dantonius1812 years, 2 months agoSamuelbt- grinding mtts at an abi of 25$. Been taking bigger shots on sundays playing both WU+Milly+Bigger 109 etc. So yeah this type of video was perfect and I personally am really looking forward to hearing the thoughts of a former husng crusher turned mtt pro.
Great first vid btw.
Nick Rampone12 years, 2 months agoHello Samuel! Thanks for introducing yourself and for your comments. I have to say, I really like your approach. I remember when I was first starting out on FTP years ago, the entire focus of my week was satelliting into the FTP 200k on Sundays (The $216 major, now 500k I believe). FTP had a SNG tier satellite token system. I would start at tier one for like $8 and work my way up to tiers two and three until I had won a seat each week. It was just so much fun to play in the big event every Sunday.
It sounds like you're quite a bit further along then what I described about myself above, but I think the overall approach is what's important. For you to emphasize playing in those big events every Sunday, you help yourself in so many ways. First you give yourself a chance to win life-changing, or at least bank-roll changing money. And you have this chance versus a field that you are a favorite against! Sure there will be tough players, but nothing you can't handle. Besides, one of the benefits of playing these tournaments is getting practice playing against better players. The third benefit is that you get used to playing under pressure. If you get 19th in the Warmup, that's great man. It's easy to be frustrated by getting so close to 100k, but look at the bright side. You made a bunch of buyins for your normal ABI, and you got a chance to experience the feeling of playing deep in a major event. The next time you're there, you're going to be more comfortable and make better decisions because of it.
Let me know what kind of videos you'd like to see. In the meantime, I'll keep my eyes peeled for you at the tables.
humAA12 years, 2 months agoHello, liked much this one. Nice analytical approach to the game sir. The spot with sixes, where you shove over the utg+1 4bb shove w/ 26,5biggies from LJ and you have 5 guys to act after you. These are not that fistpump kinda spots with 66, and things i would consider here with this spot and 66 would be how aggro are the 5 guys if we have history with them. And if there are normal passive-ish players i think shove is not the best play here, i would just call and that would look still strong and if nits get over me i can have still 21bigs and nice stack to continue good tournament.
Nick Rampone12 years, 2 months agoHello Tuomas! Thank you for your feedback! I really like your thoughts about this 66 spot. After I read your comments, it made me realize that I made some mistakes in this hand. I did not consider either of the things you mentioned.
About history, I did not think about that as I was making my decision. As i think back to it, my first thought is that I did not have very much history with those players. But I was at the table for quite a long time at this point, so there must be some information and history I could have used. What I know about these players, is that all the information pointed to them being more tight and nitty, than loose and aggressive. This means that I should call, as you suggest, because if they shove over me behind, they are more likely to have a stronger hand than they are to be making a move there. I could pretty comfortably fold if that happens, vs the two other 25bb+ stacks.
I must admit I did not think of the aggression level of the players behind me either. This is a mistake. I know Skidepas is a professional, and while he seems aggressive, I don't see him as being crazy, or the type to do things too lightly behind me. If I had thought of that during this hand, I would have called as well, because I would not expect anyone behind me to take advantage of my wide calling range vs. the 4 bb shove here.
Now that I think about it, what is the argument for shoving? I am not going to fold out any better pairs behind me. I will fold out some overcard hands for sure, like A7 and KQ. But those hands might also fold if I flat call the 4 bb shove. I think as I look at the whole picture, and all of the possibilities, I think I would call the 4bb shove, and fold to shoves behind.
Thank you, you helped me improve. Next time I will be more careful and try to think of all the relevant factors when I'm in this situation next time :D
Where are you from Tuomas? I will guess Finland. Hopefully I'm not too far off! Were you able to understand my video okay? Thanks again for the comments!
bob routledge12 years, 2 months agoreally like the video. i went deep in the millions a couple months back. im interesed in your play as you get closer to the final table. Who you steal from/pick on and why...maybe i would like to see some of the pots oyu dont have monster hands and your just playing the player/ trying to steal blinds and antes. I found myself in shove/fold mode for most of the later part of the tourney.
anyhow good video..Nick Rampone12 years, 2 months agoAnother person asked about this below, look for my response under that post.Nick Rampone12 years, 2 months agoHello Bob! Man, it sure is fun getting deep in that thing, isn't it? You just don't get to play with that feeling of intensity and with that much on the line too often.
This is a great question. I'm planning to do a video from the final 3 tables, all the way down to the finish, so you can see just that. I also plan to do a "highlight" video of sorts, where I show some of the things I did really well, and some of the things I think were my biggest mistakes. Here you will get to see me play without monster hands, and not even in big pots. I'll show you how I try and create good situations and chips by taking advantage of reads I have on my opponents, and mistakes I see them making. Choosing which players to steal against, and to three-bet vs, are really important things throughout the tournament.
Let me answer that a bit here before that video gets made. I will try and steal from players who I think won't fight back. If we are getting deep into the tournament, players will often begin to become very tight as the big money is getting closer. If I think I a player will fold his big blind a lot preflop, or fold on the flop to my c-bet if he doesn't have a good piece of the flop, I will steal from those players all day. When I look to my left and I don't see anyone I think will make a move on me without a hand, I will try and steal, with any two cards. There will be some examples of this in the video.
Three-betting. This is a great way to pick on inexperienced players, and put a lot of pressure on them without risking very much. I see this a lot. There is a player who is just learning poker, but has had some success and knows the basics. This player will raise a lot, because they know it's better to be aggressive. Their problem comes after that. They know how to open a lot of hands, and be aggressive in that way, but they don't know how to play against a three-bet. Usually they will just fold unless they have a huge hand. I will three-bet these players constantly, sometimes regardless of my cards, because they will be folding so often, almost all of the time. Let's say that player has 23 BB. If they min raise to 2 BB, and I three-bet to 4.5 BB, They have to shove their whole stack in to win the pot. I am risking 4.5 BB to win the pot, and they will have to risk 23 BB if they want to win the pot vs me. Most players won't risk it. And since he is raising a lot, he will be folding a lot to your three-bet. Again, there are a couple great situations just like this coming later in this series.
One final note. Most players deep in the Million are in shove / fold mode toward the end. The average stack is just really really low (shallow) at that stage. You will see this from me as well! Don't feel like you have made a mistake just because you have 12 BBs left, most of the time in the Sunday Million, that happens, whether you are playing for the first time, or are Phil Galfond.
Let me know if you have any follow up questions! Thanks.
Nick Rampone12 years, 2 months agoI think using and understanding a HUD is a big weakness for me. I will spend several minutes in a video talking about what I do know, what my numbers are, and how I generally use a HUD. For now, here are my numbers, in the order they appear on my HUD:
VPIP / Raise First / Fold to Steal / Total Hands
Fold to 3b / 3b / Cbet / Fold to Cbet
I made it this way and used these numbers to get fast information on common situations. To be quite honest, I am not in the habit of using all of these HUD numbers. I will outline why in a video. The numbers I use a lot are, are VPIP and Raise first, and the relationship between the two, and the three-bet number. From those numbers I can get a pretty accurate general idea of how a player is playing and approaching the game, or at least the game on this day on this table. From there, I'm pretty comfortable thinking through specific hands and situations with that basic (but super valuable) information in mind.
I think the biggest difference from my HUD compared to most players, is that I use Raise First instead of Pre-Flop Raise (PFR). The reason is, PFR takes into account the times a player raises first, and the times a player three-bets. It's both numbers added up. Well, I already have a three-bet number, so I just wanted to have the number for when a player raises first to be separate as well. For example, some players don't raise many pots, but they love to three-bet players that do. In this case, the PRF stat will be misleading, because it will make them seem as if they're raising a lot, but really it's their frequent three-betting number that makes that PRF number go higher. I don't think it's a big difference either way at all, but I prefer to have all the information in separate categories.
Nick Rampone12 years, 2 months agoHey Adam. Good question. This a key point that I'll definitely spend time talking about in a video. I also need to look through the forums and see what information is out there about this topic, and contribute my two cents.
The short story is that a couple of months ago I experimented with min-raising every time I opened. Every level, every stack size. I used to 3x a lot early, and from earlier position, but I just wanted to give this a try and form and opinion on it. I really like some things it does for me, and I haven't been taken advantage of for doing it. Which, if the right players are behind you, they can definitely make your life tough.
Stay tuned for a full explanation in-video, with examples. But for now, yes it has been my standard for the past several months.
BRwniez12 years, 2 months agoGreat video and great analysis, am looking forward to #2. With the A3 wheel hand, seeing as we're not too concerned about balance, what do you think about betting smallish to induce missed heart draws/ straight (w/ pair eq) draws etc to come over the top with a raise? as well as getting thin value from some 7xs, few combos of 33 etc.
Nick Rampone12 years, 2 months agoWow I really like that idea. Let's look at what happens if we do make that small river bet, versus what happens if we don't.
Small river bet: We ensure that we make money vs 7x. No way he will fold to a small bet here with top pair in a pot controlled hand with two flush draws having missed. We give him the chance to make a big bluff raise. If we bet 700 into 4300, we give him the chance to bluff to say 3500 or something. If we check, and he chooses to bluff, it will likely be for a small amount like 1500-2000. My hand and line look very weak to this point, so it seems reasonable to think that he would think a small bet would get me to fold. I think a bluff raise is harder for a player to make on the river, compared to just betting as a bluff, so I think he would make the bluff raise left often. But when he does, we're making much more money. So there's some give and take there. But I think what pushed this over the top to making a small river bet the better option, is ensuring that we get called by 7x, and that it doesn't check behind, as it did in this actual hand.
I really like this idea, thanks for posting. If I had my time again, I would make a small river bet. I like the look of 700. It seems like a good middle ground to accomplish our goals. What size do you think? John Nelson11 years, 3 months ago
I think a river c/r on the A3o wheel hand is a good idea, bc he pretty much never has a full house given that he checked back the flop. I would imagine that he bets any 2p, set or 77 on this flop. I dont think it is the best option against this opponent though. Even though he has Laggy stats he appears to be more of the aggressive pf and not as much post flop given the AQs hand at the begining of the video. I think betting small is the 2nd best option though, for the reasons already stated. You get value from a wide range and could induce the bluff. I think I like betting 3800ish though best. It looks like a bluff, given the line that you took on the flop and turn and he has enough chips in his stack that he could prolly talk himself into it, bc that size does not kill his stack if he is wrong. I think there is a good chance that he will hero call with a 7 or maybe worse on this river.
John, good stuff. That's a really strong point about betting 3800 OTR. We can rep literally nothing. He has to be sitting there thinking "okay this guy has to bet a set or overpair on the flop to protect on this wet board 3 ways. Now he's betting fat OTR? With what? It makes no sense with any hand.. Leaving only bluffs". I like that far greater than seeking x/r OTR here. I think that yes, we're certainly safe in doing so in terms of hand strength - we always have the best hand. However, I just don't know how often he's betting the river. On the one hand he's going to have some missed draws, so those figure to bet. He's also going to have quite a bit of A high, but I imagine those just show down. If he does make 7x, I expect him to bet, but that's just not going to be a major portion of his range here. And as I said in my post, I expect his river bluff to be pretty small.
Because he's likely betting the river small or not at all, I think that rules out x/r as a good option. To me it comes down to bet fat or bet small to induce. I think it's close, and could be solved with a fair amount of accuracy if we put the time into it. I don't think it's that big of a deal though, since this spot is relatively minor in the grand scheme of things. Generally speaking, I'm a huge fan of betting small to induce in a variety of spots, but I think I 2014 Nick agrees with you that betting fat produces the most EV. The biggest factor is we can't rep anything for value, and it's a pretty simple read for (granted he'll be wrong in this case!) him that he's quite likely to follow through on (call our bet) if he has 7x, a worse pair, or even the occasional A high.
Aaron12 years, 2 months agoSolid first vid. 8/10. I like how your not an auto cbetter with both your fequentcey and size. I think I get stuck in a gameplan of trying to make my sizing standard, thus not giving away information when being exploitable and looking for the most ev is best. Maybe it's my cash game back ground playing vs tougher opposition. Thanks again.
Nick Rampone12 years, 2 months agoHello Aaron. Nice to hear from you! I agree with all of that. I think cbetting is something I do pretty well with, because as you said, I don't auto-cbet. I really think of all the positives and negatives of each flop situation, and make a decision from there.
Sizing is just like anything else in poker, there are so many factors that play in to it. I do feel that there should be no standard size for cbetting in tournaments. I take into account my opponent, his tendencies, his range, flop texture, stack depth, likely progressions of bet sequences on turn/river, my image, how many tables he's playing, and probably a couple others I'm not recalling at the moment. I think most importantly, I look at how his range interacts with that flop, and how my perceived range does as well. When I look at it that way, I really get a pretty clear vision of what's a good spot to cbet and I have a pretty good idea of how I'll react to his different actions. Same with checking, I'll see opportune situations to check, and have a pretty good idea of how I'll proceed to his different actions and bet sizes, whether it be with the flopped nuts, or a hand I'm looking to check fold because the texture is poor for me to continue.
