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

@ 18:25, K9s on 279r

What hands do you think the fish shoves with on this dry a board? He's very passive so i think he'd be more inclined to flat hands we beat. I find myself beat very often in this spot if i call vs this kind of passive fish.

Time Link to 00:59:58

Great video,as usual.I also would consider this spot in this way:what's your perceived range?U're likely to fold/raise your pure floating on the turn.U're likely ro raise on this wet flop u're 2pair and sets(few combos to be honest).U're also gonna raise and get it in almost always your flushes on the turn.Imho u're hand looks like exactly what it is, an A bluffcatching.So,as he seems a decent reg,i think that:
a)A shove would be good because what we are reppresenting it's just A4 or something like that,so,once he bets i guess his value range his gonna probably bet/call no matter what.
b) I don't expect him to 3barrel in bluff enough to call with profit(but i think it's close) in this spot,unless u already have some particular history.This is probably a card on which he wouldn't be bluffing u that offen,cause it strenghtens your range and narrows his .I know people sometimes get fancy in blind war,but this guy seems decent and,once again,u're hand looks quite face up,so i would give him credit .I also don't expect him to ave trips too(in this case we have to remeber that we are calling to split the pot or to loose)due to the blocker we hold and the river bet size.
Hope makes sense

Time Link to 00:57:20

Based on the prf stack off w/JJ and the Ac being on the board, I don't think he folds the 2nd nut flush very often.
You RR QQ prf, so your sets are either 99 or 44, and 99 fastplays. That leaves repping AQ/9/4.

As for his range, I think it's not the greatest to 3barrel as a bluff, so he doesn't do it often.

Time Link to 00:17:39

what kind of hands might silent turn into bluffs there?

Time Link to 00:23:37

Lol changing our avatar's facial expression is so underrated.

Time Link to 00:40:21

if our percieved value betting range is stronger because he saw us check down before, then doesnt it make it harder to go for thin value with AK?

Time Link to 00:56:23

can it be argued that that river is such a bad card to bluff and that a lot of our range is Ax, so he has to be value betting, and if hes value betting he either has a flush to a better A and therefore we should fold?

can it be argued that that river is such a bad card to bluff and that a lot of our range is Ax, so he has to be value betting, and if hes value betting he either has a flush to a better A and therefore we should fold?

idk how bad the river card is to bluff, or how often he has a worse hand that takes this line for value, but essentially, yes, you're right, it can be argued

if our percieved value betting range is stronger because he saw us check down before, then doesnt it make it harder to go for thin value with AK?

if he's adjusting, which isn't clear yet (and the raise itself would seem to indicate that he's not)

can it be argued that that river is such a bad card to bluff and that a lot of our range is Ax, so he has to be value betting, and if hes value betting he either has a flush to a better A and therefore we should fold?

never mind, you covered it well at the end of the video : )

Time Link to 00:57:24

what do you think about his cbet with the QT on that board? is he value betting or (semi) bluffing?

if he's adjusting, which isn't clear yet (and the raise itself would seem to indicate that he's not)

so do you mean that his raising range has a lot of air in it and therefore hes not cognizant of the fact that our range is strong there and he is therefore likely to call with worse A highs?

you've been checking back a lot in late position when you are flatted from the bb, esp on high card boards. what type of board textures are you cbetting often when you are in CO and BTN and are flatted from BB?

with regards to asking yourself if you would be happy bluffing to determine if its good to value bet and vice versa, is it the case that when you are considering a value bet and you ask yourself if its a good spot to bluff and the answer is yes, shouldnt you still value bet a lot because although you will get a lot of folds its still worth a shot?

maybe it would be better to put it like: if its a good spot to bluff, then your value bets have to be less thin?

I don't really see him folding a flush to a shove. You can't really have a lot of better hands because most full houses are probably putting in a raise earlier in the hand. I would guess you are probably raising A9, 99, etc. especially in a blind vs. blind where people don't like to fold. Therefore, your value range is almost entirely A4, which makes it tough for him to fold a Q high flush.

