---

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

It's probably better to do post production audio anyway, so that you can really explain things without having to also multi task and auto pilot - I'm so happy this is up, will finish it by end of the night.

The original video was better than this. When I'm playing I know exactly what I'm focussed on, know minor details impacting my decisions etc. This is largely lost in post production. Pure HH review would be more valuable than doing post production audio on a live video.

Could you please increase the framerate when recording in the future? It's kinda bumpy/jolty right now.

Time Link to 00:48:40

If there are no fish at the table, what is the lowest pair you'd typically open from UTG? What about UTG+1? Thanks Grindcore - great video once again.

Could you please increase the framerate when recording in the future? It's kinda bumpy/jolty right now.

+1

The rest is as great as always, I love the explanations and your ability to think in much much more advanced categories.

Btw, not sure if you know, but you check/raised with QdJd (turned flushdraw on A-high board) against jballer88, CR coach as far as I know ;p

The original video was better than this. When I'm playing I know exactly what I'm focussed on, know minor details impacting my decisions etc. This is largely lost in post production. Pure HH review would be more valuable than doing post production audio on a live video.

You don't feel that you can easily deduce the why after the fact? I usually find no difference in that in whichever format I record in, but I do find that live audio can be better for different reasons, the main being that you can learn a lot seeing great decision makers reason out and make decisions hyper fast -- not only is it cool to watch for a lot of students it helps train their own brain to think like that and process faster in-game.

Keep up the good work Gc

Time Link to 01:00:08

Table two with the straightflush on turn you say you should raise here. But how much would you raise with the given stacksizes. Shove or minreraise?

Could you please increase the framerate when recording in the future? It's kinda bumpy/jolty right now.

Yeah I cut the framerate in half. The file was over 2GB, which is the maximum the DC drop box accepts, so I had to shrink the file somehow. There were a lot of problems leading to this video. The next videos should be better.

the main being that you can learn a lot seeing great decision makers reason out and make decisions hyper fast -- not only is it cool to watch for a lot of students it helps train their own brain to think like that and process faster in-game.

This +1. My reasoning can be pretty good in post hand analysis, but I'm always concerned my in-game thought process could be much more refined. Seeing winning coaches do it is really valuable, to me at least.

+1

The rest is as great as always, I love the explanations and your ability to think in much much more advanced categories.

Btw, not sure if you know, but you check/raised with QdJd (turned flushdraw on A-high board) against jballer88, CR coach as far as I know ;p

I hardly know anyone. I'd only recognize DC coaches if their SN was the same as their DC name, and maybe a few other super well known ones. If he's a CR coach it makes the line even better as he's more likely to be folding AK there (unless he recognizes me and knows I like to take these lines from having seen my videos).

Table two with the straightflush on turn you say you should raise here. But how much would you raise with the given stacksizes. Shove or minreraise?

A minraise doesn't set up well for a river shove. Shoving turn is also extremely bad as I'm very unlikely to be bluffing there (it risks too much if I have air because he could easily have the ace or 9). I'd probably raise to set up a 80-90% pot rivershove.

You don't feel that you can easily deduce the why after the fact? I usually find no difference in that in whichever format I record in, but I do find that live audio can be better for different reasons, the main being that you can learn a lot seeing great decision makers reason out and make decisions hyper fast -- not only is it cool to watch for a lot of students it helps train their own brain to think like that and process faster in-game.

Keep up the good work Gc

It's more of an effort to deduce the fact. I still can, but during live play you can always talk about what you're thinking. After the video you don't know what exactly you were thinking about at that time, you're not exactly sure what table you're thinking about, etc. I very often have the feel I'm missing someone during post commentary, and it also lacks a certain feel of flow. I can't really describe it well. Also during a live session, if a new hand comes up, you always pay attention to it, but during post commentary I might still be talking about something and don't notice the new hand coming up and thus miss it. Maybe it's just in my head and the end result is actually similar in quality, but having done both, I've generally always felt better about the way live videos turned out, and the videos where I only talk about the interesting hands (pure HH reviews in essence). For example, after I recorded this live session I felt great/exited about it, but after the commentary I had a more mediocre feeling about it.