Nick Rampone12 years, 2 months agoHaha yeah it is. I snagged him on break at a WSOP event one year and shot the shit with him. He was pretty cool, even letting me try on his blingin head phones, haha. I've played 2 5 with him at Aria a few times since, my god, he is the tightest player ever. PutMyRobeOnRITE12 years, 2 months agoYeah for sure, he's a cool guy. He probably makes up 23% of chapstick/lip balm sales in the U.S., he's always putting on lip stuff, lol. He's funny and has cool watches and bling like you said, and always dresses flashy.
PutMyRobeOnRITE12 years, 2 months agoNick, in hand one if you were villain, what would your 3-bet range be vs. your utg open? Also you flatted AK, I'd assume you'd flat QQ too right?
Nick Rampone12 years, 2 months agoMan this is a great question. I really like how you're thinking about this situationally, and not just from the hero's perspective. First of all yes, I would flat any AK combination here, QQ, and KK as well I think. KK is questionable, but I think he always 3-bets AA, but I don't always think he 3-bets QQ. He 3bets AK a lot, but I block those combinations pretty well. Overall, I just don't like getting in 250 bb in this spot with KK vs a range I estimate to be always AA, usually QQ, almost always AK when he has those combinations, and occasionally a few bluffs, AQcc, and JJ. I can see this being a little too conservative, so curious to hear your thoughts.
This is fun. If I were in villain's shoes here.. If i was the villain and this was my first time playing with a player opening as often as I am in the Sunday Million, in these positions, I would be 3-betting a ridiculously wide range. A lot of that gets into my general approach early in tournaments, which in a nut shell is to stir shit up while stacks are deep, but a lot of that is based on ranges. I'm going to punish the way too wide range he's demonstrated he's willing to open by 3-betting it. He knows I can only be doing this comfortably with AA and KK to get in, but if UTG were to 4b me, I know the same about him. And I know his range is wide, so it's not too believable. That combined with the fact that 250 bb deep, peeling 4bs when the guy is saying I have AA, isn't so bad. When you know his hand or at least the hand he is/is going to be representing, and your range is a bit more undefined, you can really do some damage. And you're in position.
However, that's a really minor consideration in the grand scheme of what usually happens in a spot like this. I 3b UTG opens super wide. I don't have a defined range, but I like to include Ax suited, you now 57cc type stuff, broadways, and even worse than that at times. A5o and K7cc have happened at times. And the reason I do that is, like 98% of the time they either fold or call. Usually it's a call. I think their mentality is okay well this guy figures to have AA or KK, I'm going to try to flop a big hand and stack him in a big pot early. As a result, they play extremely fit or fold post-flop, allowing me to win a very high percentage of these pots that go to the flop. I think the biggest thing here to realize is that I'm exploiting a huge mistake from my opponents in their estimation my range and frequency. They are responding to my perceived range, which they perceive to be really tight, as one would usually expect in these positions. But my true range is so far off from that. My true range might be 30% of hands, and they're playing as if I've got 2% of hands. So in a way, I get to play with AA 30% of the time UTG1!
Another benefit worth mentioning is that I frustrate them and widen their ranges for playing back at me in the future. I'll have position on him all day, so I'm going to be constantly applying pressure on those players to my right, and force them to identify my true ranges, and then play back at me as well. PutMyRobeOnRITE12 years, 2 months agoOh Shit, you really got back to my questions, lol. I'll make commentary when I have a little time to read and digest this! Good stuff!
PutMyRobeOnRITE12 years, 2 months agoNick, @ minute 27-28, you flat AA vs. utg around 70 effective.
1. Could you tell me what you think a good cold calling range would look like for you in that spot?
2. If you were smokingQQ in the BB and were also 70bb effective, with 2 people in the pot already (UTG Raiser and Yourself), what do you think a good calling range for him would be there?
-thx.
dantonius1812 years, 2 months agoNot that im nick, but imo you should probably flat your whole value range pre. Just cause with no history especially in the million a competent player knows to fold JJ and AQs versus us. Even ako is a fold versus our 3b value range readless so 3bing is just pretty dumb here since he probably folds 85% of his opening range versus our 3b. Also with the dinosaur in the blinds flatting AA seems like the clear play since hell come along with probably 50% of hands. As for smoking, he can flat really wide here so id say, any two suited cards and probably a9o+,k10o+,q9o+,j8o+,108o+ and then any connected one-gapper down to 75o? . Maybe this is wide but this is what id assume most players would defend here getting like 7:1 70bb deep.PutMyRobeOnRITE12 years, 2 months agoI agree dantonius about flatting the whole range, I was also looking for what he thinks what a good range would beNick Rampone12 years, 2 months agoAnother good question, thank you. One of my goals when looking at any hand of poker or any decision I have to make, is to come to an actually decision on it - to take a stance. Is X true? Yes or no. Too often the answer is "That's close" or "Man tough spot". I make it a point to always decide. Of course, I can change my conclusion later after hearing more input. Anyways, I like questions like this that force me to take a stance.
1. In this spot I'm calling very wide. 22-AA, any suited broadway hand, 78 suited + (maybe 67) and suited one-gappers probably starting at 68ss. Some things to note. I probably would call around half the time with JJ-KK here, and 3b the other half. The reasoning there is I think the postflop value of them goes down simply because of ace high board situations. If the pot is 3b, almost all boards will be favorable or at least comfortable to continue on for one or two streets, and even A high boards are pretty playable in position with the lead for us. I would 3b hands like AJo ATo, maybe even weaker Ax hands here just to create some initial history, while having position both now and going forward. I would play almost all offsuit broadway combos, calling about 75% of the time in this spot with higher combos, and 3betting most lower combos almost always.
I should note that my range here is significantly different than other similar situations. Like I said, with SmokingQQ in the bb, I expect to go 3 ways + almost always. In the moment I honestly thought he would defend 73o here. So he's in there with trash, but the original raiser might not range him wide enough. He also won't be cbetting as often multiway, so a lot of boards come up where it's checked to me on the flop and both players have extremely weak ranges, and I can bet and win a ton.
2. As I've gotten more and more comfortable postflop, and got a much better handle on estimating the ranges, frequencies, and tendencies of my opponents, I've started calling much wider preflop in this spot, given these odds and stack sizes. I think the odds are the biggest factor, I would call with a wide range at almost any stack depth with these pot odds. I'm hesitant to just recommend that everyone do that though, because you can really get yourself in to trouble postflop if you're not experienced there. I mean how comfortable are you folding top pair on the turn after the raiser has bet into you twice now? Are you noticing spots where guys are betting nearly 100% of their range when checked to and check raising them to exploit that frequency? These are the types of plays, and the type of comfort level you've got to have to play this spot with a wide range.
Having said that, the best way to improve is to get in those spots. And with that in mind, I do feel comfortable saying you should push yourself to expand your comfort zone. Maybe take a couple more flops and try a couple moves. See what you can get away with. Don't be afraid to make a big fold if you don't like where you stand vs his range. You'll get dealt in the next hand and you can play on from there.
My range is probably 34s or 45s + 67o + any broadway, any suited ace, any pair, and really a lot of unsuited aces too. It's wide man!
Final note. If you're not comfortable yet in these spots, and don't want to try out new things in the Sunday Million, I think it's great to just fold and post the SB the next hand with 70 bbs. You're likely to get a spot down the road that is much more clear cut for you, like okay the cutoff raised and I have QQ on the button, time to 3bet this guy. I mean what kind of a mistake is folding 67o for one big blind of 70? Doesn't seem too bad to me.
Dantonius - Thanks for jumping in on this topic man. I think you nailed estimating SmokingQQ's range in the BB here. I mean it can't be far off from that at all, in either direction.
One thing about how the original raiser should play his range, and how he should estimate mine. If he has AKo and I 3b him, he cannot fold. It's not possible. You said that he should fold that hand versus our 3b value range. Well, it is true that AKo is behind the hands I 3b for value, and am willing to get all in preflop with. Those hands are always AA and KK, and about half the time QQ and AKo. So yes, he's not doing well there. But, my 3betting range just isn't a 3betting for value range. It's not just those top hands. When he gets 3b there, he has to ask himself, okay what hands is he doing this with, and how often. He might think well for starters he's doing it with monsters, AA KK, some QQ and AK, but he also must have some bluffs in there. So with the bluffs being in there, added to his monsters, suddenly we see that AKo is doing just fine versus that range. AKo might not be doing well enough to get allin preflop, I don't think it is, but it should feel good enough/strong enough to continue by calling preflop getting good odds with a very strong hand. Also, it blocks the AA and KK hands of the world, so he has to worry about those less of the time. I just want to make sure that when you're ranging someone, you look at the entire range, not just the top part of it.
You might say, well Nick, how do you know he has bluffs in his 3b range here? How can you just throw them in there like that? Well, that is an estimate on my part. I'm not certain. But I do know that in my experience, and especially with the way the game is being played today, most players will have bluffs in their range. To note, by bluffs I don't necessarily mean Q2o, but hands like ATo or Q9s that are decent cards, and valuable to include in your 3b range.
Yes you guys are both like 98% right here. I am flatting nearly my whole range here that is strong enough to flat. Like I said I might include some KK-JJ and AJo-JTo hands in a 3betting range here. I also would include hands like A4o and 47hh that aren't strong enough to call.
PutMyRobeOnRITE12 years, 2 months agoOk, sorry it took me so long to get back....so Nick, you are saying you would flat all those sc'ers/gappers you mentioned because you had a read that smokingQQ would come along too, or would you ditch them if you didn't think that was the case? Is Axs part of your flatting range here? I'm confused about what you are doing with offsuit broadway here, so like AJo and KQo, QTo, KJo you are 3-betting as a "Bluff" and AQ AK are mainly calls? Is that what you are saying?Nick Rampone12 years, 2 months agoNo problem, glad you got back here. First of all. it's important to note that my ranges here also have frequencies. I'm not calling with XX hand 100% of the time. The AA flat call is evidence of that. Honestly, there isn't an exact formula or a specific recipe that dictates what I'll do with what hand, what percentage of the time. In my first post I tried to nail down my frequencies of each specific hand, or at least hand type, as best as I could.
Yeah I am flatting wider there because I thought a lot of good things could happen behind. Specifically, one of the most likely good things that could happen is that SmokinQQ could put money in the pot with a wide range, out of position, with loose/undisciplined tendencies. I can directly take advantage of that in position. Another good thing that can happen, is the mulitway nature of the pot will make the original raiser cbet less. I'l get checked to in position a ton, where I can make a small bet and win a really high percentage of the time against two players who are likely check folding. I also think the original raiser won't think I'm calling as loose as I am, so I can operate with a tighter precieved range. That should get me some extra credit on my bluffs, since I'll have fewer combinations of bluffs (a narrower preflop flatting range), in his eyes.
I would 3b AK almost always here, and 3b AQ most of the time, probably 60-70%. I'm calling (most of the time) with higher offsuit broadway combos (KJo types) and 3-betting lower combos (JTo types) usually, since those have less value postflop. I'm not calling preflop with A7o. but I am 3betting that hand a lot here. Those type of hands will be the majority of my 3b range in this type of spot. I'm more likely to flat call the suited combinations of those hands.
Basically I'm trying to construct a frequency for 3-betting that to him, will look normal. But I'm kind of trying to have my cake and eat it too by calling with hands like AA that he would normally expect to be in my 3b range, and 3bing hands like A4o that he would normally expect me to fold. Based on the exact situation here, I"m also flatting his open preflop with hands like 97ss that I usually would 3b. My ranges are really a bit wacky and not normal here, and certainly wider that usually. But I don't expect him to be able to identify that, or take advantage of it, without seeing a showdown or two from me. PutMyRobeOnRITE12 years, 2 months agoOk Nick, thanks for taking the time to detail all of that. It will take me some time to digest. I was just thinking that vs. ep raisers since we don't have much of a 3-betting range we should flat most of our range since that if we only 3-bet AA and KK we would be face up and unbalanced somehow. But it seems you certainly have a 3-bet "Bluff" range. I don't know why you are 3-betting AK and QQ , AK AQ vs. utg unless you have a dynamic that you can get it in or you are 3-bet folding vs. a fish with a tight 4-bet range......Ok, you don't have to respond to this lol. I have plenty to study in this thread and I appreciate the time you put into this. Peace out!Nick Rampone12 years, 2 months agoHaha, I'm happy to reply here man. You're asking a lot of good and important questions, and I want to answer them and help you understand as best as I can. I'll try to keep it brief though, lol. The main thing to keep in mind here is that we're only going to be playing agaisnt this player for a short period of time. In that time, we should do everything we can to make the most money then and there. I think 3-betting as a bluff fits into this plan. Imagine what he's thinking about our 3b range. Imagine he's thinking like you are, for example. You say that vs an EP raiser we shouldn't have much of a 3b range. We'll you're right, because if we did, and they knew that, they would be able to take advantage of us pretty easily. But they don't know, so we're the ones taking advantage. We're taking advantage of this thought that we have a tight range here. And since we'll only be playing with them for 30 minutes or something before one of us busts, gets moved, or the table breaks - they won't have nearly enough time to figure it out. I hope that helps. I'll keep checking these comments every day or two and I'm totally happy to continue going over my thoughts here. Cheers.
dantonius1812 years, 2 months agoI think the 34s hand is a spot where 95% of players would flat and demonstrates how you can both build the pot against a range that will continue with bluffs a non 0% of the time, and turn hands that would be considered the nuts bvb (AA) into complete bluff catchers and bluff on future streets if need be(since he wont think we bluff often at this depth bvb on this board) Its also good to have this hand in our raising range so he cant just auto 3b us with any 2 whenever we raise this board and feel good about it since we fold so much.