Time Link to 00:58:57

i think you're looking at this spot wrong and too simplistically.

yeah, the turn is probably a call due to your hybrid showdown value and redraw equity, but you're not really looking to ever have to face another river bet even when you improve - these things mostly serve to deny his airballs equity.

then, when the river is an ace, you consider this a good card, which it is not. it has the effect of reducing combos of better hands, but it will also drastically reduce his bluffing frequency. you basically call folding 'weak' and bluffshoving 'hopeless' so elect to call. this just isn't a good way of going about things. this is a terrible card for him to bluff, mostly because people in your spot end up calling with the virtual bottom of their range (and thus calling close to 100%). further, his size makes a bluff incredibly unlikely.

i think you're looking at this spot wrong and too simplistically.

yeah, the turn is probably a call due to your hybrid showdown value and redraw equity, but you're not really looking to ever have to face another river bet even when you improve - these things mostly serve to deny his airballs equity.

then, when the river is an ace, you consider this a good card, which it is not. it has the effect of reducing combos of better hands, but it will also drastically reduce his bluffing frequency. you basically call folding 'weak' and bluffshoving 'hopeless' so elect to call. this just isn't a good way of going about things. this is a terrible card for him to bluff, mostly because people in your spot end up calling with the virtual bottom of their range (and thus calling close to 100%). further, his size makes a bluff incredibly unlikely.

what is the worst hand you would call with terp?

Time Link to 00:09:02

T3 with A5 on Q85tt
I have a hard time believing that your hand is good enough to call here. You have only 5½ outs to improve (BDFD = ½ out) and its not really like you are going to stack them every time you hit an ace or 4-flush.
Finally you may be have some reverse implied odds if the fish should hold 88 or anything like that.

i think you're looking at this spot wrong and too simplistically.

yeah, the turn is probably a call due to your hybrid showdown value and redraw equity, but you're not really looking to ever have to face another river bet even when you improve - these things mostly serve to deny his airballs equity.

then, when the river is an ace, you consider this a good card, which it is not. it has the effect of reducing combos of better hands, but it will also drastically reduce his bluffing frequency. you basically call folding 'weak' and bluffshoving 'hopeless' so elect to call. this just isn't a good way of going about things. this is a terrible card for him to bluff, mostly because people in your spot end up calling with the virtual bottom of their range (and thus calling close to 100%). further, his size makes a bluff incredibly unlikely.

from a combo perspective the A is a good card, reducing the likelihood that he has a better A. from a relative value standpoint, no, it doesn't help me beat anything I didn't beat already.

however, the combo point is legit, and i expect villain to see that A as a good bluff card and not a bad one, as it makes it more likely i was stubborn with a Q+c or something similar than having an A. It also may give him more confidence to go for thin value with a worse A (tho the betsize on the riv may discount that).

all that said, I was pretty close to thinking of it as a raise/fold on the river, with call seeing sorta like just about as good as either of them. in retrospect I think it probably is a raise fold, but not a clear one by any means.

Andrew

from a combo perspective the A is a good card, reducing the likelihood that he has a better A. from a relative value standpoint, no, it doesn't help me beat anything I didn't beat already.

however, the combo point is legit, and i expect villain to see that A as a good bluff card and not a bad one, as it makes it more likely i was stubborn with a Q+c or something similar than having an A. It also may give him more confidence to go for thin value with a worse A (tho the betsize on the riv may discount that).

all that said, I was pretty close to thinking of it as a raise/fold on the river, with call seeing sorta like just about as good as either of them. in retrospect I think it probably is a raise fold, but not a clear one by any means.