Time Link to 01:23:35

''Nine isn't a good card to barrel'' what cards would you barrel and how much would you bet?

Yeah I cut the framerate in half. The file was over 2GB, which is the maximum the DC drop box accepts, so I had to shrink the file somehow. There were a lot of problems leading to this video. The next videos should be better.

Maybe try to convert the video into .rmvb (Real Media) format ? Quality remains almost the same and the size of the file goes down. Give it a try, use a Real Video Converter.

If there are no fish at the table, what is the lowest pair you'd typically open from UTG? What about UTG+1? Thanks Grindcore - great video once again.

I've never heard it put quite the way you put it - which does beg the question, what would be the bottom PP you'd want to open with UTG with no fish at the table? Obviously it's going to depend on table dynamics and such, but in a spot like this where you're relying on picking up equity to barrel, I'd be curious to see your thoughts. I have to second the question here Bart.
Thanks!

''Nine isn't a good card to barrel'' what cards would you barrel and how much would you bet?

btw i think i asked you something like this last week but barreling is what i suck at most haha.

Time Link to 00:04:38

Set of tens hand. He didn't bet the turn with his top set. Does it tell us something about the villain? Any adjustments can be made?

Maybe try to convert the video into .rmvb (Real Media) format ? Quality remains almost the same and the size of the file goes down. Give it a try, use a Real Video Converter.

Almost the same still means decrease. Filesize is normally never the problem, just this one time due to rare circumstances.

If there are no fish at the table, what is the lowest pair you'd typically open from UTG? What about UTG+1? Thanks Grindcore - great video once again.

I probably fold 22-55 from UTG with only regs at the table. I'll always open all pairs from MP.

''Nine isn't a good card to barrel'' what cards would you barrel and how much would you bet?

Again your timestamp is off by an hour. What exactly are you doing? If you're not actively doing something to cause it, please manually remove the hour from the timestamp before you post as I can't do it anymore after you've posted so I have to click on the timeline to find the hand which is a bit inaccurate and the flash player has some playback issues with this too (often simply doesn't play when I click on the timeline, have to pause/unpause).

Put your opponent on a range. Pretend you're him with his tendencies etc, and ask yourself what you'd do if your opponent fired a 2nd barrel on that card. If you have trouble doing this at the tables, do it in session reviews or something. Here I had him on FDs Kx and 88+, sometimes 22-66 or AQ AJ or so. That range didn't seem to be folding much on the turn.

Again your timestamp is off by an hour. What exactly are you doing? If you're not actively doing something to cause it, please manually remove the hour from the timestamp

i did try to do that but it wouldn't let me type i often have to cancel several times before it will let me even type in the box and never lets me backspace if i make a mistake sorry i guess.

Time Link to 01:02:36

Would you consider bluffing the river if get called by jballer88?

i did try to do that but it wouldn't let me type i often have to cancel several times before it will let me even type in the box and never lets me backspace if i make a mistake sorry i guess.

Here's what it should look like when you click pause and then click the comment from timeline button:

http://img405.imageshack.us/img405/7527/timestamp.png

Anything different? If it looks the same but it randomly adds 1 hour and won't let you type in the timestamp field, create a thread about it in the forums to get it fixed.

Would you consider bluffing the river if get called by jballer88?

No, when I c/r turn I look like I have a hand that's gonna shove river, so most regs will either fold turn or call twice.

Time Link to 00:19:29

As the OOP aggressor here, what's the worst hand you are going for a value 3rd barrel? What's the worst hand you check call?

If you had a 9 here and is checked to on this river what amount are you value bet/folding to shove on the river with?

As the OOP aggressor here, what's the worst hand you are going for a value 3rd barrel? What's the worst hand you check call?

