sleep without knowing the outcome of the last hand!!!! :-)

Pretty sure I called and villain shows nut flush.

Pretty sure I called and villain shows nut flush.

Lol thanks Nice to know my instincts are correct

Time Link to 00:15:21

Why fold 22 UTG (table 4)? And again on 15:50 (table 3).

Yeah, too horny - this will be epic!
pretty excited now - Just thank you DC^^

Excellent discussion imo, helped me a lot!

Had another video on the schedule, but this is too good to pass up...

Time Link to 00:12:07

Usually , in game i just fold here A4s vs. a halfstacked guy, as well.
But i just can remeber a Hu-Vid which I have watched and there the Hero also coldcalled OOP vs. an Open a small Axs-hand, thiugh Villan had only about 50BB.
When you think about it, this is probably b/c
- you can hit a TP (Reverse Implieds, should you be sometimes dominated are smaller b/c of the lower SPR postflop)
- decent PotEQ with which you can
step on the gas postflop.
- we have the postflopedge <-> his positional advantage is decreased b/c of the smaller SPR post...
-> I guess this is only possible b/c Hu a Bu-Openrange is so wide.
But basicalyl this is also now a HU-situation with even slighlty better odds b/c of the SB as deadmoney...
Ok, a Bu-Openrange is not so wide 6max, like it is Hu,
but still pretty wide.
So don`t you both think that b/c of these aspects that actually a coldcall pre is, even though he is only halfstacked, better than a fold?
Or do I maybe miss some points which are agaisnt a call?
What would you have btw. done with JTs, T9s, here?

btw.,
best Intro I have ever watched - Love for the devils

how come this video suddenly stops in the middle of discussion? is there part 2? or something wrong with my download?

Time Link to 00:13:46

Interesting bluff3bet:
They are some very well respected ppl who are advocating to just not have a 3betrange in MPvsUTG.
So of course, it is good to 3bet here your top of your foldingrange with good Blockingeffects (AJo, KQo, KJo, QJs...), but then you also should have to start to 3bet in this spot AK and QQ+ sometimes.
I wonder which strategy is more +ev longterm:
Either having here a well balanced 3betrange or just do not have any 3betrange in this spot.
Do you have any opinion on this one?

edit: damn, just noticed that he was opening to only 2,5BB UTG - that changes probably much due to your reasoning.
Anyways,
how do you both treat this spot considering the mentioned thoughts vs. a normalsized UTG-open (3-4BB), when UTG is not too nitty (UTG oR: 17%+) and has a decent high Foldto3bet_stat?

Time Link to 00:13:25

I agree with 3betting there a lot, but why don't we 3bet hands like Ax, Kx or QJo here as bluffs and call with such a great hand like QJs?

There are many good reasons for calling imo:
- we have position on the pfr
- we get a great price for calling
- there is a fish in the BB against whom we want to play pots
- there is most likely another fish in the SB
- QJs plays very good multiway
- we can look very strong with our semi bluffs postflop given the positions
- its somewhat unlikely to get squeezed (players behind seem to be tagish and not all too loose and they are more likely to call to keep the fish in)
- if we overdo it we open ourselves up to get 4bet very light, cause he knows he looks very strong and we can't 5bet ship light

I know you aren't 3betting QJs there 100% of the time but I would call it probably like 95% of the time or so

how come this video suddenly stops in the middle of discussion? is there part 2? or something wrong with my download?

There was corruption in the file and I had to splice it here. Believe it or not they go onto a different topic so as for them leaving off in mid discussion this was not the splicing so much as the video itself. Sorry guys.
-Rusty

funny thing, i just wanted to post exactly the same post as poemmel regarding the QJs hand. really looking forward to the next vids, great duo.

Hielko you fckn lucksack, mbfn to receive coaching from one of the best players in the world!
anyway nice vid!
Patrick HC Amsterdam,

how come this video suddenly stops in the middle of discussion? is there part 2? or something wrong with my download?

See reply here: http://www.deucescracked.com/forums/13-Videos/topics/278811-Boosdoener-Episode-One#posts-2311921

Why fold 22 UTG (table 4)? And again on 15:50 (table 3).

You get back to it later on. When folding these low pairs, there really is almost no low flop you are hitting. When opponents catch on your not opening low pocket pairs they can just use agression to make us fold a lot on low flops when we are out of position?

going to be watching every ep of this go Hielko!