So yeah, thanks lol this has me thinking about a lot of different spots and noticed even in the session I just finished, I was constantly thinking about what my range looks like as well as my opponents.
Nick Rampone12 years, 2 months agoGood stuff man! That's exactly the kind of thought process that this game is all about. You can't just memorize what to do in this position, at X stack depth, with Y cards, vs Z player. You have to think about each situation that comes up, and what the possibilities are every time you choose to bet, choose a bet size, choose to check, or choose to raise. I think that 34dd hand was a great example of this, and I'm glad you got that message loud and clear. And this is when poker gets fun man :) Getting deep into thinking about every hand. The next time you go to do something standard, just stop and think if you have any other options. Often times you already are doing the best one, but it's a good way to double check, and you'll be surprised at what you might find if you do that simple thing.
Aleksandra ZenFish12 years, 2 months agoHi Nick , very nice to meet you thank you for adorable video greetings from belgrade serbia :) screenname shashoualex
im playing MTTS plo and nl 6 seat and im trying to upskill to a pro level .maybe lil too ambitious but ill give it a try :)
Its lovely you want to make 2 way learning process ...regarding subject and what i want im very easy, anything any pro has to say has value for me even if its repeated or simple subject people think they are over with, beause anything a pro says has different depth analysis and structure and is always good to hear so im looking forward hearing anything from you
Regarding this series of videos, im thankful you made us possible to have an insight on a winning deep play of most important sunday game on stars
it was great to watch review of crucual spots of the game so far and your review of what you thought at the time you played a hand and specially afterward analysis in retrospect what you could have done or done differently, it was ellaborate and sharing the thought process of playing ahand was really great poker lesson, thank you v much
Nick Rampone12 years, 2 months agoHello Aleksandra! Thank you for your kind words and feedback on my video. I met some friends while I was traveling in Zagreb. These new friends were from Belgrade and were very nice people. They were telling me about the city, and it sounds great!
The first thing that catches my attention is your approach to learning poker. I really like it. I see many players who thing they have something about poker figured out, so they stop learning about it and they stop thinking about it. A great example is myself. I used to think I knew how to continuation-bet really well. It's easy, right? If you were the one to raise pre-flop, then you continuation bet almost every time. Quite some time later, I realized that this was not true! Or at least not that simple. Instead of just always continutation-betting, I started to think about who my opponent was, what his range was, what my perceived range was (what he thinks my range is), what the flop texture was, and how it helped my range or his range - all of these things I now think about before I continuation-bet. It's really nice to see a poker player who is open to learning all things, and wants to hear what several people think on each topic before they decide for themselves how they want to play.
I'm glad you learned a lot from this video. I'm really glad at what you learned, too. The most important things are how to think about a hand, how to analyze a hand, and all of the thought processes behind this. You seem to understand that very well. That is what is going to help you as you play, trying to create those thought processes for yourself.
Becoming a pro is too ambitious? No it isn't. I've seen a lot of people come in to the game of poker. I have seen many succeed, and seen many fail. I can tell you that you have a winning attitude, and approach to learning the game. Poker is very difficult to play as a professional though, so my advice is to be careful. If you have a job right now, I would say to keep it until you are nearly certain you can succeed in poker. If you think you can quit your job now, but go back to it in 6 months if poker doesn't work out for you, then that might be a good option too. But just make sure to be careful. You also should not worry. You have what it takes to succeed. You just need to keep putting in the work and the effort to get better, and in time you will be at that level.
živjeli!
Aleksandra ZenFish12 years, 2 months agoThank you very much for kind advices, i have opportunity to take a few months off so i will try to use it to best and see can i make it, and i reffered to too ambitious beside becoming pro i also reffered to as many fields i do like in poker and i push same time, which im not sure is it advisable or not
And yes, simplest things as they can be, poker should never be a pattern but thinking process, i liked way you played aces by not 3 betting them, and thinking of it i acttually think it was excellent play not just because of diversity we should implement in our plays, but in retrospect i think of how many folds we did get by only 3 betting, and in that situation in particular way its played i dont think you could ever get such a value out of set of aces versus set of kings if you 3 betted particular hand, player would be very careful if you announced your hand strenght by 3 bet there
Im very glad you had lovely time in zagreb, im concidering go to a concert with friends there in 2 days , though i got a lil flu so im not sure, but really wish to see zagreb again , last time i was there was soo long ago, and may tell you ppl around the world love to visit the area and belgrade as well as zagreb because people are very social and go out a lot, lot of cafes and good restaurats, so i do hope to see you some time in belgrade to enjoy yourself as well :))
Cheers
Nick Rampone12 years, 2 months agoOh wow. That is really perfect if you have a few months you can safely set aside and see if you can make poker work professionally. With the other fields, are you saying that you can earn money with a few different jobs? If so then that is perfect, because you will always be safe. If poker is going badly, you will still be able to earn money and pay your expenses. Some other advice... I would make sure that you keep the money that is in your poker bankroll separate from the money that you use to pay rent, buy food, and have fun. It can become very stressful if this money is not separate, because when you lose in poker, you will start to fear that you cannot pay for the rent. But, if everything is in order, as it seems that it is, I would say go for it!
One other thing I want to understand better. In your first post, you said that you play MTTs and 6max NL and PLO. You mean cash games for this right? I think it's good that you are able to play cash games as well as tournaments. It can be difficult to win consistently in tournaments, but if you are playing cash games as well, you can win a bit each day, or at least more often than in tournaments. And since you are playing tournaments as well, you give yourself a chance to win first place and have a nice score to add to your bankroll!
Yes every person I met in Zagreb, all over Croatia, and all over that region in general, were very nice people. As you say, very social and friendly. Get some rest and feel better so you can make it to the concert! I want to travel in that area again sometime soon, if I do I will let everyone here know and try to meet up with a few friends from RunItOnce.
Cheers and good luck on your journey to becoming a professional poker player.
Aleksandra ZenFish12 years, 2 months agothanks for money advising, ima girl that means usually being not crazy money wise but well balanced, i upload max 300 per month till i learn to play well and im sticking to low stakes till i upskill, i upped bankroll few tiimes changed blinds but in general im following through on bankroll management :) and i think i wont change play lever till i feel confident im proficient enough for it~ then ill give it a go with somewhat more moneys but ~ as recomended will stick to proper bank management rules :)
Yes i like cash games NL and PLO and mtts and im trying out turbos as well lately , to add i love hu as well and im just lil worried is it too many poker fields that i like ~ people i see around usually love 1 or 2~ and im worried is it too much to try to accomplish all
If you come by in area let us know maybe meet up and party if you are in mood :) best regards and best of luck at tables
Nick Rampone12 years, 2 months agoIt sounds like you are doing things the correct way. Bankroll management is very important, especially if you are starting out as a professional and are counting on the money to pay for your expenses. I like your plan to move up in stakes, wait until you feel confident and profiecient. One thing to consider is that you can always try out the next higher limit. If the players are better than you thought they would be, you can move back down to your normal stakes. If they are worse, then maybe you can change your bankroll rules a slight amount to allow you to play that higher level.
That is a tough question. Should you focus on one or two areas, or try to develop in several? I don't know. I can see that it makes sense to focus on one. But I also know that when I was starting out, I played all of the different forms of NL. They were all fun for me to try and to play, and I wanted to find which one I liked the best, and also maybe which one I would be the best at. Maybe this is something you could do as well. Or maybe there is already one area you like the most, or you think you can make the most money at, and you decide to focus on that one. I think they are all fine options.
If I'm there I will definitely be in the mood! Haha. I will let you know if that happens. Gl to you as well!
AdamHendrix12 years, 2 months agoAmazing video. Do you offer private MTT coaching? I cannot figure out for the life of me how to PM anyone on here. Thanks.
Nick Rampone12 years, 2 months agoHaha I'm not sure how to PM either, or if it's possible. I haven't ever done private coaching before. Honestly I'm a little hesitant to commit that much time to doing it, but that said, I won't rule it out completely. Is there an email address I can get in touch with you at? AdamHendrix11 years, 4 months ago
Never saw that you replied and haven't been around the forums much. But ya contact at alaskaegypt@gmail.com
On my phone, somehow accidentally flagged your reply as spam!
ivanb12 years, 2 months agoSorry to say that. But that vid doesn't have any educational value, 1 hour 11 hands 2 of them is obv badbeats 1) AA > KK that would be pretty same result if you 3bet and it went preflop AI. On top of that if turn wasn't K you would miss stacking chance with A high flop. Showing how luck doesn't punish yours obv. incorrect AA cold call isn't way to go for someone wanting to learn how to play MTT. I can say pretty confident that most novice players following that kind of play would end with AA crushed by some J4o called from BB. Without even understanding what the heck just happened. 2) KK > QQ pretty much same as above.
And flopping wheel to A3 isn't something to talk about lots. Standart late position thrashy opener with amazing flop.
And looking at how ur stack changes from hand to hand it's pretty obv that you cut out all moves away, leaving us with bad beats and obv plays.
TL:DR
If i wanted to see how i wont million video, i would pay 9.99$ to maratik for his replay. I think i could saw even more badbeats and god mod hands that way
Just opinion.
If i sounded rude i am very very sorry. vOv
Nick Rampone12 years, 2 months agoHey Ivan, thanks for leaving some feedback. I have a few thoughts after reading your post, that I feel very strongly about. At the beginning of the video, I mentioned that my plan for this first video was to show the big hands and big pots. I realize it's not the best demonstration of my skill to see me get aces while another player gets kings.
I had two goals with this. First, was to just simply so everyone could see what happened for me to get to the final table. I know it's not surprising that I had to get good hands and good luck. My second goal was to try and show you guys that even in situations where you have big hands, there is room to think about what to be done. You don't always have to do a certain thing, like reraise with aces. I challenge you to really think about this. Poker isn't something you can memorize. While there are plays that a good player makes and should make 95% of the time or more, I feel that the best players are willing and able to make a different play every now and then, if they see conditions at the table that they feel make it a better option than the standard, usual play.
I also mentioned in the video that I will be doing a video on this hand history that shows the hands where I think my edge was displayed to the highest degree, as well as the opposite, the hands where I think I made the biggest mistakes. In reviewing the hand history myself, I noticed several mistakes. Since posting this video and getting feedback, I've learned about a couple more things I think I could've done better, from your guys' feedback. So, if you want to see me play something other than aces, stayed tuned for videos later on in this series.
1) Okay let's talk about this hand and each of our opinions about it. I know this is tough, I know this doesn't make sense, and it's not even natural - but you must believe me when I say it. Actually, you must try to truly understand it, not just believe what I say. The results don't matter. It doesn't matter that I was dealt aces, that he was dealt kings, or that we each had sets appear on the board. What matters is the choices I can make. I said in the video that I wasn't sure if my choice to flat call AA preflop was the best choice I could've made there. I realize that almost all players choose to 3b that hand, and I understand the reasons why. But I also stand by the thought process behind the choice I made, and the thought process behind the fact that I have a choice there in general. It's not a must to 3b AA there, but it very well could be the best choice. Do you see what I mean at all?
In your post about his hand you mentioned that "the result would be pretty much the same" (if I had 3b instead of flat called preflop). Well, so what if I had 3b, and we had got allin preflop, and the flop came KK2 and he busted me with quads. Would I have made a bad choice then, choosing to get allin preflop? No I don't think that I did, even though I lost a huge pot. The same thing applies here. I think that this can be a good choice (doesn't have to be) to call preflop, and the way the cards came out on the board shouldn't have any effect on how we think about the hand itself, and the choices we have in it.
I'm hoping to teach novice players that they always have choices, and that they should always think of those choices. Even if they make the same choice in a particular situation 99% of the time, I'd still like them to be aware that they have a choice, and always be ready for the 1% of the time when the non-standard choice is the better choice.
2) Would you c-bet the flop with KK there? What if he had AJ? He would fold to a flop c-bet, but I would get his whole stack if he saw the turn and made top pair top kicker with his ace jack. I didn't know he had QQ in this hand. When I'm making decisions in a hand, I'm making them against my opponents entire range, all of the hands he could possibly have. Because I don't know his actual two cards. I think this is a really important concept in poker, one of the most important in fact. I really ask you to give what I'm saying some honest thought. You're going to have to question some of your current beliefs, some of the ways you currently think about the game and understand it. This is not easy. You having nothing to lose and potentially a lot to gain.