Probably the straight. You should not check call. This is a very big and very common leak. When you bet you can get called by bluffcatchers and his monsters that beat you (or shoved on by them). When you check you only face a bet from the monsters and the bluffcatchers will check back. In general if you're considering a valuebet and end up not making it, you should c/f and not c/c. If you're gonna c/c you might as well bet and get the value from his bluffcatchers too instead of only his strong hands. The only reason to c/c would be thinking villain can turn pairs into bluffs, or can have busted draws that he'll bluff. People generally don't turn made hands into bluffs until you reach midstakes, and even then the average regular probably doesn't do it often enough, and there are no draws that missed on this particular board.

If you had a 9 here and is checked to on this river what amount are you value bet/folding to shove on the river with?

I checked back a straigh in the video. No way I'm vbetting a 9

Probably the straight. You should not check call. This is a very big and very common leak. When you bet you can get called by bluffcatchers and his monsters that beat you (or shoved on by them). When you check you only face a bet from the monsters and the bluffcatchers will check back. In general if you're considering a valuebet and end up not making it, you should c/f and not c/c. If you're gonna c/c you might as well bet and get the value from his bluffcatchers too instead of only his strong hands. The only reason to c/c would be thinking villain can turn pairs into bluffs, or can have busted draws that he'll bluff. People generally don't turn made hands into bluffs until you reach midstakes, and even then the average regular probably doesn't do it often enough, and there are no draws that missed on this particular board.



I checked back a straigh in the video. No way I'm vbetting a 9

Great and timely reply, it is very much appreciated. Good work on the series so far. Those check/fold spots come up pretty often and I think would make an interesting DC short. Even though you're already explaining it pretty well here.

Great and timely reply, it is very much appreciated. Good work on the series so far. Those check/fold spots come up pretty often and I think would make an interesting DC short. Even though you're already explaining it pretty well here.

It's a very common concept that has been touched upon in a lot of videos. Doesn't need it's own short imo.

Doesn't need it's own short imo.

What about a short on donk betting?

Keep up the good work on this series. I appreciate that you hold yourself to such a high standard when making a video. Sorry to hear about the technical difficulties on this one, but it was still very good.

Time Link to 00:04:39

on table 1. If you know that he is 4bet bluffing then he would fold vs 5bet so why do you 5bet?

Enjoyed the vid. Loved the sexy calldowns ATo oop was niiiccceee!

on table 1. If you know that he is 4bet bluffing then he would fold vs 5bet so why do you 5bet?

I don't know he's 4b bluffing. I know he can be 4b bluffing. If he is, his bluffs will likely have blockers to premiums, or in other words, overcards to my hand. I'm also OOP postflop. If I had aces or so I might call, but KK- is definitely a shove here.

Time Link to 00:58:04

Why do you iso the fish with 94s on the button? Is that hand generally good enough to bluff them off hands?

Why do you iso the fish with 94s on the button? Is that hand generally good enough to bluff them off hands?

My assumption about unknown fish is that they play fit/fold after limp-calling, which makes isolating them very profitable. Just bluffing him off his air will be enough to justify the raise.

Time Link to 00:12:22

Table 1 -> ATo:
Here you are pretty happy about the rivercards for obv. reasons (decreases his valuerange + no Draws come in).
But aren`t you in such spots worrying about that it also will probably decrease the bluffing-freq. from a thinking REG drastically, on the river?

Table 1 -> ATo:
Here you are pretty happy about the rivercards for obv. reasons (decreases his valuerange + no Draws come in).
But aren`t you in such spots worrying about that it also will probably decrease the bluffing-freq. from a thinking REG drastically, on the river?

Sure. But go actually do the following:

1) Ask yourself what you think the weakest hand is he 3barrels from value, taking into account that aggressive players are often FPSy and check made hands at some frequency and also don't necessarily valuebet rivers thin.
2) Count the amount of value combos on the river.
3) Use pot odds to calculate how many bluffing combos he needs to have on the river in order for me to call.
4) Count how many combo's he's double barreling on the turn that aren't for value.
5) Calculate how frequently he has to bluff the river when he has air in order for me to call there.
6) Post results here because I'm too lazy to do the math and it's more educative to do it yourself

My assumption about unknown fish is that they play fit/fold after limp-calling, which makes isolating them very profitable. Just bluffing him off his air will be enough to justify the raise.