You get back to it later on. When folding these low pairs, there really is almost no low flop you are hitting. When opponents catch on your not opening low pocket pairs they can just use agression to make us fold a lot on low flops when we are out of position?

you could also argue the other way around.
if we do have all those small PPs in our range, we can be bluffed and floated way more easy.

the problem with opening 22 is this (at least in my opinion):
we flop an underpair 11 out of 12 times.
with that underpair we have very little equity when called and therefore need a lot of foldequity.
we might have that on the flop sometimes, but we basically have to cbet and then give up if called (or raised ofc), cause we can't barrel with only 2 outs all too often.
for our opponents this is so super easy to adjust by just floating more and just calling one and fold to the turn barrel with a medium strength hand.

and if we flop our set 1/12 times we are still utg raiser and therefore less likely to get much money in vs weaker hands.
and with 22 we can only be set over setted and not ever stack a smaller set, we basically can't cooler anyone (cause many players just play their 2 pairs very cautiously vs utg).

therefore I'd much rather have a hand like KQs to raise utg, where we can flush over flush someone or make a higher straight and were we have sooooo unbelievable more room to show aggression on further streets, which makes us way tougher to play.

don't know if thats true or the whole story, but it makes sense to me

Time Link to 00:28:09

Great video, really looking forward to the series.

I'm afraid I don't understand the discussion about the turn bet with the nut flush on table 1. It sounds like you advocate checking the turn so we have a wider value range on the river, which allows us to check back the turn and bluff the river more often.
I don't understand why you wouldn't bet the turn with the nut flush when at the same time you believe it's a bad spot to bluff. At least that's what it sounded like to me.
Thanks a lot

Time Link to 00:11:55

Can you explain why you don't want to 3bet with 50BB stacks? This is right after Hielko folded A4s to a BTN open.

Hielko you fckn lucksack, mbfn to receive coaching from one of the best players in the world!
anyway nice vid!
Patrick HC Amsterdam,

Thanks, GL crushing @ A'dam

You get back to it later on. When folding these low pairs, there really is almost no low flop you are hitting. When opponents catch on your not opening low pocket pairs they can just use agression to make us fold a lot on low flops when we are out of position?

See the reply from Poemmel below, and one thing to add; when we raise UTG our range is pretty strong so we shouldn't be too worried about getting bluffed. We might not have hands like bottom set, but we have overpairs all the time.

Can you explain why you don't want to 3bet with 50BB stacks? This is right after Hielko folded A4s to a BTN open.

With a shorter stacksize you have less fold equity preflop and postflop, and since A2s is going to be a bluffing hand having less fold equity is bad. At the same time we also have less implied odds in case we hit a flush on the flop/turn/river reducing the value of the hand even more.

Great video, really looking forward to the series.

I'm afraid I don't understand the discussion about the turn bet with the nut flush on table 1. It sounds like you advocate checking the turn so we have a wider value range on the river, which allows us to check back the turn and bluff the river more often.
I don't understand why you wouldn't bet the turn with the nut flush when at the same time you believe it's a bad spot to bluff. At least that's what it sounded like to me.
Thanks a lot

I'm not sure if I completely got that spot either.

This is what I thought the thought process behind it is: When we bet there our range is polarized, but since we are not going to be bluffing in that spot very often we should slowplay the nuts some % of the time as well. Does that make sense?

There was corruption in the file and I had to splice it here. Believe it or not they go onto a different topic so as for them leaving off in mid discussion this was not the splicing so much as the video itself. Sorry guys.
-Rusty

Taz,

May I make a suggestion? Just make a quick .jpg saying something like "We're sorry for the abrupt ending of this video, but we have experienced some technical dificulties with the final 15 minutes of the raw footage" and let it run for five seconds just after it cuts out.

To the content: I listened to the video today while I had to do various other things so I couldn't pay close attention, but just listening to FWF talking about poker sounded awesome. There's something in the way he approaches pokerthinking that immediately sparks my own creative thinking about this game. Looking forward to the next episodes.

This is exactely what DC needed, mode MSNL conent from guys like FOF, jk3a, WOT, krantz etc...

was lacking some good quality content lately, aside from Newmani/jk3a series imo

Great first episode! Can´t wait for next monday!!!

Pretty sure I called and villain shows nut flush.