Thanks for you feedback. Let me know if there's anything I can clarify in my comments. Also, let me know what kind of videos you want to see. I want to make sure you get what you want. I'll have Maratik do a guest video if I have to :D ivanb12 years, 2 months agoDan, Thank you for comment
About what i said before. It's not you fault, but rather nature of huge huge field mtt. It's hard to learn something new from such replay. But whatsever that was just earlier play, and i am looking forward to see how you handled bubble/deep itm play in that tourney :)Nick Rampone12 years, 2 months agoI'm glad you will continue to watch. I hope to be able to teach things that you find useful. I also want to say that I think something can be learned from any video. Some more than others of course. I just think that you need to keep as open of a mind as possible when you do anything related to poker, and you might be surprised at what things you discover :D
With the A3o hand --> I like your check on the flop for the reasons that you stated.
Would you make the same check if you were say 85BB+ deep with villain? I like your check with that stack depth (<50BBs) because you can still have the opportunity to stack your opponent on turn cards that dramatically improve his range. I just think that IF you were really deep your main priority is going to be extracting value and trying to build a pot (which will lead to a massive stack that you can use to apply pressure).
If both opponents fold to a c-bet then so be it - I just think the value of giving us the chance to win a big pot far outweighs ensuring that we win a small-medium pot (by checking flop).
Keen to hear your thoughts. Keep the vids coming!!
Nick Rampone12 years, 2 months agoHey Blah. Thank you for the comments and feedback! I like where you head is at here. Planning a hand to be able to get allin by the river, or at least build the pot by the river, is a really important consideration to keep in mind. This is true both if one is bluffing or value betting.
However, I don't think that's a huge factor in this particular hand. I choose to check the flop because of how my opponents' ranges matched up with that flop texture. I felt very confident they would bet with about 95% of the hands they would call my c-bet with, so I wasn't risking missing a bet and a chance to build the pot. I think the key note here is this: I can't build a pot versus them if they don't have a hand and will fold to my c-bet. I mean if the button is sitting there with JTcc, he will almost always fold (occasionally bluff raise or float) to my c-bet. I really think that ranges for calling c-bets, betting when checked to, and checking behind for my opponents in this hand won't really change at a stack depth of anywhere ~30bb+.
I hope that I'm articulating this well. It's something that I feel very strongly about. Too many times I've gone to c-bet monster hands at a deep stack depth with that very thought, let's build the pot and stack this guy, only to realize when he snap folds that his range can't continue much to a c-bet from me. One thing to note as well. If I thought he would check back a lot of hands that would call a bet, then I would absolutely be inclined to c-bet and build a pot. In this hand, I just felt that his range for calling a c-bet and betting when checked to were nearly identical, so I didn't lose anything (a chance to build the pot) by checking. In fact, I increased my chances to build a pot, because I've now given him the chance to one, two, or three barrel bluff that air he would just auto-fold to my c-bet.
Overall you are spot on with that consideration being of huge importance, I just think that this hand specifically is a rare exception where we shouldn't apply that idea and approach.
Let me know if I can clarify any of my thoughts here. Thanks! Glgl.
Jason Koon12 years, 2 months agoGreat job brotha and welcome to the team! A few thoughts on the 34dd bvb hand v Gawa: 1. I don't think over-betting should be an option with range given the fact that villain can have so many 6x himself. I certainly don't mind raising the flop but I think I would be doing it for exploitative reasons 1. villain doesn't have a feel for our range so he can't punish us by 3betting the flop with 99 given that we have so many more combos of 3x than we do trips. 2. We are effectively making his turn bet 330 chips by raising to 570 on flop over his 240 cbet, so we are taking a strange form of pot control. I do think we will get peeled a ton here by overs so I think we have too much showdown value to consider turning the hand into a bluff. Regardless how deep I think it's a bit ambitious to use this hand as a 3 street bluff to fold out an over pair for reasons stated above (6x being in his range, our hand is too valuable). I would prefer we barrel any diamond or 5 on the turn for a second street of value + build the pot for when we roll of gin on the river, and get to showdown on the rest of the run outs. I just woke up and started replaying this vid so my thoughts may be a bit sloppy but hope this helps!
Nick Rampone12 years, 2 months agoThanks J! This is awesome man, glad to be on board with you guys. Thanks for watching and leaving some feedback in between EPT days. GG over there man.
Great thoughts. I hadn't really considered and factored in either of these points to be honest. I'm not sure why, but it just never crossed my mind that the villain here has 6x a non-zero percentage of the time. I think this was because I assumed he would be opening a relatively tight range here Bvb vs me in the Million, with so many other good situations likely to present themselves. That said, I'm not sure he just looks down at 68cc and folds. He definitely has several 6x combos. For the same reasons that I failed to account for his 6x possibilities, I think that he won't assume I'm raising 3x here. Both are just applications of a pretty basic level of conventional wisdom. Mine was "he won't raise bad cards, so he won't have hands with a 6 in them." His is "He won't raise with 3x because he's basically turning his hand into a bluff". That quote is my assumption of his thought at the time. He definitely could realize that I would do that with 3x or 55, especially given my size.
He should still have more combos of overpairs than 6x, right? If true, that might give more weight to the viability of using the option to hammer the turn and river.
I also never considered that my flop raise is essentially dictating his turn bet size. I really like that, especially since it has the added value of me getting more money in good vs overs he peels one / contemplates calling down with. It just gives me a ton of flexibility going forward, as you noted with what we can do on turn cards that we pick up some equity on.
I felt a bit silly saying that I could do everything from check down, to bet down for value, and to pot down as a bluff. All of those things can't be equally true and optimal vs one player's range here. I mean it's either optimal to big bet bluff, or it's optimal to value bet, not whichever you want to be true at the time. So I felt a little awkward saying that. My point there was to note that making that flop raise gives me a ton of flexibility going forward in the hand, and leaves all options open to me. From there I'll gather more info and decide which is optimal! And little did I know that that flop raise had a couple of extra benefits as well, that you noted above. Great stuff man, thank you!
Dr.Octagon12 years, 2 months agoHey Nick, great video! excited to see the rest of the run. I'm a low-mid stakes MTT grinder/shot taker. "Dr.Octagon77" on Stars and "DanMcLaren" on FTP. Are you Canadian? I think a few years back i met a pal of yours(eric?) who lured me in with talks of staking by namedropping purecash25! haha anyways...
Im curious about the 66 hand at min 57. I find that I bust a ton of tournaments in that very same spot when one of the remaining players behind wakes up with a monster. Do you think calling and folding to a 3rd party jam could be better? I feel like that way we can avoid losing our stack to bigger pairs but still get HU with the short stack a decent amount of time without risking the rest of our chips. Would that leave us exploitable? Im not sure. Although you said the other players would know that you have a farily wide calling range there, to me calling always seemd slightly stronger than jamming because id put JJ+ in your calling range and not so much in your isolation range.What would you do with JJ+ here? Is jamming it in fine or would you be calling more to allow weaker hands to come over top? Also curious what your thoughts are on if any remaining villains have 77-99. Do they fold to your isolation and if so would they also fold if you just called? hope that made sence, appreciate any thoughts!
Nick Rampone12 years, 2 months agoThank you Danny! And thanks for introducing yourself, good to meet ya. I'm an America first world refugee living in Canada, haha. I think I know who you're talking about, met the guy playing online but never in person. Not too familiar with this game.
Yeah.. Looking back at this hand I'm not too thrilled. Well, I'm not too stoked on my decision in the hand, but I feel like I've really got a good feel for this spot now that I've reviewed it and got a ton of good feedback. There was a poster above who made some really good comments on this hand, I like what he said a lot, and am keeping it in mind going forward.
One of the things he said was what are the tendencies and history you have with the players behind? In this case, there wasn't much history, and I'd didn't see anyone with particularly aggressive or opportunistic tendencies. Basically, if I were to flat call this 4bb shove, I hadn't identified anyone behind me who would think "Oh, Pure is calling this shove so wide here, let me fold him off most of his range by shoving my J9cc here". Since there is none of those types behind, I really don't think we get penalized much for calling. In fact, it might save us, because we can comfortably fold to their shoves because we're confident we're well behind their range. You ask a good question again, would this leave us exploitable. And the answer is well yes in a purely theoretically sense, or to more perceptive opponents. But to these guys who are basically playing their cards and more or less waiting for good ones, they will not be exploiting us here, so it actually doesn't matter that we're making an exploitable move. Now, don't try this in the 200r, or everyone behind you will exploit you! But we're safe in the Million.
Since it is the Million, I think we should be even more cautious than normal, which is even more of an argument for calling and folding to a shove behind. That's a nice observation, about what I would do with JJ+. I would definitely call with it, this time hoping someone shoves from behind. I leave my range for shoving over his 4bb shove pretty exposed because of this, so now it seems obvious to me that calling with my whole range in this spot is the best way to go.
It's tough to say exactly where villains behind would draw the line for getting it in vs me if I shove or if I call. I see your point here. I think the main argument for shoving would be to fold out hands like AT that might shove over us. There are a lot more combinations of those hands than say his borderline 77. When we do just call the 4bb shove, we do expose ourselves to get shoved on by a wider range than would call our shove, so we get heads up with the 4bb allin player less often, and end up folding our hand to further action behind more often.
I can't say for sure what the specifics are for how the villains will react to each potential course of action of action our part. I can say for sure that what's more important here, and what I love to hear, is how you're thinking about this hand. That broad mindset, seeing the entire picture and all the possibilities, is exactly the kind of thing I'm trying to emphasis and encourage in you guys. Great players might be not be able to quote the exact ranges for everyone in this hand, for all of the different options, but they will be thinking about the hand with the same framework that you're using here.
Bi Bo12 years, 2 months agoNick, thanks for a great video experience. It was very educational and also very comprehensible, even for me as a PLO CG player.
Your game seems like your auto-pilot is shut off most of the time. So my question is: how many tables are you capable of playing simultaneously in this style?
I mean, at the and of the year, you have to get in a couple of k of MTTs, so I guess you can't sit there and play just two tables and try to play like Ivey, right? How does your typical daily schedule look like?
Nick Rampone12 years, 2 months agoThanks for watching. This is as awesome question, and something I was actually planning to go over in a video. I'm happy to go over it here first though. That's a great observation, that my auto-pilot is shut off. I conciously aim to make sure that I'm thinking through every decision, no matter how seemingly easy or trivial it is. Often times when doing so, I'll discover minor errors that I've been making consistently. Or maybe they're not errors, but a slightly better way to play a hand or to act. Sometimes I get pretty deep into the most minor detail.. Haha. Things that will increase my edge or equity by like .01% lol. I'll also occasionally discover pretty major errors in my approach to the game.
The best example is with continuation betting. I've always thought I was all-pro at it. I would raise a bunch of hands preflop, and everytime I would fire away at it. Until one day I kind or realized that a lot of my c-bets weren't working. What was up with that? One time I was going to c-bet and I was like man... This really just isn't going to work vs his range. I had to learn to account for his range, for him accounting for my wide opening range, stack depth, positions of the opener and the caller, etc. Once I realized how much was involved, I got a lot better at continuation betting. It was crazy to think I was doing something so common, so seemingly routine, sub-optimally for years.
That's the kind of the thing that makes me not want to play a lot of tables. I have a few reasons though, for not playing many tables. Today for example, I was at 5-6 for most of the day, occasionally 7, and maybe briefly at 8. For me, I just think it's optimal though. I think I'm at my best when I'm getting deeply into my opponents heads. I'm picking up a ton of information on them and really sitting there thinking about what it means. That's something I simply don't have time to do when I'm on 10-14 tables. I spent all of 2012 playing lots of tables. I really tried to get better at it by practicing overwhelming myself during most sessions. I know it sounds silly to say that I can't play 12 tables, and it might not be totally accurate to say that. But what is fair to say, is that I'm a much better player as the table load gets lower. I'm sure this is true for everyone, but I think it's much more true for me specifically.
Basically I think it's the best EV for me. I think my EV drops too much as the tables increase for it to be worth the extra EV those extra tables provide. Also, consider this. Last year when I was playing tons of tables all year, I had a hard time playing more than 4 sessions a week. It was just too much for me. I actively tried to improve on it, but the fact is I feel like I reached a limit of sorts. Instead of pushing it to the limit everyday and ending sessions burnt out with a fried brain, I decided to drop table load. All of a sudden I'm playing 6 tables all day, I'm able to comfortably play all day without any stress of timers going off constantly and having to make rushed decisions. I'm also able to play more sessions. I can play several days in a row like that because I don't get fried. To me I'd rather be fresh for the Big162 everyday, than add a bunch of $27 turbos the days I play, and leave myself too burnt out the next day to play the Big162. When you take all of this into account, to me it's the best EV for myself.
Finally, I think it's best for improving my skills. I'm thinking about poker constantly, not just making rushed reshoves or instant decisions. I make better, more accurate decisions in hands because I've got more info on my opponents, and more time to think about that information and process it into a purposeful action. Perhaps most of all, I have much more fun when I play that way, and that's always a good thing.