Is there any marginal hands you would ever consider limping behind here on the button vs unknown fish? (if blinds are also weak/passive or nits)
Or Would u always iso as standard until u find that they dont like folding post flop?

Sure. But go actually do the following:

1) Ask yourself what you think the weakest hand is he 3barrels from value, taking into account that aggressive players are often FPSy and check made hands at some frequency and also don't necessarily valuebet rivers thin.
2) Count the amount of value combos on the river.
3) Use pot odds to calculate how many bluffing combos he needs to have on the river in order for me to call.
4) Count how many combo's he's double barreling on the turn that aren't for value.
5) Calculate how frequently he has to bluff the river when he has air in order for me to call there.
6) Post results here because I'm too lazy to do the math and it's more educative to do it yourself

That is for sure very interesting and I am glad to do it with having the chance to get then some feedback from you on my analysis

1.) My assumptions:
-worst val.bettinghand would be for Villain A9.
- And for his tricky played madehands, I just have taken out 3 combos of his valuerange, namley the topset which he could checkback sometimes on the flop for example.
- also 77 shall checkback here on the flop (the board hits a pas. defendingrange pretty well....)

2.) I have used a combinatoric-tool for it and the result was that his valuerange be 119 combos (also considered cardremoval-effects).
His Valuerange would be:
AA,QQ-99,33,AKs,A9s,K2s+,AKo,A9o,K7o+

3.) Due to my calc, he would need regards our needed EQ of about 28 % (for a rivercall),
about 46 Bluffcombos on the river to make us allow to C/Call.

4.) my assumed doubleBarellrange for him regards to semibluffs on the turn would be:
(any FD+, OESDs, doublegutter, but no pure gutshots)
-> AdQd,AdJd,Ah8h,Ad6d,Ad5d,As5s,Ad4d,Ad2d,QdJd,QsJs,Qd8d,Qd6d,Qd5d,
Qd4d,Qd2d,Jd8d,Jd6d,Jd5d,Jd4d,Jd2d,T8s,86s,8d5d,8d4d,8d2d,6d5d,6d4d,
6d2d,5d4d ,5d2d,4d2d,3d2d,T8o,86o

-> 66 combos

5.) So he would need a bluffingfreq. of about 69,7% on the river.
(a little bit more b/c against his bluffingrange on the trun, you have "only" 96,5% EQ b/c obv 2 combos there,( namely AdQd, AdJd, ) have you beat.
But I thought that i cannot add these combos then 100% in his valuerange b/c maybe he will not "bluff" it to 100% on the river...
But this i anyways no big deal.

All right,
I definetely think that it already helped me personally to analyse it so far and though it takes some time, i will try it to make it in the future more often.

So yeah, looking forward to your feedback b/c i could imagine that you maybe are not agreeing with me 100% (maybe you would give him another valuerange or also another bluffrange on the turn....)

Is there any marginal hands you would ever consider limping behind here on the button vs unknown fish? (if blinds are also weak/passive or nits)
Or Would u always iso as standard until u find that they dont like folding post flop?

Any hand that's strong enough to limp is almost always also strong enough to raise. Limping turns your hand extremely face up to regs behind you. So yeah, if the blinds are passive nits, I might overlimp small suited connecters or baby pairs if the fish has a smaller stacksize, but in 99% of the spots I'm just raising.

That is for sure very interesting and I am glad to do it with having the chance to get then some feedback from you on my analysis

1.) My assumptions:
-worst val.bettinghand would be for Villain A9.
- And for his tricky played madehands, I just have taken out 3 combos of his valuerange, namley the topset which he could checkback sometimes on the flop for example.
- also 77 shall checkback here on the flop (the board hits a pas. defendingrange pretty well....)

2.) I have used a combinatoric-tool for it and the result was that his valuerange be 119 combos (also considered cardremoval-effects).
His Valuerange would be:
AA,QQ-99,33,AKs,A9s,K2s+,AKo,A9o,K7o+

3.) Due to my calc, he would need regards our needed EQ of about 28 % (for a rivercall),
about 46 Bluffcombos on the river to make us allow to C/Call.