That was probably a fold given how nit he was. What are we beating that a nit is betting the pot with on the river?

Holy moly that accent.
It is like you never spoke English before and just learned English by the book. Pronouncing every word like it is a Dutch word.
(Im Dutch)

Pretty sure I called and villain shows nut flush.

gah

as soon as he made that bet size i barfed a little bit.
would snap with AsKx instead of AxKs.... can't say I'd have actually folded this though, but the bet size makes it ugly



solid video guys. looking forward to the next ones!

I thought the name of this series was Booze Donor. Like you guys were going to drunken kung fu the hell out of midstakes or something. FWF providing the cold beverages. Weird....

After I am ready now with watching the first part, just wanted to say thank you and respect for you both - I am sure this series will be great and just epic

Why fold 22 UTG (table 4)? And again on 15:50 (table 3).

You can hear the explanation later in the video

Time Link to 00:34:34

I don't see how people can watch this video and not comment on this. It is absolute gold.

"miraculous thinking fish"

"what I am gonna do is play fairly tight, and then when someone raises UTG, I am going to utilize the fact they're using a HUD and then I am just gonna pop em, and take down those 3 big blinds."

AHAHAHAHA. epic

Time Link to 00:35:16

I am interested in hearing some more discussion on the flop play with the KK hand. We get donked into on the flop and raise. I am curious as to what our plan is if we get 3 bet? Also, why are we talking about this guy as a fish when all we have is 30/20 over a small sample? My thinking is that the raise is bad for a few reasons. First, if he is not a fish then he will be leading to 3 bet/get it in with a range that includes sets, and high equity draws like NFD or Tx of spades. We obviously don't do well against that range where we are crushed or flipping. Next, if he is bluffing or leading for value with a hand Tx hand we really don't need to discourage that and we can use our position to decide how much money goes in and on which street. Thoughts?

you could also argue the other way around.
if we do have all those small PPs in our range, we can be bluffed and floated way more easy.

the problem with opening 22 is this (at least in my opinion):
we flop an underpair 11 out of 12 times.
with that underpair we have very little equity when called and therefore need a lot of foldequity.
we might have that on the flop sometimes, but we basically have to cbet and then give up if called (or raised ofc), cause we can't barrel with only 2 outs all too often.
for our opponents this is so super easy to adjust by just floating more and just calling one and fold to the turn barrel with a medium strength hand.

and if we flop our set 1/12 times we are still utg raiser and therefore less likely to get much money in vs weaker hands.
and with 22 we can only be set over setted and not ever stack a smaller set, we basically can't cooler anyone (cause many players just play their 2 pairs very cautiously vs utg).

therefore I'd much rather have a hand like KQs to raise utg, where we can flush over flush someone or make a higher straight and were we have sooooo unbelievable more room to show aggression on further streets, which makes us way tougher to play.

don't know if thats true or the whole story, but it makes sense to me

you make some good points here. you are off though with respect to the likelihood of flopping a set. Not 12:1.

http://www.suntzupoker.com/poker-odds.aspx

I don't see how people can watch this video and not comment on this. It is absolute gold.

"miraculous thinking fish"

"what I am gonna do is play fairly tight, and then when someone raises UTG, I am going to utilize the fact they're using a HUD and then I am just gonna pop em, and take down those 3 big blinds."

AHAHAHAHA. epic

lol yeah that was hilarious

you make some good points here. you are off though with respect to the likelihood of flopping a set. Not 12:1.

http://www.suntzupoker.com/poker-odds.aspx

wow it's possible to flop sets that often?

thanks, good to know that!
was really way off there.
don't know where I have that 12:1 from ^^

wow it's possible to flop sets that often?

thanks, good to know that!
was really way off there.
don't know where I have that 12:1 from ^^

Most likely from the fact that it is 12% of the time. 7.5:1

Most likely from the fact that it is 12% of the time. 7.5:1

that might easily be the case

I thought the name of this series was Booze Donor. Like you guys were going to drunken kung fu the hell out of midstakes or something. FWF providing the cold beverages. Weird....

