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

Nice vid Noah. Even after your explanation I still have a hard time deciding that the last hand is a mistake. As you said just a minor adjustment on his range makes it a call, so in these situations aren't reads on the player more important than the aproximate math?

I enjoy your videos.

Nice vid, great series. F the haterz, swearing in vids is amusing and WTF combos are a nice way of phrasing it.

Also including some standard hands like the 99 hand along with more esoteric ones is fine / educational too.

Nice vid Noah. Even after your explanation I still have a hard time deciding that the last hand is a mistake. As you said just a minor adjustment on his range makes it a call, so in these situations aren't reads on the player more important than the aproximate math?

Sure. All I mean when I say it's a mistake is that based on the range I put him on, it's -EV. Obv it's not a very big mistake, and obv it's +EV against a lot of opponents--i.e., someone who we're sure 3-bets preflop almost always with AJ/KJ or someone who checks back QJ/J9 sometimes most of the time on the river. It's also very very -EV against some opponents--i.e. someone who raises flop with FD almost always or doesn't bluff the river much or v-bets the river with lots of Tx/99-type stuff.

cloudcap and choparno,
Thanks. Glad you liked it.

Time Link to 00:21:32

DIIIIIIIIIISGUSTING lol. 100% not the spot to overbet bluff imo.

DIIIIIIIIIISGUSTING lol. 100% not the spot to overbet bluff imo.

Why do you think that? I think I made a pretty clear argument in the video (He has a hand like AT/AQ/AK a lot more often than two pair or better, and he'll fold those most of the time to an overbet but not to a standard-sized bet), so without knowing what you disagree with, I don't know how to respond.

Great content Noah, thank you.

Re the A2s hand: Do you not think villain can put you on a missed club/heart draw when you polarize your range in his eyes. If villain expects you to show up with 65, which I don't think he would unless he has reads on you, (I'm not sure if you mentioned this so my apologies if you did) then he may assume you have a number of other busted draws in your range. I wouldn't expect a TAG to fold AQ/AK here from my experience of 3/6 but if villain is more weak/tight then this is more reasonable to assume, obviously. I tried something similar myself quite recently convinced I could move my opponent off a better Ace and inadvertently induced a bluff catch from a worse pair. When you say your opponent is a nit, perhaps I got the wrong idea as lately I just think TAG when someone says nit.

Well.. I have two different argument for why I think AK will fold here often enough to make this good:

Actually Relevant Reason

I just think he will usually fold here. I mean... I hate to just say "trust me, I know this specific guy, he'll fold here" because that sorta kills discussion and that's not really helpful for you guys learning how to play similar spots in the future. But, I think I can say pretty confidently an opponent as I described him in the video is v likely to fold AK here. He's not a TAG at all. As I said in the video, he's a straightforward nit--the kind that a lot of people who watch these vids prob run into pretty often at uSNL/SSNL or at Euro-friendly sites where there are still plenty of huge nit regulars. (FWIW, the guy is 17/15 and has incredibly nitty postflop stats as well.)

Interesting but Largely Irrelevant Reason

There's actually a pretty strong argument for a fold here with AsKd. I don't think most players as described will bother to go through this thought process, so I don't think it matters much, but it's interesting.

My perceived value range on this river is like 100% AJ, 40%ish 56s/A7s, and like 20%ish 33/44/A3s/A4s, so that's 6 + .4*(4+2)+.2*(3+3+2+2) = 10.4 combos. My perceived potential bluffing range if I don't turn a made hand into a bluff is just whiffed clubs, so the widest possible bluffing range is something like 6c8c/8c9c/9cTc/TcQc/KcQc/KcTc/Kc9c, so 7 combos. That's of course more than I'll actually have because they're not all in my preflop range and I often raise them on flop or turn. I'm laying him 1.78:1, so he needs 5.8 bluff combos here to make this call profitable. That's def not happening if the assumptions are true (i.e., I don't turn a made hand into a bluff and I can be value betting here).


So, cliff notes is that I think this guy as described folds AK here usually and I think there's pretty basic logic that he could use to actually justify that fold.

Time Link to 00:10:21

Interesting thought, and spot. But then you said you wished to bet bigger. I would actually like the contrary. If you bet something like $320, it looks more like a blocking bet(more then for value), representing Ax with a flush draw or middle pair, that doesnt want to be bluffed of the hand. And this imo will actually entice him to shove as a bluff.

I mean... I hate to just say "trust me, I know this specific guy, he'll fold here" because that sorta kills discussion...