4.) my assumed doubleBarellrange for him regards to semibluffs on the turn would be:
(any FD+, OESDs, doublegutter, but no pure gutshots)
-> AdQd,AdJd,Ah8h,Ad6d,Ad5d,As5s,Ad4d,Ad2d,QdJd,QsJs,Qd8d,Qd6d,Qd5d,
Qd4d,Qd2d,Jd8d,Jd6d,Jd5d,Jd4d,Jd2d,T8s,86s,8d5d,8d4d,8d2d,6d5d,6d4d,
6d2d,5d4d ,5d2d,4d2d,3d2d,T8o,86o

-> 66 combos

5.) So he would need a bluffingfreq. of about 69,7% on the river.
(a little bit more b/c against his bluffingrange on the trun, you have "only" 96,5% EQ b/c obv 2 combos there,( namely AdQd, AdJd, ) have you beat.
But I thought that i cannot add these combos then 100% in his valuerange b/c maybe he will not "bluff" it to 100% on the river...
But this i anyways no big deal.

All right,
I definetely think that it already helped me personally to analyse it so far and though it takes some time, i will try it to make it in the future more often.

So yeah, looking forward to your feedback b/c i could imagine that you maybe are not agreeing with me 100% (maybe you would give him another valuerange or also another bluffrange on the turn....)

The math is good, just the range you put him on is extremely off imo. Do you seriously think he 3barrels A9 for value 100% of the time? I'd say there's only a 50% chance he even cbets it to begin with. Then another 50%, probably less, that he double barrels it and maybe a 10% that he triple barrels it on the river. I'd also bet money on most regs, LAG or not, not even vbetting KTo 100% of the time on the river, and also checking it on the flop or turn at some frequency. And if you think he 3barrels AQdd then add it to his valuerange (even though he's bluffing, for the math of the call it should be considered a value bet). And did you also take our ATo blockers into account for combination counting? Though they actually work in his favor as they block more bluffs than value bets...

The math is good, just the range you put him on is extremely off imo. Do you seriously think he 3barrels A9 for value 100% of the time? I'd say there's only a 50% chance he even cbets it to begin with. Then another 50%, probably less, that he double barrels it and maybe a 10% that he triple barrels it on the river. I'd also bet money on most regs, LAG or not, not even vbetting KTo 100% of the time on the river, and also checking it on the flop or turn at some frequency. And if you think he 3barrels AQdd then add it to his valuerange (even though he's bluffing, for the math of the call it should be considered a value bet). And did you also take our ATo blockers into account for combination counting? Though they actually work in his favor as they block more bluffs than value bets...

yeah, when I think about it again, then my valuerange for him is in fact way too large.
Also I just missed in the heat, that I would have of course just add AdJd, AdQd in his valuerange if i would assume he is 3barelling it....

@you question regards to the combinatoric:
Yes, our whole cards have been also considered.


Anyways,
I have just played a little bit with giving him some tighter valueranges and in fact, then his bluffingfreq. on the river can be significantly lower.
Rly helpful to analyze such spots in such a manner using your recommended steps - thx for the input

How low specifically? I'd estimate something like 25% during the hand.

How low specifically? I'd estimate something like 25% during the hand.

When I give him for example as his Valuerange TP with T-Kicker or better + AdQd, AdJd only and then the mentioned bluffrange,
then his Bluffingfreq. on the river should be at least 43,6%.

I have here assumed that he checksback all the worse TPs on the flop or does not 2ndbarell it and to count an occasionally worse madehand which 3barelled , I have given him all the KT-combos....

Yeah that seems more realistic. I'd assume he checks back KT or KJ on one street at some frequency so my numbers would be a bit lower, but I'd estimate him to be bluffing his air there maybe 50% of the time or so, as the river is a brick, but he also seems very aggro. But what I think his range is is a result of handreading, which you'll get better at over time. Understanding the actual thought process and being able to apply it yourself at the tables is way more important, as handreading is useless if you don't know what to do with it.