Andrew

there is no such thing as a worse ace. Ax makes AAAQ9

also you simply have way more Ax in your range than Qx. i should probably count, as obv this changes with another A on board, but i think most people think 1) this 2) you fold a good number of Qx combos on the turn 3) you still have some flushes in your range. so this is very near the bottom of your range. obv this is not a complete case to fold, as some (many) people bluff too much bvb. i just think this spot looks really poor from his perspective to bluff.

there is no such thing as a worse ace. Ax makes AAAQ9

also you simply have way more Ax in your range than Qx. i should probably count, as obv this changes with another A on board, but i think most people think 1) this 2) you fold a good number of Qx combos on the turn 3) you still have some flushes in your range. so this is very near the bottom of your range. obv this is not a complete case to fold, as some (many) people bluff too much bvb. i just think this spot looks really poor from his perspective to bluff.

From villians perspective - If he perceived Andrews 3 bet range bvb to AT+
and KQ+
Then if he believes Andrew defends all Ax - then two unknown Ax times non broadway non FH aces = 6 ranks.
= 2 A * 6 ranks * 4 kickers = 48 combos.

Depending upon how wide Andrew defends Qx BVB with the card removal of one Q = 12 combos of each Qx that is not three pairs on river or FH.
And if KQ is out of flat call range PF.
He needs ALL QJ,QT,Q8 Q7 or ALL QJ QT + ALL non 3 pair Qx suited - to have the same amount of combos of Qx and Ax.

And as you mentioned - there has to be some discount filter for turn folds of Qx - I guess perhaps the best method to filter would be that Andrew only continues with Qx with a club. If that is true he prolly has to be defending alot more QXo to have as many combos of Qx as Ax on the river.

Re:AAQ94

Villian Potential value combos

Flushes - KTs+,K8s-K2s,QTs+,Q8s,JTs,J8s-J7s,T8s-T6s,85s+,75s+,65s,54s - potentially 26 combos give or take how wide you think he raises SB.
3 combos 999
3 combos QQQ
3 combos AQ
3 combos A9
3 combos A4
Not including 444 as at least some of the time he checks flop with 44.
15 combos FH

I am not sure what you guys think whether he Valuebets Ax on river - bear in mind that we only get to chop with all those combos and still lose to AK.

Minimum Value combos~ 40 combos.

So lets just assume that Ax is not in his river value betting range - so we can see even if he is very polarised whether we can bluff catch.

We are being offered 2-1 on the river. 40 value combos So we need 20 bluff combos.
If the rump of his 3barrell bluff range is flopped str8 draws.
KJ, KT JT J8 = 60 combos ( 64 - 4 combos are flushes) Edit

So we need ~ 33 % 3 Barrell bluffing frequency from his busted str8draws when he is polarised.


I think thats right?

Re:AAQ94

Villian Potential value combos

Flushes - KTs+,K8s-K2s,QTs+,Q8s,JTs,J8s-J7s,T8s-T6s,85s+,75s+,65s,54s - potentially 26 combos give or take how wide you think he raises SB.
3 combos 999
3 combos QQQ
3 combos AQ
3 combos A9
3 combos A4
Not including 444 as at least some of the time he checks flop with 44.
15 combos FH

I am not sure what you guys think whether he Valuebets Ax on river - bear in mind that we only get to chop with all those combos and still lose to AK.

Minimum Value combos~ 40 combos.

So lets just assume that Ax is not in his river value betting range - so we can see even if he is very polarised whether we can bluff catch.

We are being offered 2-1 on the river. 40 value combos So we need 20 bluff combos.
If the rump of his 3barrell bluff range is flopped str8 draws.
KJ, KT JT J8 = 60 combos ( 64 - 4 combos are flushes) Edit

So we need ~ 33 % 3 Barrell bluffing frequency from his busted str8draws when he is polarised.


I think thats right?

cool, i think what everything hahs established (with terp's help as well) is this:

fold > raise > call, but it is close between all 3.

Andrew

Yeah it is an interesting spot.

I mean if villian never thinks you would fold an Ace - is it a good bluffing spot for him on the river?
He is laying himself an ok price.

I mean if you add some slowplayed flushes not sure you have that many FHs
- no flop raise no PF 3bet
- I guess A9, A4 are the only nut hands in your range
Which 6 combos of FHs
Maaaybe 20 combos of flushes

There are potentially something like 26 nut hands and 40 some combos of Ax bluffcatcher.

