Big Game Macau: NLHE
Posted by Brian Rast
Video Player is loading.
This is a modal window.
The media could not be loaded, either because the server or network failed or because the format is not supported.
Resume Video
Start from Beginning
Watch Video
10
Loading 38 Comments...
53s - seems like you think his 3B/call range is pretty wide, given this is part of your 4b plan that he will call and XF many flops? i thought you were going to DB turn and sometime triple? listening to all your range assumptions makes me not want to 4B bluff this guy?
66 - so in general you will get XR less on deep stacks right and therefore can CB more often - right?
i think i would have folded the river but i guess i am used to playing vs more passive players but it does seem pretty close depending on the exact LC range you give him
Board: Td4s9c7c2c
Equity Win Tie
CO 64.00% 64.00% 0.00% { A9s, KTs-K9s, QTs+, JTs, T9s, 97s, KJo-KTo, QTo+, JTo }
BU 36.00% 36.00% 0.00% { 66 }
nice video format and pacing where all good - looking forward to more live NLH content:)
for A8hh hand - the key is his sizing. Pot is 8900. He rr to 12k. In my experience, a more wide/merged value range 3bet in that position from villains to accomplish what you are saying is and should be smaller. Now this depends somewhat on the fish. If the fish is so bad that he does not fold to 3bets regardless of sizing, then I think it would encourage TAG villains in that spot to 3bet larger in order to encourage me to fold more of my range - and to get in a larger amount vs fish with a hand that is a solid equity favorite. While I didn't discuss in the video how this fish responds to 3bets, I believe that he was sensitive to the initial 3bet sizing. Additionally, I believe in game you should assume a fish is initially, until evidence suggets otherwise - and this is something you can test (or someone else might show you!). In a spot like this one, where I am not assuming fish calls any 3bet, this sizing from reasonable TAG villains usually does not include many merged value hands (AT, KJ, 88, etc...) because usually they are worried they fold out many of the hands they dominate. I tend to find it's the premium value hands... and possibly some bluffier hands. I find in live games that there are some villains in TAGs spot who 3bet light too much (some who do it recognizing the large initial fold %, and are ok playing hu against weakish fish range with bad hand somewhat often), and others who very infrequently do it (who just dislike these type of high var spots in general and just try to wait for solid value hands) - and I made this play without knowing which type of villain this TAG was - but assuming he'd be light here often enough that with my immediate fold equity, and with the A card removal of AK/AQ/AA (which is significant). Obviously not a play I can do in this spot every time, and there were some gameflow considerations involved.
Yes, I actually feel in this hand based on further thought... I think I should have bet turn. I think that because my hand is disguised very well, and has a large amount of equity on the turn even (about the most I could expect from a hand that's behind) - it should be in my turn barreling range. Despite my assumptions, I think there is some % my opponent folds a hand like 7s. And what's more, I believe that sometimes when I bink river, if he did x/c turn with an overpair, he will be tempted to pay off some of my outs. I think that in this spot I chose to check based on an entirely exploitative reason for my immediate equity, but that since villain is someone I regularly play with, it would have been better for me to have bet the turn. If called I could make a decision what to do on the river. I think it's a more balanced play for my turn range (my turn 2nd barrel range in this spot is way too strong if i'm checking even this back.
you been playing much live PLO recently? would really love to see a video of this format for PLO :P
Very good video, really like the format with extreme deepstacks where edges can be massive. Situations we don't see too many videos about so I'm very happy to see it
I find it interesting how hands that plays well in this game differ from hands we will be looking to play in mtts where stacks are usually less than 50bb. I guess the deeper we get we are looking for hands that can potentially hit the nuts and nutdraws but shallower we are looking to hit more boards with higher avarage equity since we are looking to be able to get it in more often and not necessarily with the nuts.
I am not a hs cash game player or anything close to it and have very little experience playing very deep stacked, but still feel like I can say I agree and understood your thought processes because you explained everything very well.
Would be interested, since you said you are mainly a live player, to see a video about how to pick up live tells and how to use them. I can imagine it is something that just comes with experience tho and not very easy to just put into words in a video.
again, great vid def looking forward to more!
I play some tournaments as well, and enjoy both styles of play. I really feel that the difference is just what you're discussing here - stack sizes / blind-ratios. All the other considerations in the vast majority of tournament situations don't really matter that much, although sometimes ICM, for example, does matter quite a bit - it's often in specific situations close to the end of tournaments... which is still a relatively small %age of the time played.