I actually think that's a very useful thing to say. Your largely irrelevant reason for villain folding is, as you say, largely irrelevant if we ignore who villain is and what he might do in this spot regardless of whether or not he can theoretically justify it. So saying "trust me, I know this guy" is very useful because I can think of plenty of villains who do fit the bill you've now described. Thank you for clarifying and, as ever, for going above and beyond with your response.

Time Link to 00:24:25

Nice video Noah. I have a question about the river spot with 99. I agree that your check is the best play as he has basically announced that his hand is weak and you very rarely get paid if you bet. You mention that you are going to check raise which seems like a mistake given the action. I think you only get called by better hands like backdoor diamonds and TJ. Seems like check call is a little better although seemingly weak on first glance with top set. Thoughts?

Interesting thought, and spot. But then you said you wished to bet bigger. I would actually like the contrary. If you bet something like $320, it looks more like a blocking bet(more then for value), representing Ax with a flush draw or middle pair, that doesnt want to be bluffed of the hand. And this imo will actually entice him to shove as a bluff.

That's a cool idea... I just don't think it will work with my image in the games that I play in. If you're playing against a good player who doesn't know you and might think you're a fish, fake blocking bets are awesome. In my games with my image, I think a block bet is def likely to set off alarm bells and is very unlikely to get bluff raised.

inavacuum,
Cool.

surfdoc,
Glad you like the vid.

I thought someone would prob bring that up. I think it's probably a c/r, but it's def very close and not clear at all. Basically what pushes it over the type in my opinions is the fact that stacks are so short that he's gonna have trouble making hero folds with rivered two pair and overpairs.

I figure he'll take this line and bet/call with like 7ish combos of JT, like 1 combos of 56, like 7 combos of diamonds (many will bet the turn, but with these stacks he prob checks back a decent amount), like 1 combos of flopped sets, like 7 combos of overpairs, like 6ish combos of 78/89/88, and like 4 combos of 9x. So that makes about 18 combos that we beat and about 15 combos that beat us.

That's definitely close enough that I could be persuaded to just c/c here, and I certainly would c/c with certain reads, but I def think c/r has merit at least.

Really enjoying this content and this discussion.

Feedback regarding your "what hands to include?" question;
I think you select very interesting hands and that it doesn't really matter if they are super aggro monkey moves or more standard hands to keep our thought process in check, the most optimal is some sort of mix based on what's coming your way at the tables.

Also, love the detailed breakdown of ranges in the last hand its something I think everyone needs to do more often.

SS,
Glad you like it, and thanks for the feedback.

Time Link to 00:24:53

if villain had bet I'm wondering if a river c/r is actually +EV. If we assume that some of the time villain will be checking back turned GS or diamond draws (which seems possible if somewhat discounted) AND if we assume he's not going to check back over pairs and then b/c the river (since he shouldn't ever really expect AA-TT to be good if you c/shove the river) then his river b/c'ing range might be ahead of us. I guess he can show up with several combos of 78, and a few combos of 88, but he can also show up with straights and flushes.

meh its late and I can't decide if I'm being a nit, or if above actually has merit. let me know your thoughts if it makes sense.

thanks again for solid vids. I liked your live play vid as well but since you like to give detailed explanations you might consider limiting them to 2 tables or so like whitelime has done in the lime aid series.

if villain had bet I'm wondering if a river c/r is actually +EV. If we assume that some of the time villain will be checking back turned GS or diamond draws (which seems possible if somewhat discounted) AND if we assume he's not going to check back over pairs and then b/c the river (since he shouldn't ever really expect AA-TT to be good if you c/shove the river) then his river b/c'ing range might be ahead of us. I guess he can show up with several combos of 78, and a few combos of 88, but he can also show up with straights and flushes.

meh its late and I can't decide if I'm being a nit, or if above actually has merit. let me know your thoughts if it makes sense.

ignore this, just saw that surfdoc asked the same thing and you responded.

Nice analysis in that last hand. I feel a little wat about it though.

Without knowing much about the BB, you are blind vs blinds 200bb deep, so how the heck does he fold J9o pre? I would think his pf range is so much looser and hence his river ranges on both sides are also much much wider. Your analysis looks like nit on nit violence or a HJ vs CO spot. I'd def give him Q3s combos for value and 74s combos for bluffs..

Time Link to 00:13:44

Noah,

Love your videos. I have a question re: what you said here -- that you would call a raise with J-high diamonds but fold T-high diamonds. What is the difference?

Noah,

Love your videos. I have a question re: what you said here -- that you would call a raise with J-high diamonds but fold T-high diamonds. What is the difference?