My schedule for the last month or so is to start playing with the early 100r, usually pick up the 22r Action Hour 30 minutes later, and then the Big 109 right after. I'll add the 50 turbo 2x chance on occasion right after, as well as the 320 6m and 33r. I'll often skip the 33r though, because I really like getting to know my table in the Big109, 100r, and 320. I'll never miss any of the Hots or the Big162, but other than that, I'll mix and match tournaments depending on my current load at the time, aiming to keep about 6 going. I'll typically register through the Hot44, or do a longer session through the Nightly 162.
Quantity or quality? It's an age old argument. In terms of mtts, there's no question that the more volume the better. But there has to be to a point right. At some point your edge and EV drops off so much the other tables aren't worth it. For me that point is much lower than most anyone. I also think the quality of my play is higher than most.
James Obst12 years, 2 months agoHey Nick, nice video man, enjoyed it. Just in that first hand that's a spot where I'd be folding AKo (and prob AKs) pre as a standard, given you identified his range as mostly like QQ+,AK. You didn't mention any thoughts of folding so I'm curious if you'd reassess that or you think when you're as active as you are early there's enough random weaker 3bs as a result to continue. It figures to be a tough spot to get value when you do make your hand is mainly the reason, and flopping Kxx vs AA/KK would be a disaster in the SM (or the rare Axx vs AA we might even get stacked - normally these are trivial considerations but when it's AK vs uber-tight range they matter more). Cheers
Nick Rampone12 years, 2 months agoHello James. Thank you for taking the time to watch and to leave some feedback. I must say, I've been really impressed with your videos. I have a lot of respect for how you approach poker and your thought processes therein. Not to mention, the quality of your decision making is terrific. Thanks for sharing with us.
Your comment here a poignant one. It's made me realize a discontinuity in the logic I used in this hand. I first state that I expect the villain to perceive (correctly) me to be very active and wide here in the early going. I then assign that villain a tight range for three-betting me, perhaps QQ+ and AK. Now both of those can things can be true, so that's not the issue. The problem arises when I estimate the villain to have a tight range, yet choose to continue with a hand that doesn't fare too well vs. that range. I think part of the reason for the lapse in judgment on my part is that I was too focused on my actual range. In my own mind I knew I was raising so wide here that AKo became an even stronger holding than usual. As I added more hands to my range, extending the bottom of it, AK saw its status as a top of the range holding solidify, and carry more weight. Of course this isn't a legitimate consideration when the villain isn't responding to my true range, but responding to my perceived range, with a relatively static range of his own.
Oddly enough, I didn't consider folding preflop. It sounds silly to say, but during the hand, and during all subsequent analysis that thought never occurred to me. I think I became so fixated on him having AK himself the majority of the time, based primarily on his sizing, that I felt comfortable in proceeding. I also tend to think that if I have a blocker, it's impossible for them to have a combination containing that rank. Because of this folly , I discounted AA and KK almost completely, while acknowledging that QQ was a good possibility. In short, I felt comfortable proceeding against his tight range, because I felt it was weighted enough toward hands I do well enough against to justify continuing. I also feel that postflop play will be relatively straight forward. If he bets a dry Axxx twice, I can feel pretty comfortable folding, assuming that his range is AK and AA, figuring KK QQ and the occasional JJ will check behind. Similar story on Kxxx. I want to make the argument that I can bluff good textures, but I don't like the idea of trying to make a player fold APTK or an overpair in the first orbit when I've communicated nothing but aggression to this point.
I'm not entirely sold on my thinking here. At a minimum I'm disappointed I didn't even consider folding. You make a great point that it's going to be difficult for me to actually get value in this pot, since any time I've got a hand to value bet, he's usually got it tied or beat. In light of that, I'm really giving folding preflop a lot of credence. What do you think of my considerations? What is your final stance on my optimal course of action preflop?
I'm glad you enjoyed the video! Thanks again for watching. Cheers.
James Obst12 years, 2 months agoDo you think you're going to be able to win or chop vs AK a lot of the time? My impression is when we miss the flop we're going to have to just check-fold since it would seem hard/silly to run a bluff against a random in the SM with a range of QQ+,AK (I agree with this range btw as you said there's some chance QQ flats and I would have said the same for AK, whereas AA,KK are always in it imo). Though given you read the 4x as weighted towards AK maybe you were planning on c/raising a lot? Given how frequently we share cards too we're going to miss a lot more than 2/3 flops, so would have to be able to take a lot of pots away somehow when we miss for it to be worth it I think. And yeah it's hard to think of many boards we could get more than a bet's value on since an A will nuke the action and we're not often ahead on Kxx flops either.Nick Rampone12 years, 1 month agoNuke the action, haha. Yeah.. I mean the more your analysis sinks in, the more I realize that it's really not that complicated, and a pretty clear fold. With my thoughts centering on him having AK the most often here, my primary plan was going to be to check/call a lot of flops that I miss. I expect him to give up much more often than barrel by the turn if he's unpaired and not on some nut draw. If he bets twice, I won't like where I'm at vs his range and can comfortably give up. If the turn checks, I can feel pretty comfortable in betting OTR to push him off of a chop. As I lay out my thoughts and this plan, it sounds reasonable, but also pretty sloppy or haphazard. Especially given that this is the best case scenario for me, and based on me assuming a lot of favorable conditions for me.
Next time around I'll feel pretty comfortable in folding this spot. And I'll absolutely be more aware of all of my options and take them into account before acting. Thanks for chiming in here man! Cheers.
Ben Newman12 years, 2 months agoHi Nick, Ben Newman (BennyBoussin) on stars.fr
Enjoyed your enthusiasm for making vids, its clear you think about the game a ton and clear to see why you’re successful in the game.
the KQos shove towards the end of the vid seems like a real high variance move as you still have some big stacks who, when called your bang in trouble. It’s not like your short in chips. But saying that I am a NIT!
I would have thought though, someone who is one of the better players at the table does not need to take the higher variance plays?
Not one to criticise but I too didn’t like the format to much of the hand replayer. As someone mentioned, the stack sizes are up there one hand, next hand you had half your stack etc without seeing what happened, So hard to get a feel for game flow etc (for me one of the most important parts of MTT’s)
Looking forward to seeing maybe a live Sunday session in the future.
Benny
Nick Rampone12 years, 2 months agoHey Ben! Thanks for your comments and feedback. I love poker, and try to stay conscious of the fact that I'm fortunate to be able to do something I love for my job. Making these first couple of video has been a lot of fun for me, so I'm glad that's showing through to those watching.
I agree with you that my KQo shove was pretty high variance, especially in a tournament like the Sunday Million. I think a nit approach is a good one in a situation like this. I still feel that with that particular hand, KQo, that shoving is best there. I talked about the reasons why, with the main one being what it communicates to the player who had opened. I also think that if I made a small three-bet, and got shoved on by one of the two big stacks behind, I play decently vs. their range. They will have any pair 88 or 99 and bigger, and I do fine vs. those hands up until QQ. Plus I block combos of those bigger hands. I think it would be a mistake to make a small 3b, and fold to a shove from behind if they had 88-JJ, because of my equity vs those hands, and the odds the pot would be laying me at that point. Basically, I think KQo has just enough equity vs the ranges the players behind would be willing to get all in with (something like 88+ AJs+) that I should just shove and make sure I get to realize that equity when called. I can see making a small 3b being a fine option here too, maybe even the best. I would be curious to hear more opinions on this.
You say you think that the better players at the table shouldn't be making the higher variance plays. I would totally agree with you here. I just feel that with 25 bb effective vs only two players behind, it's not as high variance as it looks. Especially with a hand like QK that plays decently vs get-in ranges behind me.
You're not criticizing! Thank you for letting me know what kind of format you want to see. I made my second video today (to be released soon) and I kind of felt the same way as you. I talked in depth about a lot of hands, but I could see it possibly being boring for some people who want to see more action and live action. My third video will be from the final three tables down to my bustout in 4th place, so that should be a little more exciting and will definitely have gameflow. I really agree with you about gameflow too. I want a lot of videos, and that's my favorite style to watch as well. After this Sunday Million, I'll definitely do a live session soon after. I might try my first live session on a day other than Sunday though, but we'll see. Thanks for the comments Benny!
jloo8712 years, 1 month agoreally good video. You can articulate your thoughts well and the flow is so smooth. Keep up the good work.
Nick Rampone12 years, 1 month agoThanks for the comment junz. I'm glad you're getting something out of my approach. After I had finished the video, and was watching it myself to see what it looked like, I was worried that it might be slow and too in-depth on each hand. Comments like yours are a relief! Thanks.
Being someone who barely plays NLHE at all - and only when dabbling at a very low stakes 8 game tourney; it's interesting to see how much I'm learning about general approaches to poker from watching the vids - making me think in different ways which should help my Omaha and Stud games over time I hope...
If you ever decide to torture yourself with Razz and see a Si_the-Climb at Stars or FTP (low stakes at the mo but one can hope!) say hi.
Nick Rampone12 years, 1 month agoHello Simon! It's really interesting to me to hear from someone like yourself who didn't start in poker the same way as I did, and nearly everyone else did. That is, by playing NLHE. It's tough for me to even wrap my mind around doing it another way, haha. Unfortunately, I have yet to spend any time trying to learn and practice other games. I've wanted too, a lot of which is because of what you said - learning and thinking about other games could help the games you already know well. I think you're spot on with this, and I mean your current learning experience shows that.
I appreciate you open-minded and well-rounded approach to learning about poker as a whole, not just NLHE. I think with your mindset, you have a bright future ahead of you. Especially if you keep doing what you're doing, exposing yourself to a lot of information and being careful to consciously process it.
Thanks for leaving your SN! I do have hopes of actually sitting down to learn these games. If I do, I'll keep my eyes peeled for you at the tables. Best of luck as you keep learning all of the games! Nick Rampone12 years, 1 month agoI should also add that I imagine general thought processes are pretty similar across all of the games, in terms of factors that enter into the equation, all the way down to specific logically elements of reading hands. One of my big points of emphasis as I make videos is to communicate to everyone the importance I think this thought process has. From there, I hope to carefully demonstrate everything that goes into my own thought process. I feel this will be very helpful for everyone watching, and can translate to all games of poker, not just NLHE MTTS
I do understand your argument why not to, but i dont think it changes his range for conteniue a lot if you bet or check.
BTN he may bet some hands here when you check but there are also posibilityes he will check behind when he has somesort of weak hand with SD value.
However checking gives you a lot less chance of winning a big pot compared to a Cbet.
There are many hands BTN he may call with. Small overpairs, FD draws, SD. sets, 2 pairs, + he can float some overcards hoping to take it away from you on turn if you check turn OOP.
Also the BB can have a part of this texture very often.
There are some turns where they will give up even if we bet. Turn Q+
I like to bet flop, and check/raise or check-call most turns. somewhat depending on reads on villain.
Also u mention you are new to using a HUD. I think here is a big factor to determine the best line is to know the villains agresion factor. Against somewhat passive players cheking the flop is real bad, and likwise against more agresive players cheking can certanly be the better option.
Hey Klondike, not sure how I missed this post until now, but I'm trying to catch up over Xmas, so I'm looking through all past threads.
I'm not convinced one way or the other here. The thing that strikes me about this hand is that you can construct the "what ifs" in such a way that either option is massively better than the other. And that construction, those assumptions that form those views, are so subjective. The way I see it now, I'm likely to take the same line. A lot of your arguments about villains potential options to VPIP OTF vs my bet seem less likely since he has a player behind. Though, that could be an argument for a sophisticated player for increasing their frequency to play back, but I think this is rare on the whole.
A couple other perspectives. Combinations wise, OTB has much more air than value on this flop. The question is does he put more money in with that air vs. a hero bet, or vs a hero check? I'd say it's vs the check. I think villains value and showdown hands VPIP similarly vs a bet and a check. My assumption of him VPIPing more with his air vs a check was my primary reason for a check. I also thought BB villain more likely to VPIP vs an OTB bet than either a lone bet by me, or a bet by me and an OTB villain call. I could see this making it more difficult to win a bigger pot more often, but I don't think we lose that potential too often.
The times we do lose that big pot with this line is the center of my final point. Checking here has huge implications for me range balance. I don't have a functional range for x/r here. I did it in this hand purely as an exploit, and would not be keening on doing this much with bluffs in this spot. If villain determines this would be an unlikely spot for me to bluff, and/or an odd line to bluff with, he may fold a hand that would call down if I bet/bet/bet. I think this soncquence is much more severe in theory than it is in practice, though.
@ about 33 mins when you've got 9Tdd, are you calling off if villain c/shoves turn? I find myself checking back a monster draw OTT often in spots like this because I'm just sick if I face a c/r and have to figure out if I'm getting the price to call, and villain is usually gonna have a strongish Kx hand here which he's not folding anyway. Given how deep the eff stack is in this hand, I wouldn't put it past villain to flat your 3bet OOP with AK, so he could show up with that. Mind you, he's often c/r'ing that OTF, but still.
Hey Brad, I'm not sure how I missed this post until now, but I'm hoping a response is better late than never.