Yeah that seems more realistic. I'd assume he checks back KT or KJ on one street at some frequency so my numbers would be a bit lower, but I'd estimate him to be bluffing his air there maybe 50% of the time or so, as the river is a brick, but he also seems very aggro. But what I think his range is is a result of handreading, which you'll get better at over time. Understanding the actual thought process and being able to apply it yourself at the tables is way more important, as handreading is useless if you don't know what to do with it.

yeah,
sounds good to me^^

Time Link to 00:26:50

Hey Grindcore,

In your video your saying it's better to check behind against a fish with a second pair type of hand for inducing a bluff. I'm a bit confused here because calling stations tend to call and not to bluff so isn't it better to just bet and get called by worse. In my experience if I check behind the fish will rarely bluff and if he does bluff it's a min bet so if I check behind I don't get much value I'm only giving him a free card.

Can you explain why it's better to check behind in this spot against a fish.

Hey Grindcore,

In your video your saying it's better to check behind against a fish with a second pair type of hand for inducing a bluff. I'm a bit confused here because calling stations tend to call and not to bluff so isn't it better to just bet and get called by worse. In my experience if I check behind the fish will rarely bluff and if he does bluff it's a min bet so if I check behind I don't get much value I'm only giving him a free card.

Can you explain why it's better to check behind in this spot against a fish.

Fish do bluff. If you get a read on a fish that he doesn't, sure, cbet 2nd pair then. If you find that the average fish doesn't bluff, then cbet 2nd pair by default and only check it back when you obtain the read that they do bluff. Don't blindly take my (or anyone else's) word for stuff, only do what makes sense to you.

Time Link to 00:42:20

Table 1 - Q9s:
I can see your reasoning for checkingback here on the flop.
But with a HighcardFD IP vs a fish, I would be anyways tempted to bet, just to build a little bit the pot for a possible improvement on the turn (FutureEV).
Then on the turn you can unimproved depending on the turncard either barell or you have the option to take a freecard...
With your read that he can have here often air, I can see reasons for a checkback on the flop, but as yu said, this note is maybe here only some % true...

Time Link to 00:44:03

Table 1 - 99:
You think that he would checkback often on the flop with AJ here.
I personally would valuebet in his shoes AJ here, when the PFA is checking here to me - do you think that is too thin?
What would be in Villain`s spot here yours worst valuebettinghand on the flop?

If there are no fish at the table, what is the lowest pair you'd typically open from UTG? What about UTG+1? Thanks Grindcore - great video once again.

I hope it is ok and I may quote this question b/c it seems to be a very interesting one.

edit: time-link is missing so I give it manually:
Min. 48.40 -> 22 on Table 4.

Time Link to 01:02:31

Table 4 - QJs:
The thing is, do you also like to C/R in such a spot on the turn a set for example?
btw.,
that was another great part, imo.
Just cool to listen to your handreading-thought-processes

I hope it is ok and I may quote this question b/c it seems to be a very interesting one.

edit: time-link is missing so I give it manually:
Min. 48.40 -> 22 on Table 4.

+1. Been on my mind lately too. Opening 22-55 from utg even when we have fish with position on us still seems not super profitable to me. They can play pretty well vs these hands by floating with all their junk that is mostly flipping with us pre and it makes alot of turns hard to barrel since we have so little equity most of the time. Seems like a spot where a loose passive naturally plays pretty well against us. I'd rather open a 56s/79s utg that I have more barrel options on turns. I guess we make enough from double barreling turn scare cards and getting multy way and set mining is always sexy.
Meh. Just some thts on my mind atm....

+1. Been on my mind lately too. Opening 22-55 from utg even when we have fish with position on us still seems not super profitable to me. They can play pretty well vs these hands by floating with all their junk that is mostly flipping with us pre and it makes alot of turns hard to barrel since we have so little equity most of the time. Seems like a spot where a loose passive naturally plays pretty well against us. I'd rather open a 56s/79s utg that I have more barrel options on turns. I guess we make enough from double barreling turn scare cards and getting multy way and set mining is always sexy.
Meh. Just some thts on my mind atm....