Wonder what Freud would say about that

I am interested in hearing some more discussion on the flop play with the KK hand. We get donked into on the flop and raise. I am curious as to what our plan is if we get 3 bet? Also, why are we talking about this guy as a fish when all we have is 30/20 over a small sample? My thinking is that the raise is bad for a few reasons. First, if he is not a fish then he will be leading to 3 bet/get it in with a range that includes sets, and high equity draws like NFD or Tx of spades. We obviously don't do well against that range where we are crushed or flipping. Next, if he is bluffing or leading for value with a hand Tx hand we really don't need to discourage that and we can use our position to decide how much money goes in and on which street. Thoughts?

He's almost certainly a fish, I don't give people a green color without reason and think raising this against a random fish is totally standard. Against a good regular it's different I think, but both options could be good depending on his donking range and general tendencies. If he's unknown probably calling down is a safe default option.

Very happy to see this series on DC

Hielko and FWF together in one place, crushers, crushing

you make some good points here. you are off though with respect to the likelihood of flopping a set. Not 12:1.

http://www.suntzupoker.com/poker-odds.aspx

From the link you gave:

Odds/probability of flopping a set or better 8.5 to 1
(or 10.5% chance)

Odds/probability of flopping a set 7.5 to 1
(or 11.8% chance)


^^does not compute (i think the probabilities are correct, they just mixed the two up)

wow it's possible to flop sets that often?

thanks, good to know that!
was really way off there.
don't know where I have that 12:1 from ^^

From TubaSteve's or jk3a's (one of them i think) videos where he suggest having 12:1 implied odds just for the times when you dont get whole stacks in when you flop and for the times you flop and loose to bigger set or better...

From the link you gave:

Odds/probability of flopping a set or better 8.5 to 1
(or 10.5% chance)

Odds/probability of flopping a set 7.5 to 1
(or 11.8% chance)


^^does not compute (i think the probabilities are correct, they just mixed the two up)

hmmm. good pickup. here is another link with more of the same

http://www.homepokergames.com/odds.php

My god, the dutch accent is so ugly in english. I know, because I am dutch

looking forward to the serie!

Pfeww... Hielko is indeed very annoying to listen to.

My god wat een steenkolen engels zeg

Time Link to 00:30:13

I do remember this sick call in the WSOP ME by Tran

Time Link to 00:39:32

Did you call this full pot bet on the river wTPTK?

you could also argue the other way around.
if we do have all those small PPs in our range, we can be bluffed and floated way more easy.

the problem with opening 22 is this (at least in my opinion):
we flop an underpair 11 out of 12 times.
with that underpair we have very little equity when called and therefore need a lot of foldequity.
we might have that on the flop sometimes, but we basically have to cbet and then give up if called (or raised ofc), cause we can't barrel with only 2 outs all too often.
for our opponents this is so super easy to adjust by just floating more and just calling one and fold to the turn barrel with a medium strength hand.

and if we flop our set 1/12 times we are still utg raiser and therefore less likely to get much money in vs weaker hands.
and with 22 we can only be set over setted and not ever stack a smaller set, we basically can't cooler anyone (cause many players just play their 2 pairs very cautiously vs utg).

therefore I'd much rather have a hand like KQs to raise utg, where we can flush over flush someone or make a higher straight and were we have sooooo unbelievable more room to show aggression on further streets, which makes us way tougher to play.

don't know if thats true or the whole story, but it makes sense to me

Think you just look at opening 22. Obviously our range is much wider. When we open about 20% UTG, 22 is 2.5% of our range. So small pairs up to 55 are about 10% of our UTG opening range.

The point is you just dont ever hit low flops. Obviously you have overpairs some % of the time. JJ-AA are also about 10% of your range. By opening low pocket pairs, your range is way more balanced imo. If an oponent knows youre not opening 22-55 he can just adjust and bluff and bet you into oblivion on low boards, can he not?

Hand with AQo SB vs BTN.
Say he opens to 18, you 3b to 50 (a little bit smaller as you mentioned) and hit a K9x board like this one. Pot is around 100 and he has around 250 left, do you cbet/fold around 60?

Awesome video by the way, just 100% quality comments from FWF, the way you explain things makes it really clear. Can't wait for the next episodes!