I imagine villain would x/c AK OTF here most often, though I could (and do) certainly see a raise from time to time. It's pretty ugly if he check shoves. I don't think I was here because I don't think the price was right. If we invested the time, we could come up with a plausible and pretty accurate range for villain OTT. We could determine our equity vs that range and see if our price is right. Now without having done this math, and with realizing this action by villain is possible and a negative consequence of us betting OTT, I think a bet is better than a check. We fold out so many hands on the turn that will either bet OTR and make us fold our air, or check call us if we bluff OTR. We can fold out a significant portion of his range OTT (all of which beats us) by betting. The value we gain from that is greater than the value we give up by betting and and folding to a raise. I think this is especially true on a board like this, since villain can have a lot of PPs that will usually give up to a bet here. A final note is that if we're checking back hands like this, it's very concievable that our range won't have enough value hands, or hands period, that bet OTT.
Haha, totally forgot about that post. Thanks for answering, wow. I see what you're saying and it makes perfect sense to me. Better to take the small risk of getting blown off our equity by a turn x/jam in order to fold out the majority of his bluff-catchers rather than check back turn, making our potential river decision much more difficult by chopping the top off our range.
New here so please bear with me, you asked what we would like to see. I'm a live player. I win at cash (small stakes) and have recently started playing more live tournys and on line satts to larger live tournys
Started watching, and enjoying, you videos got me thinking about applying your concepts to live situations.
I'd be really interested to hear your thoughts.
Mine are that
Live tournys have a much softer field at the level I play ( below £500 buyins)
You are right, a lot of players ( including me) are unsure what to do when 3 bet , calling is usually last on my list in tournys.
I re shove light 15 -30 bb to steal attempts but I'm not sure of range I should use in these spots.
I don't use these as intensely as you as I don't feel it's necessary as an abc approach is a good basis I think.
I've have a good insight to body language thanks to books and use this in close decisions but not alone
You will no doubt cover these subjects in your vids but you did ask for feedback
Richard
Ps a basics video would probably be easy to produce and I for one would enjoy, maybe edit some situations together? Is that easy to do?
You said your demographic here is not typical. Well not typical is not a problem. I imagine the new and additional perspective will be beneficial to the community. Thanks Richard, for all of the feedback and questions here. Also, I apologize for taking 3 weeks to respond.
First all of, you're asking important questions here, they're just very broad. I will distill them as best as I can. Generally speaking, live tournaments at the 500 pound or below level are going to require a different approach than live tournaments with a higher buyin, or many many online events. The reason is simple: the quality of play. The way to beat live tournaments 500 or below is to play good cards. Play solid as a default. Of course there will be specific opponents at the table who are passive or scared that you can target. But before running a bluff, make sure you're aware of if they have the ability to make a fold or not. With more experience you'll see new ways to earn chips and to make moves, but you cannot fail with this simple default gameplan.
In terms of your specific questions:
-Unsure of what to do when 3bet. In live MTT 500 and below the defualt is to fold all but the best hands. Two reasons here, one is that you're often not very deep, whereas in a cash game you're more familiar with playing or a bigger buyin tournament, you'd be deep enough to call 3bets profitable a fair amount of the time. Secondly, they often have very good cards when they 3b. Of course, you must know your opponent (as best as you can). Some take advantage of this very thought.
-15-30 BB reshove, what range should one use? First note that there is a major difference between 15bb and 30bb. You should use much much different ranges for these two stack sizes. 15-20 is a general amount of BB that should use a similar range, and then 20-25 is another. 30bb you rarely want to be shoving. My thoughts when shoving hands here are hands that have good equity when called, but don't play that well on a flop with low effective stacks. Pocket 44 is a good example of this. So is A7o and like A2s. It will require a bit of effort and can be tedious, but looking into the math of these spots is very useful. I would start by going to pokerstrategy.com and downloading their free program Equilab. Play around with that to learn some of the math. Also, don't be shy about asking questions on the forums. That's what they're there for!
-Body language. I think there is a TON of accurate information that can be learned from observing one's opponent's body language. It sounds like you have a good feel for this already, that's great. There should be much given away and thus much to learn at these stakes (any stakes really). Just as you've developed your experience and ability in observing and interpreting body language, you must do the same for more math and strategy based fundamentals of poker.
PS. About your video request... I've recently been promoted! I no longer make new videos for the the Essential Plan, I'm not making videos for the Elite Plan. Your idea for a video is a good one, I'd suggest posing it to one of the current coaches. Perhaps on the forums? And a lot of what you seek is likely to already exist. Both in videos and in the forums. I'd invest a good amount of time in searching for this information on this site and twoplustwo.com.
22 yr old brazilian that can't stay much time on just one game. started playing NL 27SD, then NLH HUSNG, then moved to cash PLO and now 6 tabling NLH zoom.. but after ghosting a friend at MTT I'll change for it soon as possible, starting in SCOOP probably.
Your approach is excellent, I really can't stand much time playing low variance spots at a 8hr session but after seeing how you deal with it, I'd probably take it more seriously. Thanks and see you at tables (probably played you sometime, because you have a nice note in my PS acc lol)
Haha! That's awesome about the note you have on me.
I was the same way when I first started playing poker - I would play many many different game types. They were all new to me and I simply had fun playing them for a little while. Looking back on it now, I also think it's a good way to learn and to challenge your mind. If you are playing, or begin to play, poker professionally than there will come a time when you need decide what is the best game for you. The big factors in that decision will be what you enjoy most and what you think you can make the most money playing.
Learning how to approach and how to manage MTTs is really interesting to me. It's also a huge challenge, and something that I know I'm still working on and do not have a perfect grasp of yet. Some players hate this aspect of MTTs, but I like it. You'll have to decide if you like it, and like MTTs enough in general, and then if you can manage your variance and tournament approach =)
At 31'mn you reshov a big reraise river with top set AAA, im surprised to be honest you dont just call considering i dont see why QT is not possible here... ? (im perfectly okay with your first raise tho on his 900 kind of blocking-inducing bet" )
I mean you repeat a lot "this is a sunday million" ... I just call his 12k bet here on a sunday million lol.
Well the thing I forgot to mention, is that this is the Sunday Million. Haha. I'm just kidding (well, it is the Sunday Million, but see you see what I mean!)
I made this last, allin raise on the river here because I think the times that he has me beat (QT specifically, only) are fewer than the times I have him beat, and he calls my shove (If I shove and he folds JJJ every time, and calls with QT every time, I'm not accomplishing much). But I think he can definitely have KKK here, JJJ, AJ and KJ primarily, for hands that I beat and will call a shove. He can have some QT as well - it's a legitimate worry, but this player raised initially from early position, and many players just won't be playing QT in this position. Especially not QT offsuit. So I'm thinking he may not even have much QT to begin, but he always has AJ always has KK always has JJ and has a lot of KJ as well - all of which I'm pretty confident are calling my shove.
Does this make sense? I'm hoping it's not one of those thoughts that's only existing in my own mind and has some legitimacy to it in the eyes of others. Thanks for the question here!
I appreciate that you're even willing to consider trusting my reasoning here. I know it is difficult to trust in an idea that you do not directly see yourself, or do not entirely agree with. Experience in these spots is just so important. It will allow you to see how things happen in these spots. It will give you real instances to think about, instead of just an abstract idea.
I hope this is easy to follow, but you are right that it is going to take trust in what I say for now, and experience to verify my conclusions or come to your own in the long run.
I recently got here on runitonce.com and found so much good material.
I love the way you played every hand and, just that 3-bet with 9-10d was a little too loose for me, but now i understand that more aggressive style is needed to be able to get deep in these kind of tournaments.
Anyway, i learn so much from every video you post, thanks!
I just rewatched this video, I'm pretty happy with it, at least from a standpoint of how I explained my thoughts at the time. It was very clear and detailed, but not too slow. I may change the way I play some of these hands today though. However the T9dd hand, I would 100% 3b this hand PF in this situation. Darko, if you made a rule for yourself that you always 3b T9 suited in these positions in freezeout tournaments, I think you would be better for it. The hand is just very good in a lot of ways. If you 3b this hand, it's not like youre playing a super crazy, loose style or anything. This hand is 37 suited or something, it's T9dd!
Hi, Nick, started to see this serie and im enjoying your thought process, i think you explain all your movements very well, so thank you in advance.
Just have a few (noobish) questions though, if you don't mind to help me:
I remember one hand where utg opens and you make a tiny 3bet (i guess it was tiny, i mean, for me it was tiny) to ~2x his open. Why so small? Why not 2.5x? Is that to give the utg opener to call you with worse hands when you have KK-AA? Even though there are regs who open a somehow quite range utg, it doesn't happen quite often. In that case, i believe you had QTo. Whit these kind of hands (QTo in this case), shouldn't we be 3betting 2.5x once these are hands we don't wanna call, so we 3bet them to fold to a 4bet?
I might be missing something, but to summarize, my doubt resumes to this: why making a 2x 3bet with hands we will fold to a 4bet and not a standard (i believe it's standard) 2.5x? You make 2x to make it cheaper for you (once you are folding to a 4bet with those hands), once you believe the result is the same with 2x or 2.5x? Aren't we giving a good price to the utg opener to call our 3bet by 3betting small? Once QTo is not a good hand to flat, shouldn't we 3bet big?
Im trying to improve my 3bet sizing and im counting on you to help me.
Great great post. You asked your questions in a very clear manner, and with much detail. That's great for me. And I have some good answers for you :)
The 3b was 3450 over a 1525 open. So, 3450/1525 = 2.26. The 3b was small, but 2.26x isn't small enough to be unreasonable. I agree that 2.5x is more "standard", and a better size overall. If I were playing this hand today, I would make it 2.5x for sure. I think you are exactly right - 3betting to 2x gives our opponent too good of a price to continue.
In general, I try to keep my bet sizes the same size if I have a good hand or a bad hand. If I have AA or QT here, I would be making a very similar 3b size. I do change it a little bit based on the strength of my hand, to encourage a more desirable outcome (i.e. 3b smaller when I have AA so he's more likely to call).
Does this fully answer your question? I am happy to continue this discussion if not. Also, I am sorry for taking so long to respond here.
Hey Nick, you're one of my favs and definitely one of the reasons I stayed on with subbing awhile back....sad to see you in premium when I just reupped, but I can understand it.
I am completely in tune with your hand reading and postflop game for the most part, but bc I never really grinded cash online (nlh) and didn't get into watching training sites will a couple yrs ago, I feel like I am missing the basics of where, when and why we're three betting in hands like the 109ss hand.
What are the stats, factors, stacks we are looking for when making a play or evaluating it preflop. If I had assumed the opener to be weak, I would in practice usually flat in an MTT and maybe 3B in a live ring game....as I like to reduce variance in MTTs and put pressure on weaker players with position in ring games.
Am I doing it wrong?
I feel like im really missing these three bet spots a lot that top players get and it's one of the final pieces in making me a solid MTT player at lower limits.
If there is a video series on here to help, i'd be all for it too.
I think the 3bet call with 66 vs a 15 blind open is pretty bad. His opening range is so polorized to premiums that your 66 are crushed. I think its an absolute fold pre. If he has marginal hands he wants to play he will shove. Prob already had this comment but im to lazy to read it all :)
Youre talking about dont want to bust this tourny and then the next hand when someone shoves 4bb EP, you jam a healty stack 25bb all in with 66 with 5 players behind for a max coinflip situation and the risky of running into another big hand, i dont like it.
Loading 88 Comments...
Great first vid btw.
It sounds like you're quite a bit further along then what I described about myself above, but I think the overall approach is what's important. For you to emphasize playing in those big events every Sunday, you help yourself in so many ways. First you give yourself a chance to win life-changing, or at least bank-roll changing money. And you have this chance versus a field that you are a favorite against! Sure there will be tough players, but nothing you can't handle. Besides, one of the benefits of playing these tournaments is getting practice playing against better players. The third benefit is that you get used to playing under pressure. If you get 19th in the Warmup, that's great man. It's easy to be frustrated by getting so close to 100k, but look at the bright side. You made a bunch of buyins for your normal ABI, and you got a chance to experience the feeling of playing deep in a major event. The next time you're there, you're going to be more comfortable and make better decisions because of it.
Let me know what kind of videos you'd like to see. In the meantime, I'll keep my eyes peeled for you at the tables.
The spot with sixes, where you shove over the utg+1 4bb shove w/ 26,5biggies from LJ and you have 5 guys to act after you. These are not that fistpump kinda spots with 66, and things i would consider here with this spot and 66 would be how aggro are the 5 guys if we have history with them. And if there are normal passive-ish players i think shove is not the best play here, i would just call and that would look still strong and if nits get over me i can have still 21bigs and nice stack to continue good tournament.
About history, I did not think about that as I was making my decision. As i think back to it, my first thought is that I did not have very much history with those players. But I was at the table for quite a long time at this point, so there must be some information and history I could have used. What I know about these players, is that all the information pointed to them being more tight and nitty, than loose and aggressive. This means that I should call, as you suggest, because if they shove over me behind, they are more likely to have a stronger hand than they are to be making a move there. I could pretty comfortably fold if that happens, vs the two other 25bb+ stacks.