I also thought it was a great video, great style. Your rambling is nothing compared to another very notable rambling man however. ;)
I also share your thought process, but I just try to see another angle ...
By no means am I a NL expert or have the skill set you do but I agree with your comment saying "Going back, I would fold this" in regards to the 53ss hand.
We hit a gin flop but cbet once and essentially give up on the turn and river. If this hand is ever in our 4b range and we're firing once to see a free river to complete our hand/realise our equity etc., I think a good opponent will bet us out a lot and it becomes unprofitable. Once we get to the turn I think it's bet and if we get to the river we should bet again as I imagine his range to get to the river is much stronger than our exact holding but our perceived range can get a ton of folds with a river bet.
Would be very interested to read your thoughts on this and how you would play it again on the turn.
Again, awesome vid. The A2s hand really helped my thought process in these situations I find myself in a lot on whether to check or bet. Thank you!
a8hh-- agree with analysis. But whether the TAG (3bettor) was sb or btn matters alot imo. Hes much more likely to be weighted towards value and making your 4b worse if hes in sb. While if hes btn think hes much more apt to be light.
53ss- you beat 67s/68s and inc. 78s yeah? When turn came down initially I had no idea, but I like 37-43k. I dont expect to get shoved on that often when you consider his range and hands he should be able to shove. And you are more disguised due to pf action on cards that improve you. But it seems very close either way!
66- Logically makes a lot of sense to choose hands such as this to almost always cbet despite it not being a great cbet spot (but we are super deep in position so always nice spot with any hand). Thats not to say you should cbet 100% of hands here but I'd rather choose other hands to change my flop cbetting distribution then sixes.
Say you are opponent and playing this hand preflop against someone deep who 3balls the button a ton and you guys are deep. Do you think its a viable strategy open limping in these positions? I'd rather not be limp/calling QJo but would much rather have some pairs/suited connectors/Axss but these hands are also awesome opens and decent enough hands to defend to a 3bet but you can probably confuse your btn /opponent more by strengthening up your limping range and cr wider for value, as not many people are doing this effectively (kind of like limping sb with 100% of value hands). Only really applicable against regs that you really cringe when they have button and you are on their right.
A2hh-- Def. seems right to keep the fish in and keep worse draws in. On the river tempting to both check to the fish, and I think you have an awesome psr for a checkraise. Then I heard your analysis and def. think it was the right move that he is randomly spazzy in river situations.
You sir are awesome and a great player. Hope you keep crushing.
As I've already stated in a few spots, I agree now that 53ss was a bet on turn, and i agree that i'm probably not getting c/r much there as well.
My general response in villain's spot on 66 hand would be to tighten up my opening range there in c/o, but still come in for open raises (and never calling)... i think a smart villain on button when notices that will have to stop 3betting a lot, and if he doesn't it's fine really bc you'll always have a hand in c/o. additionally it allows you to attack the blinds still instead of limping... i generally only like developing a limping strategy in earlier positions ... and i basically never do it in hold em - although i sometimes have one for plo in certain ring games.
53s hand: i initially thought we should ck back flop or take the triple barrel line but then not much stuff folds the turn ( i can think only AQ/AK type of hands, that we already beat, and mayyybe 77-TT even if i don't think he plays PP often like that preflop).
Curios to hear some other opinions about that hand :)
Slightly envious that your such a baller playing pots that are 1000 times more than my total lifetime earnings and net worth! :-)
I agree with brah, I don´t expect to see a check/shove ott very often. What about shoving turn? I think there are some positives for this play. I guess we can fold out many better hands here and are nearly never in terrible shpae when called. In regards to our range, it´s not the best play obviously but I think there are many players who can level themselves into thinking you´re trying to level them into a call with AA,KK. This all depends obv very much on the level of your opponent.
What do you think?
From a balance perspective, there are a lot of problems with it I think - and I don't like the idea of coming up with a balanced shoving range here that goes along with a balanced "normal bet size" range here.... but while I believe that while it's very important in poker to think about balancing ranges, it's not everything. I think exploitatively speaking, shoving here with our hand has a lot of benefits - and it's very hard for our opponent to call (for the reason you stated above), and when called we have outs. It's a spot where our opponent can't give us too many draws either, given the 4bet and lack thereof on the turn board texture. Also, when exploring plays like this, it allows you to see how your opponent will respond - which in and of itself has value against someone you figure to play with again.
I think that it's generally a good idea to try these ideas out, and "exploit away" until our opponent shows us a thorough knowledge of the game in that - in spots that we are unbalanced, they seem to make the correct decision often. Once our opponent shows us this, then we know that our opponent understands what is going on with our ranges in these unbalanced spots.