Yeah, cbet fold seems right. Can't give up free cards and stacking off is ugly

Interesting bluff3bet:
They are some very well respected ppl who are advocating to just not have a 3betrange in MPvsUTG.
So of course, it is good to 3bet here your top of your foldingrange with good Blockingeffects (AJo, KQo, KJo, QJs...), but then you also should have to start to 3bet in this spot AK and QQ+ sometimes.
I wonder which strategy is more +ev longterm:
Either having here a well balanced 3betrange or just do not have any 3betrange in this spot.
Do you have any opinion on this one?

edit: damn, just noticed that he was opening to only 2,5BB UTG - that changes probably much due to your reasoning.
Anyways,
how do you both treat this spot considering the mentioned thoughts vs. a normalsized UTG-open (3-4BB), when UTG is not too nitty (UTG oR: 17%+) and has a decent high Foldto3bet_stat?

Threebet wide with bluff hands and three bet JJ, AQ+ seems right

I agree with 3betting there a lot, but why don't we 3bet hands like Ax, Kx or QJo here as bluffs and call with such a great hand like QJs?

There are many good reasons for calling imo:
- we have position on the pfr
- we get a great price for calling
- there is a fish in the BB against whom we want to play pots
- there is most likely another fish in the SB
- QJs plays very good multiway
- we can look very strong with our semi bluffs postflop given the positions
- its somewhat unlikely to get squeezed (players behind seem to be tagish and not all too loose and they are more likely to call to keep the fish in)
- if we overdo it we open ourselves up to get 4bet very light, cause he knows he looks very strong and we can't 5bet ship light

I know you aren't 3betting QJs there 100% of the time but I would call it probably like 95% of the time or so

People 3bet a lot, letting people into the pot makes it harder to take the pot down yourself postflop, lots of great semi-bluffing potential if he does flat, etc. I think flatting is probably the worst of the options in EP vs EP

You get back to it later on. When folding these low pairs, there really is almost no low flop you are hitting. When opponents catch on your not opening low pocket pairs they can just use agression to make us fold a lot on low flops when we are out of position?

I don't agree with folding small pairs but I don't think the metagame problem is that huge. So you can't have a set on 248. Big deal. You can still have a very strong range regardless

I'm not sure if I completely got that spot either.

This is what I thought the thought process behind it is: When we bet there our range is polarized, but since we are not going to be bluffing in that spot very often we should slowplay the nuts some % of the time as well. Does that make sense?

Would be nice to get a timestamp, but there's no inconsistency with saying "This is a bad spot to bluff, you have the nuts, check": you want to protect your whole range and when you have nut hands it's less likely your opponent is strong (as opposed to when you don't it's more likely he is). Sometimes you have to give up immediate profit for the sake of balance

I am interested in hearing some more discussion on the flop play with the KK hand. We get donked into on the flop and raise. I am curious as to what our plan is if we get 3 bet? Also, why are we talking about this guy as a fish when all we have is 30/20 over a small sample? My thinking is that the raise is bad for a few reasons. First, if he is not a fish then he will be leading to 3 bet/get it in with a range that includes sets, and high equity draws like NFD or Tx of spades. We obviously don't do well against that range where we are crushed or flipping. Next, if he is bluffing or leading for value with a hand Tx hand we really don't need to discourage that and we can use our position to decide how much money goes in and on which street. Thoughts?

My thoughts are that people donk out a lot wider than they used to, it's very annoying the times you don't have anything, and if you let them do it because they know that they won't get popped the times they have marginal hands unless you're nutted or have a huge draw, they can basically get away with donking a weak range and daring you to bluff (which is hard to do often since your button range is extremely extremely wide)

Time Link to 00:07:15

In the AQ hand, isn't there a consideration to who's in the BB? Hielko has the BB marked green, which I imagine is a weaker player. In this spot, I would flat AQ here much more often than I'd 3bet the button if the BB was a fish, especially AQs. But at the limits/site I play, people aren't 4bet bluffing in steal/resteal spots super wide or even calling resteals very wide, so it'd be just putting myself into (what seems like) a 0EV preflop war with a TAG. I'd much rather call and play postflop with someone who will make much worse decisions than I will.

Hey FWF/Hielko,

It is frequently mentioned in the videos (and rightfully so) that with a lot of the hands you raise utg, if a good player calls you IP your life sucks. What are your thoughts on either openlimping your entire range utg (and maybe utg+1) as you have the smallest shot of taking down the blinds and you keep the pot small, or openlimping a balanced strategy then raising some hands that are hard to play in a limped pot or play well in a raised pot (balanced with monsters and weak hands).