I must admit I did not think of the aggression level of the players behind me either. This is a mistake. I know Skidepas is a professional, and while he seems aggressive, I don't see him as being crazy, or the type to do things too lightly behind me. If I had thought of that during this hand, I would have called as well, because I would not expect anyone behind me to take advantage of my wide calling range vs. the 4 bb shove here.
Now that I think about it, what is the argument for shoving? I am not going to fold out any better pairs behind me. I will fold out some overcard hands for sure, like A7 and KQ. But those hands might also fold if I flat call the 4 bb shove. I think as I look at the whole picture, and all of the possibilities, I think I would call the 4bb shove, and fold to shoves behind.
Thank you, you helped me improve. Next time I will be more careful and try to think of all the relevant factors when I'm in this situation next time :D
Where are you from Tuomas? I will guess Finland. Hopefully I'm not too far off! Were you able to understand my video okay? Thanks again for the comments!
anyhow good video..
This is a great question. I'm planning to do a video from the final 3 tables, all the way down to the finish, so you can see just that. I also plan to do a "highlight" video of sorts, where I show some of the things I did really well, and some of the things I think were my biggest mistakes. Here you will get to see me play without monster hands, and not even in big pots. I'll show you how I try and create good situations and chips by taking advantage of reads I have on my opponents, and mistakes I see them making. Choosing which players to steal against, and to three-bet vs, are really important things throughout the tournament.
Let me answer that a bit here before that video gets made. I will try and steal from players who I think won't fight back. If we are getting deep into the tournament, players will often begin to become very tight as the big money is getting closer. If I think I a player will fold his big blind a lot preflop, or fold on the flop to my c-bet if he doesn't have a good piece of the flop, I will steal from those players all day. When I look to my left and I don't see anyone I think will make a move on me without a hand, I will try and steal, with any two cards. There will be some examples of this in the video.
Three-betting. This is a great way to pick on inexperienced players, and put a lot of pressure on them without risking very much. I see this a lot. There is a player who is just learning poker, but has had some success and knows the basics. This player will raise a lot, because they know it's better to be aggressive. Their problem comes after that. They know how to open a lot of hands, and be aggressive in that way, but they don't know how to play against a three-bet. Usually they will just fold unless they have a huge hand. I will three-bet these players constantly, sometimes regardless of my cards, because they will be folding so often, almost all of the time. Let's say that player has 23 BB. If they min raise to 2 BB, and I three-bet to 4.5 BB, They have to shove their whole stack in to win the pot. I am risking 4.5 BB to win the pot, and they will have to risk 23 BB if they want to win the pot vs me. Most players won't risk it. And since he is raising a lot, he will be folding a lot to your three-bet. Again, there are a couple great situations just like this coming later in this series.
One final note. Most players deep in the Million are in shove / fold mode toward the end. The average stack is just really really low (shallow) at that stage. You will see this from me as well! Don't feel like you have made a mistake just because you have 12 BBs left, most of the time in the Sunday Million, that happens, whether you are playing for the first time, or are Phil Galfond.
Let me know if you have any follow up questions! Thanks.
VPIP / Raise First / Fold to Steal / Total Hands
Fold to 3b / 3b / Cbet / Fold to Cbet
I made it this way and used these numbers to get fast information on common situations. To be quite honest, I am not in the habit of using all of these HUD numbers. I will outline why in a video. The numbers I use a lot are, are VPIP and Raise first, and the relationship between the two, and the three-bet number. From those numbers I can get a pretty accurate general idea of how a player is playing and approaching the game, or at least the game on this day on this table. From there, I'm pretty comfortable thinking through specific hands and situations with that basic (but super valuable) information in mind.
I think the biggest difference from my HUD compared to most players, is that I use Raise First instead of Pre-Flop Raise (PFR). The reason is, PFR takes into account the times a player raises first, and the times a player three-bets. It's both numbers added up. Well, I already have a three-bet number, so I just wanted to have the number for when a player raises first to be separate as well. For example, some players don't raise many pots, but they love to three-bet players that do. In this case, the PRF stat will be misleading, because it will make them seem as if they're raising a lot, but really it's their frequent three-betting number that makes that PRF number go higher. I don't think it's a big difference either way at all, but I prefer to have all the information in separate categories.
The short story is that a couple of months ago I experimented with min-raising every time I opened. Every level, every stack size. I used to 3x a lot early, and from earlier position, but I just wanted to give this a try and form and opinion on it. I really like some things it does for me, and I haven't been taken advantage of for doing it. Which, if the right players are behind you, they can definitely make your life tough.
Stay tuned for a full explanation in-video, with examples. But for now, yes it has been my standard for the past several months.
Small river bet: We ensure that we make money vs 7x. No way he will fold to a small bet here with top pair in a pot controlled hand with two flush draws having missed. We give him the chance to make a big bluff raise. If we bet 700 into 4300, we give him the chance to bluff to say 3500 or something. If we check, and he chooses to bluff, it will likely be for a small amount like 1500-2000. My hand and line look very weak to this point, so it seems reasonable to think that he would think a small bet would get me to fold. I think a bluff raise is harder for a player to make on the river, compared to just betting as a bluff, so I think he would make the bluff raise left often. But when he does, we're making much more money. So there's some give and take there. But I think what pushed this over the top to making a small river bet the better option, is ensuring that we get called by 7x, and that it doesn't check behind, as it did in this actual hand.
I really like this idea, thanks for posting. If I had my time again, I would make a small river bet. I like the look of 700. It seems like a good middle ground to accomplish our goals. What size do you think?
I think a river c/r on the A3o wheel hand is a good idea, bc he pretty much never has a full house given that he checked back the flop. I would imagine that he bets any 2p, set or 77 on this flop. I dont think it is the best option against this opponent though. Even though he has Laggy stats he appears to be more of the aggressive pf and not as much post flop given the AQs hand at the begining of the video. I think betting small is the 2nd best option though, for the reasons already stated. You get value from a wide range and could induce the bluff. I think I like betting 3800ish though best. It looks like a bluff, given the line that you took on the flop and turn and he has enough chips in his stack that he could prolly talk himself into it, bc that size does not kill his stack if he is wrong. I think there is a good chance that he will hero call with a 7 or maybe worse on this river.
John, good stuff. That's a really strong point about betting 3800 OTR. We can rep literally nothing. He has to be sitting there thinking "okay this guy has to bet a set or overpair on the flop to protect on this wet board 3 ways. Now he's betting fat OTR? With what? It makes no sense with any hand.. Leaving only bluffs". I like that far greater than seeking x/r OTR here. I think that yes, we're certainly safe in doing so in terms of hand strength - we always have the best hand. However, I just don't know how often he's betting the river. On the one hand he's going to have some missed draws, so those figure to bet. He's also going to have quite a bit of A high, but I imagine those just show down. If he does make 7x, I expect him to bet, but that's just not going to be a major portion of his range here. And as I said in my post, I expect his river bluff to be pretty small.
Because he's likely betting the river small or not at all, I think that rules out x/r as a good option. To me it comes down to bet fat or bet small to induce. I think it's close, and could be solved with a fair amount of accuracy if we put the time into it. I don't think it's that big of a deal though, since this spot is relatively minor in the grand scheme of things. Generally speaking, I'm a huge fan of betting small to induce in a variety of spots, but I think I 2014 Nick agrees with you that betting fat produces the most EV. The biggest factor is we can't rep anything for value, and it's a pretty simple read for (granted he'll be wrong in this case!) him that he's quite likely to follow through on (call our bet) if he has 7x, a worse pair, or even the occasional A high.
Sizing is just like anything else in poker, there are so many factors that play in to it. I do feel that there should be no standard size for cbetting in tournaments. I take into account my opponent, his tendencies, his range, flop texture, stack depth, likely progressions of bet sequences on turn/river, my image, how many tables he's playing, and probably a couple others I'm not recalling at the moment. I think most importantly, I look at how his range interacts with that flop, and how my perceived range does as well. When I look at it that way, I really get a pretty clear vision of what's a good spot to cbet and I have a pretty good idea of how I'll react to his different actions. Same with checking, I'll see opportune situations to check, and have a pretty good idea of how I'll proceed to his different actions and bet sizes, whether it be with the flopped nuts, or a hand I'm looking to check fold because the texture is poor for me to continue.
This is fun. If I were in villain's shoes here.. If i was the villain and this was my first time playing with a player opening as often as I am in the Sunday Million, in these positions, I would be 3-betting a ridiculously wide range. A lot of that gets into my general approach early in tournaments, which in a nut shell is to stir shit up while stacks are deep, but a lot of that is based on ranges. I'm going to punish the way too wide range he's demonstrated he's willing to open by 3-betting it. He knows I can only be doing this comfortably with AA and KK to get in, but if UTG were to 4b me, I know the same about him. And I know his range is wide, so it's not too believable. That combined with the fact that 250 bb deep, peeling 4bs when the guy is saying I have AA, isn't so bad. When you know his hand or at least the hand he is/is going to be representing, and your range is a bit more undefined, you can really do some damage. And you're in position.
However, that's a really minor consideration in the grand scheme of what usually happens in a spot like this. I 3b UTG opens super wide. I don't have a defined range, but I like to include Ax suited, you now 57cc type stuff, broadways, and even worse than that at times. A5o and K7cc have happened at times. And the reason I do that is, like 98% of the time they either fold or call. Usually it's a call. I think their mentality is okay well this guy figures to have AA or KK, I'm going to try to flop a big hand and stack him in a big pot early. As a result, they play extremely fit or fold post-flop, allowing me to win a very high percentage of these pots that go to the flop. I think the biggest thing here to realize is that I'm exploiting a huge mistake from my opponents in their estimation my range and frequency. They are responding to my perceived range, which they perceive to be really tight, as one would usually expect in these positions. But my true range is so far off from that. My true range might be 30% of hands, and they're playing as if I've got 2% of hands. So in a way, I get to play with AA 30% of the time UTG1!
Another benefit worth mentioning is that I frustrate them and widen their ranges for playing back at me in the future. I'll have position on him all day, so I'm going to be constantly applying pressure on those players to my right, and force them to identify my true ranges, and then play back at me as well.
1. Could you tell me what you think a good cold calling range would look like for you in that spot?
2. If you were smokingQQ in the BB and were also 70bb effective, with 2 people in the pot already (UTG Raiser and Yourself), what do you think a good calling range for him would be there?
-thx.
As for smoking, he can flat really wide here so id say, any two suited cards and probably a9o+,k10o+,q9o+,j8o+,108o+ and then any connected one-gapper down to 75o? . Maybe this is wide but this is what id assume most players would defend here getting like 7:1 70bb deep.
1. In this spot I'm calling very wide. 22-AA, any suited broadway hand, 78 suited + (maybe 67) and suited one-gappers probably starting at 68ss. Some things to note. I probably would call around half the time with JJ-KK here, and 3b the other half. The reasoning there is I think the postflop value of them goes down simply because of ace high board situations. If the pot is 3b, almost all boards will be favorable or at least comfortable to continue on for one or two streets, and even A high boards are pretty playable in position with the lead for us. I would 3b hands like AJo ATo, maybe even weaker Ax hands here just to create some initial history, while having position both now and going forward. I would play almost all offsuit broadway combos, calling about 75% of the time in this spot with higher combos, and 3betting most lower combos almost always.
I should note that my range here is significantly different than other similar situations. Like I said, with SmokingQQ in the bb, I expect to go 3 ways + almost always. In the moment I honestly thought he would defend 73o here. So he's in there with trash, but the original raiser might not range him wide enough. He also won't be cbetting as often multiway, so a lot of boards come up where it's checked to me on the flop and both players have extremely weak ranges, and I can bet and win a ton.
2. As I've gotten more and more comfortable postflop, and got a much better handle on estimating the ranges, frequencies, and tendencies of my opponents, I've started calling much wider preflop in this spot, given these odds and stack sizes. I think the odds are the biggest factor, I would call with a wide range at almost any stack depth with these pot odds. I'm hesitant to just recommend that everyone do that though, because you can really get yourself in to trouble postflop if you're not experienced there. I mean how comfortable are you folding top pair on the turn after the raiser has bet into you twice now? Are you noticing spots where guys are betting nearly 100% of their range when checked to and check raising them to exploit that frequency? These are the types of plays, and the type of comfort level you've got to have to play this spot with a wide range.
Having said that, the best way to improve is to get in those spots. And with that in mind, I do feel comfortable saying you should push yourself to expand your comfort zone. Maybe take a couple more flops and try a couple moves. See what you can get away with. Don't be afraid to make a big fold if you don't like where you stand vs his range. You'll get dealt in the next hand and you can play on from there.
My range is probably 34s or 45s + 67o + any broadway, any suited ace, any pair, and really a lot of unsuited aces too. It's wide man!