Laying himself 1-1 on a bluff - geez How many double floats and Qx are in your range.

But I guess he doesnt always see the bluff spot for what it is........counterbalanced by your own thing Andrew of "they arent bluffing as often as you think"

Time Link to 00:26:31

the KTs hand where you hit the king on the river, you say you rep a king but imo you rep a Q. Obv QK is one of the Qs along with QJ and AQ

other than that the "tight guy" argument still makes it a fold

Time Link to 00:29:30

T2 KTo
I think the way you played this hand is at least debateable. The c/c flop is probably fine?
As you say: you have the best hand a lot. So why would you turn your hand into a bluff on the river?

T2 KTo
I think the way you played this hand is at least debateable. The c/c flop is probably fine?
As you say: you have the best hand a lot. So why would you turn your hand into a bluff on the river?

i assumed I could get him off a lot of better hands on the river. that assumption was clearly wrong vs this guy, but not vs many other people.

Andrew

Where can we find and purchase your latest seminar?

Where can we find and purchase your latest seminar?

via PM from me is best, or at dailyvariance.com

Andrew

via PM from me is best, or at dailyvariance.com

Andrew

How do I PM you on dc?

I am enjoying this series so far, as always you're able to condense convoluted theories down to it's simplest parts. I think it would be helpful for the audience if you played 3 tables instead of 4. I think when spots come up on multiple tables it is difficult to have a discussion and play really well.

I much rather see you talk in depth about specific game/player dynamics than to see more hands. Eg. What kind of adjustments you're making, against who/when and why. I know you've already been doing that for the most part. But it is much more worthwhile to see more discussion on adjustments and counter-adjustments vs tough opponents.

At about 54:41 you say "if it's a good spot to value bet, it's a bad spot to bluff and vice versa." While I agree with your intuitive reasoning that there are a lot of spots where this is the case, it can be easily mathematically untrue and thus the statement is slightly misleading. For instance, say on the river, we can have hand a or b. We think that villain calls 55% vs. a 1/2 psb, and folds 45%. Hand a is ahead of his calling range >50% of the time, and hand b is a bluff. Both a value bet with hand a and a bluff with hand b are profitable, since he only needs to call with worse 50% of the time for a vbet to be profitable (he does), and he only needs to fold 33% for a bluff to be profitable, and he does. It's thus a great spot to both vbet and bluff. I'm guessing you are aware of this but just thought it should be clarified for people.

At about 54:41 you say "if it's a good spot to value bet, it's a bad spot to bluff and vice versa." While I agree with your intuitive reasoning that there are a lot of spots where this is the case, it can be easily mathematically untrue and thus the statement is slightly misleading. For instance, say on the river, we can have hand a or b. We think that villain calls 55% vs. a 1/2 psb, and folds 45%. Hand a is ahead of his calling range >50% of the time, and hand b is a bluff. Both a value bet with hand a and a bluff with hand b are profitable, since he only needs to call with worse 50% of the time for a vbet to be profitable (he does), and he only needs to fold 33% for a bluff to be profitable, and he does. It's thus a great spot to both vbet and bluff. I'm guessing you are aware of this but just thought it should be clarified for people.

this is clearly true, provided that villain's 45% folding are all better hands. But, if you win a lot of the time when you check anyway (against missed draws or whatever) than obviously it becomes a worse time to bluff.

its a guideline, not a rule.

Andrew

Time Link to 00:41:38

Great vid and series BW, I like your content.

Right here T2 you say: We cant get value from worse, but he might call w/ draws right? It's also one of those concepts I have in my game from you, that whenever we iso fish and he can call w/ worse hands we should bet.. Is it because his equity might still be quite okay?

hey,
u said something about a business meeting you attended a while ago, do you have a script or notes from that seminar? Id be really interested in more of that stuff they talked about so it would be great if you could share your notes or give links for further information
thx