Yeah, i also tend to agree that it depends on the position of the fish when you hold 22-55 and are in UTG. (+ the fish should not be shorty).
For example when the fish is next to you in MP and then there are only aggr. REGs behind (who will also often isosqz the fish), then it seems as well too be very close to open here 22-55).
Maybe I would only prefer to open here 22-55 in UTG when
- the fish is in the blinds.
- the fish is in the BTN
- the fish is in the Co and the BTN pretty nitty

But I am not sure of all this thoughts so far^^

Time Link to 00:19:18

hi all

upper right tab, 67s, what about valuebetting like 22$? i cant imagine he everfolds a 9x hand to this betsize

hi all

upper right tab, 67s, what about valuebetting like 22$? i cant imagine he everfolds a 9x hand to this betsize

Sure, but I think he's checkraising better more often than c/c worse. Also, I'm bet-folding, and an underbet might induce a bluff c/r occasionally. I very often underbet to maximize value, but I dont think this was a good spot for it. If I think he has more 9x than boats in his range, a larger bet is probably better anyway.

last question: you made the note that he lead TPTK 3way on 9high, does this note change anything if you had this before the hand?

Yes I'd be much more inclined to bet the river as it increases his top pair combos, and likely also makes him more straight forward and thus a bit less likely to go for a river c/r with a set.

Time Link to 00:13:34

Question about AK bvb vs aggro: For the sake of balancing ranges bvb, since you started a limp strategy bvb in the previous orbit, wouldn't it be better to limp your entire range vs. an aggro player in the bb, thus getting value out of an aggro player who is likely to raise you?

Time Link to 00:19:40

Isn't this kind of river a good reason to be raising the turn so that we can extract max value before the river gets ugly? Then again, being the type of TAG you described him as, there's a good chance he'd fold that hand on the turn anyway.

Yeah raising turn might have been best actually since a lot of river cards suck for my hand. It really depends on how bluff heavy he is. If I had a read that he's straight forward I'd be raising the turn all day and if he's more like i-momo from the previous (or the next, not 100% sure) video I'd call to let him hang himself.

on table 1. If you know that he is 4bet bluffing then he would fold vs 5bet so why do you 5bet?

I don't know he's 4b bluffing. I know he can be 4b bluffing. If he is, his bluffs will likely have blockers to premiums, or in other words, overcards to my hand. I'm also OOP postflop. If I had aces or so I might call, but KK- is definitely a shove here.

What do you think of his 4bet bluf? He doesnt know much about you at this moment. You had the dynamic with him with the QQ blindVSblind, where you checked the monotoon board. + you said the regs 3bet you both once.

When he cold4bets here, he risks 46 to win 27, so that has to work 63% of time if there is no postflop game. It's a huge bluff, 23bb and im not sure if that is a good line here without good information?

edit: this belongs to the first time note on the vid

and an other not related to the vid question: which vids do you recommend to get better in postflop 3bet spots, because I have a hard time with that last days.

What do you think of his 4bet bluf? He doesnt know much about you at this moment. You had the dynamic with him with the QQ blindVSblind, where you checked the monotoon board. + you said the regs 3bet you both once.

When he cold4bets here, he risks 46 to win 27, so that has to work 63% of time if there is no postflop game. It's a huge bluff, 23bb and im not sure if that is a good line here without good information?

edit: this belongs to the first time note on the vid

It's too long ago, I don't remember the dynamics. It might have been a good 4b bluff, it might not have been. It can also be part of a balanced strategy where he's simply 4b-calling enough combos to make a 5b bluff on my part -EV so he can have a few 4b bluffs in his range almost regardless of what my range is.

and an other not related to the vid question: which vids do you recommend to get better in postflop 3bet spots, because I have a hard time with that last days.

It's still poker. When someone raises CO and you call on BU you're also playing postflop. The only difference is the stack to pot ratio and preflop ranges. I think I 3b a ton and call 3bets a ton in my videos so they should be good, or you could re-watch the first episode of The Thin Red Line for general theory on how to approach any spot.