J-high diamonds has better equity against his FDs since it dominates the T-high diamonds. Giving villain a rough range to illustrate my point:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 71.224% 70.01% 01.21% 955 16.50 { 22, AJs-ATs, A2s, KdJd, KdTd, Kd9d, Kd8d, JdTd, Jd9d, Td9d, Td8d, 9d8d, 8d7d, 5d4d, AJo-ATo }
Hand 1: 28.776% 27.57% 01.21% 376 16.50 { Jd9d }

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 73.068% 71.89% 01.17% 949 15.50 { 22, AJs-ATs, A2s, KdJd, KdTd, Kd9d, Kd8d, JdTd, Jd9d, Td9d, Td8d, 9d8d, 8d7d, 5d4d, AJo-ATo }
Hand 1: 26.932% 25.76% 01.17% 340 15.50 { Td9d }

jim,
I may try making a 2-tabling sweat video. Obviously the concern for me is just that I won't have much to talk about.

Paul,
I think my preflop range there is pretty accurate, though certainly not perfect.

Like with the AJ/KJ/J9 bunch of hands (I really should've separated those), I think AJ he'd prob 3-bet 6 combos and call 3, KJ he'd prob 3-bet like 5 and call 4, J9s he'd prob call 2 and 3-bet 1, and J9o he'd prob call 5, 3-bet 1 and fold 3.... something like that. So I like the 13 combos that I came up with, maybe 14 is a little more accurate. I do wish I'd made it clear that the major discount was coming from 3-betting, not folding.

Q3s I would consider a WTF hand since it's discounted a decent amount preflop, a little on the flop, and a bit on the turn, so I'd say he has like less than half a combo of Q3s in his range. Same with 74cc... prob only like 1/5 of a combo of that. I prob should've included one combo of K3s, though .

Time Link to 00:21:30

Hi Noah
Let me start out by saying that I think you are very creative and an excellent communicator. I do have a discrepancy with the A2 hand you decided to turn into a bluff. Considering the fact that the so called overly tight nitty player would probably check a decent portion of his AJ, set of 3's and set of 4's and a solid majority of his AK AQ AT I think even with a big overbet this is a bad play(I recognize that by combo analysis the latter hands are more likely). I feel that most people in this spot when they check back a made hand like this (even nits) are doing it not really as pot control for fear of you have a better hand but to induce bluffs from missed draws. Given that he snap calls the times he checks back his top range hands and the majority of the time when he has AK AQ AT he checks expecting that if you bet it will probably be bluff, it might be a little hard to get that thought out of his head. So I think even the nittyist might go out of their comfort zone and make the big call of their week here with AQ or something. Another thing is that you say that you would fold A2 of spades but you have to call because of your heart draw. My problem with this is that given your deuce as outs you have 12 outs (assuming that he almost always has ace deuce beat on the turn because he is so nitty)and based on direct pot odds you do not have odds to call because if this guy is as nitty as you say he is you almost never have implied odds because he will not pay you off when your heart falls so isn't this a negative EV play? I dunno Given your image I feel that turning your hand into a bluff and trying to push even a nit off a strong made made hand on a board like this when you played it like you were chasing clubs cannot be profitable in the long run.

Dissent with respect
DDP

Please anybody feel free to respond

bezzer,

Thanks for the compliment.

I explained why I think he almost always mucks AK here in an earlier post. Scroll up and look for a long post with bold text. Let me know if you still don't agree.

You're right that my overbet is bad if he checks two pair/sets/straight as often as he checks Ax, but I think he actually is way more likely to check Ax than two pair+ because there's pretty clearly no value in betting ATs on this river, and slightly less clearly, there's no value in betting AK on this river. Plus, with Ax he doesn't want to get raised, but with set/straight, he'd obv love to get raised here. Plus there's obv just the psychological factor that he'd be more comfortable checking a weaker hand. I'd bet that he's at least 2x more likely to check Ax here than two pair+.

FWIW, I would check my strong hands in villain's shoes on this river against a lot of opponents, but I don't really see other people do it too much.

As for my turn call, I have 8 outs to the nuts, 3 other outs to a very strong hand, and 4 more outs to a hand that's pretty far ahead of his range, and I have the best hand sometimes. I actually think that I have about 35% equity vs his range here, so I think I'm getting direct odds.

Plus, I can turn my hand into a bluff on a lot of rivers (clubs, a 6, a J, maybe a T). When I do hit, I'm obviously not going to overbet if checked to, so the fact that I think he c/fs AK to an overbet on an offsuit J river isn't really related to how often I think I get paid on a heart river when I bet like 210 (or when he bets himself).