Also, it is definitely possible to start making these plays on a more regular basis - and including them as part of a balanced overall strategy - I will concede this... and in the same moment also concede that I haven't done this personally, or thought about it enough to make a comment about how good or bad I think it would be. I think there is definitely a lot of interesting logical & mathematical work that could be done about overbetting and really incorporating it in balanced NLHE postflop play, that I will humbly admit I am not an expert on.
I like this video a lot and I am fan of the way you think about poker. I have a very basic question about that hand where you are playing 53ss and decide to cold 4bet. I agree with everything you say in your shoes. my question is more about the range that you assign the SB:
If I am in the SB shoes and I get cold 4bet by a guy like you, my calling range would be very narrow bc I am not really interested in playing very deep and OOP vs a tough thinking player. So the question I am asking myself is if I would leave anything on the table if I wouldn't consider playing broadway cards that you mentioned for him. The only two hands I can see myself calling there are AK AKss, AQss and with AQoff I am probably folding . Would that be too tight?
My approach in SB shoes vs you would be trapping AA, KK, (about 20% or so instead of 5betting) and looking for really good boards with QQ and below + the AK AKss AQss.
Too nitty? I just dont really see myself being able to profitably play hands like AJ or KQ, KJss etc there OOP (i dont see very many players in general being able to play that profitably OOP vs tough thinking player very deep)
Granted I wouldn't know all this at the time as the bb, and thus wouldn't be playing perfectly as I'm theorizing now... Nor would I be able to perfectly narrow down your range without this knowledge... and it does help you avoid a lot of tough spots oop, it would be exploitable over time if the bb discovered you were playing this way as the 3bettor in the sb.
All of that said, most people in live games don't play that way, they play looser than your description on some level (maybe not by much, maybe by a lot, depends) and I don't think this villain was. My feeling is that he would not fold most of his playable hands in this spot... i.e. suited connectors, pairs, etc... 45s, tjs, KQo, AJs, 77+, etc... which honestly is probably the majority of hands he was 3betting. I had found this villain to be very sticky once he chose to play a pot, and very unwilling to give up his equity in the pot by folding.
thanks for that detailed analysis! I agree with everything you said again. For now I would stick to avoiding tough spots oop. As soon as i would get the feeling that i am being abused (i assume i am capable enough for that - yet not confident enough in my game to jump in there right away w SBs given range in that scenario) i would figure thinks out from there. I just really dont like playing good people oop, esp deep.
All that being said, your reply helped a lot, I look forward to your next video and I think you one of the best and most logic "teachers" I have heard from so far. Best of luck in the nosebleeds!!!
Just seems like a spot where your range for raising in the BB, after 3 limps, when deep, is perceived to be strong, and therefore you'd want to be raising bigger to try and get it HU. Or is it precisely BECAUSE you're OOP and deep that you want to keep it smaller?
In the last hand A2s .... What doing if no A on turn ?
Calling a second barrel passively against a pro ???
I prefer raise on the flop to take the pot now.
The play is good to keep the Fish, but the pro will win this pot very often and take you 2 barrels too often i think ...
Thanks for this vidéo !!!
The first few hands were played kinda standard.
But the Ah2h play I really liked, really smart adjustments you made on every street!
One added benefit of checking the river that you didn't mention is that it balances your range, thus if the reg in the SB held a hand like 55 (which I don't know why you didn't include it in his range earlier) he could still call, given that the fish might be bluffing, so that you win extra on the river. He would rarely call if you bet and the fish calls.
First hand perfect, hes 3 betting light from the button a ton with the fish being weak for sure and u being LAG, and even called ur 4 bet size 28k very nice, at least when u don't know them. Second hand is weird, I think u should barrel that turn, it gross if he shoves but at least u still do have some equity, that being said eve if ur getting the odds to call he wopuld have to be pretty damn strong to call ur 4 bet oop call the flop an check raise the turn that's a NUTTED line so I think you still fold. When u check the turn I think that caps ur range at least in the villains eyes an I think he should donk out there like everytime, I could be wrong but that's seems like the right play, also a good flop to float on for the villain. Called villians hand in 3 hand makes perfect sense, 7 and 2 don't really complete a lot of hands.NH. A2h was a masterpiece never saw it played like that before as well as u broke it down so well. Awesome job
Brian, in the 3 5 suited hand did you consider jamming the river as a bluff? It seems stack sizing is perfect for a jam bluff.
Great video Brian! Fantastic
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.