(for example, limpraise red and black 22, KK and AA, JTs, limpcalling other hands and losing the minimum when we want to play like AJ and it goes raise/3bet behind us, and then raising like 99-QQ, AQ, multicolor 22, AA and KK, other stuff, you kinda get the point)

Seems nowadays having the lead with all the floating and bluffraising and thin valuebetting and calling and whatnot is not as useful as the old days where most of the reason we were taught to always openraise was to build a pot we could take down with a cbet 2/3 of the time.

Thoughts on this concept?

I think that is bad.

Some hands are maybe hard to play UTG, but your range from that position is still very strong so on average it is good to play big pots. If you limp you will be playing really deep while being oop; shorter effective stacks are better for you. If you limp you give the blinds a free shot at the pot. No need to give people a free shot at realizing their equity when your range is strong.

Time Link to 00:35:14

If this hand was a 3bet pot somehow, where the fish called our 3bet; would you still bet this turn if he would have checked?

For example, fish is sitting in the CO, and he raises to 3bb, we 3bet to 11bb on the button. He calls, pot is ~23bb. He does not donk and we cbet 15bb. He calls. We have 74bb behind, and the pot is now ~53bb. The fish checks on this 3flush turn. Do we bet-fold 26bb, check behind, bet-call/fold 37bb ? Ship even maybe to get a call from AsTx ?

Time Link to 00:18:55

It is quite frankly ridiculous how clearly and concisely FwF can explain quite complex topics like this. Love it.

Time Link to 00:06:05

Do you have any statistics backing up you claim that 98s is a fold in this situation? Or some other more objectivly measurable method than your general feeling of unhappiness? Because I'm not convinced.

Time Link to 00:30:36

sry I dont get that part. You said that it is a bad board to bluff because ppl will call you down because you represent nuts or nothing. so you have to bet nuts some times and check it back sometimes. dont get why you dislike the bet.

Hey FWF/Hielko,

It is frequently mentioned in the videos (and rightfully so) that with a lot of the hands you raise utg, if a good player calls you IP your life sucks. What are your thoughts on either openlimping your entire range utg (and maybe utg+1) as you have the smallest shot of taking down the blinds and you keep the pot small, or openlimping a balanced strategy then raising some hands that are hard to play in a limped pot or play well in a raised pot (balanced with monsters and weak hands).

(for example, limpraise red and black 22, KK and AA, JTs, limpcalling other hands and losing the minimum when we want to play like AJ and it goes raise/3bet behind us, and then raising like 99-QQ, AQ, multicolor 22, AA and KK, other stuff, you kinda get the point)

Seems nowadays having the lead with all the floating and bluffraising and thin valuebetting and calling and whatnot is not as useful as the old days where most of the reason we were taught to always openraise was to build a pot we could take down with a cbet 2/3 of the time.

Thoughts on this concept?

I've thought about this before and have always wanted to experiment with it, but it's too weird and unfamiliar for me so I never did it. I tend to agree with Hielko that I'd rather just open a slightly tighter range than give up getting in money with a strong range though

If this hand was a 3bet pot somehow, where the fish called our 3bet; would you still bet this turn if he would have checked?

For example, fish is sitting in the CO, and he raises to 3bb, we 3bet to 11bb on the button. He calls, pot is ~23bb. He does not donk and we cbet 15bb. He calls. We have 74bb behind, and the pot is now ~53bb. The fish checks on this 3flush turn. Do we bet-fold 26bb, check behind, bet-call/fold 37bb ? Ship even maybe to get a call from AsTx ?

Ship all in to get calls from hands that heroically put us on semibluffs. You can't really put him on a flush after he check/calls

Do you have any statistics backing up you claim that 98s is a fold in this situation? Or some other more objectivly measurable method than your general feeling of unhappiness? Because I'm not convinced.

Nope. I don't think you'll ever get enough of a sample size in a database to figure out whether a call with any given suited connector is +EV (way too much variance int he flops you hit/your opponents' hand at the time) but that's just what I think. Sorry if you're not convinced, it's an unorthodox view of mine so I don't blame you for disagreeing

Time Link to 00:17:10

sry, already understood

Time Link to 00:34:12

This is literally what I do lol....

Time Link to 00:32:12

Completely agree here with Foxwood - Regs often stack off to fairly nitty players after getting 4 bet by a tight player - I think most of them are just flatting with AQ so the only hands there 4betting are AA-KK-QQ and sometimes AK - thus AK doesn't do so great there!

Great commentary!!