Final note. If you're not comfortable yet in these spots, and don't want to try out new things in the Sunday Million, I think it's great to just fold and post the SB the next hand with 70 bbs. You're likely to get a spot down the road that is much more clear cut for you, like okay the cutoff raised and I have QQ on the button, time to 3bet this guy. I mean what kind of a mistake is folding 67o for one big blind of 70? Doesn't seem too bad to me.
Dantonius - Thanks for jumping in on this topic man. I think you nailed estimating SmokingQQ's range in the BB here. I mean it can't be far off from that at all, in either direction.
One thing about how the original raiser should play his range, and how he should estimate mine. If he has AKo and I 3b him, he cannot fold. It's not possible. You said that he should fold that hand versus our 3b value range. Well, it is true that AKo is behind the hands I 3b for value, and am willing to get all in preflop with. Those hands are always AA and KK, and about half the time QQ and AKo. So yes, he's not doing well there. But, my 3betting range just isn't a 3betting for value range. It's not just those top hands. When he gets 3b there, he has to ask himself, okay what hands is he doing this with, and how often. He might think well for starters he's doing it with monsters, AA KK, some QQ and AK, but he also must have some bluffs in there. So with the bluffs being in there, added to his monsters, suddenly we see that AKo is doing just fine versus that range. AKo might not be doing well enough to get allin preflop, I don't think it is, but it should feel good enough/strong enough to continue by calling preflop getting good odds with a very strong hand. Also, it blocks the AA and KK hands of the world, so he has to worry about those less of the time. I just want to make sure that when you're ranging someone, you look at the entire range, not just the top part of it.
You might say, well Nick, how do you know he has bluffs in his 3b range here? How can you just throw them in there like that? Well, that is an estimate on my part. I'm not certain. But I do know that in my experience, and especially with the way the game is being played today, most players will have bluffs in their range. To note, by bluffs I don't necessarily mean Q2o, but hands like ATo or Q9s that are decent cards, and valuable to include in your 3b range.
Yes you guys are both like 98% right here. I am flatting nearly my whole range here that is strong enough to flat. Like I said I might include some KK-JJ and AJo-JTo hands in a 3betting range here. I also would include hands like A4o and 47hh that aren't strong enough to call.
Yeah I am flatting wider there because I thought a lot of good things could happen behind. Specifically, one of the most likely good things that could happen is that SmokinQQ could put money in the pot with a wide range, out of position, with loose/undisciplined tendencies. I can directly take advantage of that in position. Another good thing that can happen, is the mulitway nature of the pot will make the original raiser cbet less. I'l get checked to in position a ton, where I can make a small bet and win a really high percentage of the time against two players who are likely check folding. I also think the original raiser won't think I'm calling as loose as I am, so I can operate with a tighter precieved range. That should get me some extra credit on my bluffs, since I'll have fewer combinations of bluffs (a narrower preflop flatting range), in his eyes.
I would 3b AK almost always here, and 3b AQ most of the time, probably 60-70%. I'm calling (most of the time) with higher offsuit broadway combos (KJo types) and 3-betting lower combos (JTo types) usually, since those have less value postflop. I'm not calling preflop with A7o. but I am 3betting that hand a lot here. Those type of hands will be the majority of my 3b range in this type of spot. I'm more likely to flat call the suited combinations of those hands.
Basically I'm trying to construct a frequency for 3-betting that to him, will look normal. But I'm kind of trying to have my cake and eat it too by calling with hands like AA that he would normally expect to be in my 3b range, and 3bing hands like A4o that he would normally expect me to fold. Based on the exact situation here, I"m also flatting his open preflop with hands like 97ss that I usually would 3b. My ranges are really a bit wacky and not normal here, and certainly wider that usually. But I don't expect him to be able to identify that, or take advantage of it, without seeing a showdown or two from me.
So yeah, thanks lol this has me thinking about a lot of different spots and noticed even in the session I just finished, I was constantly thinking about what my range looks like as well as my opponents.
im playing MTTS plo and nl 6 seat and im trying to upskill to a pro level .maybe lil too ambitious but ill give it a try :)
Its lovely you want to make 2 way learning process ...regarding subject and what i want im very easy, anything any pro has to say has value for me even if its repeated or simple subject people think they are over with, beause anything a pro says has different depth analysis and structure and is always good to hear so im looking forward hearing anything from you
Regarding this series of videos, im thankful you made us possible to have an insight on a winning deep play of most important sunday game on stars
it was great to watch review of crucual spots of the game so far and your review of what you thought at the time you played a hand and specially afterward analysis in retrospect what you could have done or done differently, it was ellaborate and sharing the thought process of playing ahand was really great poker lesson, thank you v much
The first thing that catches my attention is your approach to learning poker. I really like it. I see many players who thing they have something about poker figured out, so they stop learning about it and they stop thinking about it. A great example is myself. I used to think I knew how to continuation-bet really well. It's easy, right? If you were the one to raise pre-flop, then you continuation bet almost every time. Quite some time later, I realized that this was not true! Or at least not that simple. Instead of just always continutation-betting, I started to think about who my opponent was, what his range was, what my perceived range was (what he thinks my range is), what the flop texture was, and how it helped my range or his range - all of these things I now think about before I continuation-bet. It's really nice to see a poker player who is open to learning all things, and wants to hear what several people think on each topic before they decide for themselves how they want to play.
I'm glad you learned a lot from this video. I'm really glad at what you learned, too. The most important things are how to think about a hand, how to analyze a hand, and all of the thought processes behind this. You seem to understand that very well. That is what is going to help you as you play, trying to create those thought processes for yourself.
Becoming a pro is too ambitious? No it isn't. I've seen a lot of people come in to the game of poker. I have seen many succeed, and seen many fail. I can tell you that you have a winning attitude, and approach to learning the game. Poker is very difficult to play as a professional though, so my advice is to be careful. If you have a job right now, I would say to keep it until you are nearly certain you can succeed in poker. If you think you can quit your job now, but go back to it in 6 months if poker doesn't work out for you, then that might be a good option too. But just make sure to be careful. You also should not worry. You have what it takes to succeed. You just need to keep putting in the work and the effort to get better, and in time you will be at that level.
živjeli!
And yes, simplest things as they can be, poker should never be a pattern but thinking process, i liked way you played aces by not 3 betting them, and thinking of it i acttually think it was excellent play not just because of diversity we should implement in our plays, but in retrospect i think of how many folds we did get by only 3 betting, and in that situation in particular way its played i dont think you could ever get such a value out of set of aces versus set of kings if you 3 betted particular hand, player would be very careful if you announced your hand strenght by 3 bet there
Im very glad you had lovely time in zagreb, im concidering go to a concert with friends there in 2 days , though i got a lil flu so im not sure, but really wish to see zagreb again , last time i was there was soo long ago, and may tell you ppl around the world love to visit the area and belgrade as well as zagreb because people are very social and go out a lot, lot of cafes and good restaurats, so i do hope to see you some time in belgrade to enjoy yourself as well :))
Cheers
One other thing I want to understand better. In your first post, you said that you play MTTs and 6max NL and PLO. You mean cash games for this right? I think it's good that you are able to play cash games as well as tournaments. It can be difficult to win consistently in tournaments, but if you are playing cash games as well, you can win a bit each day, or at least more often than in tournaments. And since you are playing tournaments as well, you give yourself a chance to win first place and have a nice score to add to your bankroll!
Yes every person I met in Zagreb, all over Croatia, and all over that region in general, were very nice people. As you say, very social and friendly. Get some rest and feel better so you can make it to the concert! I want to travel in that area again sometime soon, if I do I will let everyone here know and try to meet up with a few friends from RunItOnce.
Cheers and good luck on your journey to becoming a professional poker player.
Yes i like cash games NL and PLO and mtts and im trying out turbos as well lately , to add i love hu as well and im just lil worried is it too many poker fields that i like ~ people i see around usually love 1 or 2~ and im worried is it too much to try to accomplish all
If you come by in area let us know maybe meet up and party if you are in mood :) best regards and best of luck at tables
That is a tough question. Should you focus on one or two areas, or try to develop in several? I don't know. I can see that it makes sense to focus on one. But I also know that when I was starting out, I played all of the different forms of NL. They were all fun for me to try and to play, and I wanted to find which one I liked the best, and also maybe which one I would be the best at. Maybe this is something you could do as well. Or maybe there is already one area you like the most, or you think you can make the most money at, and you decide to focus on that one. I think they are all fine options.
If I'm there I will definitely be in the mood! Haha. I will let you know if that happens. Gl to you as well!
Never saw that you replied and haven't been around the forums much. But ya contact at alaskaegypt@gmail.com
On my phone, somehow accidentally flagged your reply as spam!
1) AA > KK that would be pretty same result if you 3bet and it went preflop AI. On top of that if turn wasn't K you would miss stacking chance with A high flop. Showing how luck doesn't punish yours obv. incorrect AA cold call isn't way to go for someone wanting to learn how to play MTT. I can say pretty confident that most novice players following that kind of play would end with AA crushed by some J4o called from BB. Without even understanding what the heck just happened.
2) KK > QQ pretty much same as above.
And flopping wheel to A3 isn't something to talk about lots. Standart late position thrashy opener with amazing flop.
And looking at how ur stack changes from hand to hand it's pretty obv that you cut out all moves away, leaving us with bad beats and obv plays.
TL:DR
If i wanted to see how i wont million video, i would pay 9.99$ to maratik for his replay. I think i could saw even more badbeats and god mod hands that way
Just opinion.
If i sounded rude i am very very sorry. vOv
I had two goals with this. First, was to just simply so everyone could see what happened for me to get to the final table. I know it's not surprising that I had to get good hands and good luck. My second goal was to try and show you guys that even in situations where you have big hands, there is room to think about what to be done. You don't always have to do a certain thing, like reraise with aces. I challenge you to really think about this. Poker isn't something you can memorize. While there are plays that a good player makes and should make 95% of the time or more, I feel that the best players are willing and able to make a different play every now and then, if they see conditions at the table that they feel make it a better option than the standard, usual play.
I also mentioned in the video that I will be doing a video on this hand history that shows the hands where I think my edge was displayed to the highest degree, as well as the opposite, the hands where I think I made the biggest mistakes. In reviewing the hand history myself, I noticed several mistakes. Since posting this video and getting feedback, I've learned about a couple more things I think I could've done better, from your guys' feedback. So, if you want to see me play something other than aces, stayed tuned for videos later on in this series.
1) Okay let's talk about this hand and each of our opinions about it. I know this is tough, I know this doesn't make sense, and it's not even natural - but you must believe me when I say it. Actually, you must try to truly understand it, not just believe what I say. The results don't matter. It doesn't matter that I was dealt aces, that he was dealt kings, or that we each had sets appear on the board. What matters is the choices I can make. I said in the video that I wasn't sure if my choice to flat call AA preflop was the best choice I could've made there. I realize that almost all players choose to 3b that hand, and I understand the reasons why. But I also stand by the thought process behind the choice I made, and the thought process behind the fact that I have a choice there in general. It's not a must to 3b AA there, but it very well could be the best choice. Do you see what I mean at all?
In your post about his hand you mentioned that "the result would be pretty much the same" (if I had 3b instead of flat called preflop). Well, so what if I had 3b, and we had got allin preflop, and the flop came KK2 and he busted me with quads. Would I have made a bad choice then, choosing to get allin preflop? No I don't think that I did, even though I lost a huge pot. The same thing applies here. I think that this can be a good choice (doesn't have to be) to call preflop, and the way the cards came out on the board shouldn't have any effect on how we think about the hand itself, and the choices we have in it.
I'm hoping to teach novice players that they always have choices, and that they should always think of those choices. Even if they make the same choice in a particular situation 99% of the time, I'd still like them to be aware that they have a choice, and always be ready for the 1% of the time when the non-standard choice is the better choice.
2) Would you c-bet the flop with KK there? What if he had AJ? He would fold to a flop c-bet, but I would get his whole stack if he saw the turn and made top pair top kicker with his ace jack. I didn't know he had QQ in this hand. When I'm making decisions in a hand, I'm making them against my opponents entire range, all of the hands he could possibly have. Because I don't know his actual two cards. I think this is a really important concept in poker, one of the most important in fact. I really ask you to give what I'm saying some honest thought. You're going to have to question some of your current beliefs, some of the ways you currently think about the game and understand it. This is not easy. You having nothing to lose and potentially a lot to gain.
Thanks for you feedback. Let me know if there's anything I can clarify in my comments. Also, let me know what kind of videos you want to see. I want to make sure you get what you want. I'll have Maratik do a guest video if I have to :D
About what i said before. It's not you fault, but rather nature of huge huge field mtt. It's hard to learn something new from such replay. But whatsever that was just earlier play, and i am looking forward to see how you handled bubble/deep itm play in that tourney :)
Loved the video. Really good stuff, mate.
With the A3o hand --> I like your check on the flop for the reasons that you stated.
Would you make the same check if you were say 85BB+ deep with villain? I like your check with that stack depth (<50BBs) because you can still have the opportunity to stack your opponent on turn cards that dramatically improve his range. I just think that IF you were really deep your main priority is going to be extracting value and trying to build a pot (which will lead to a massive stack that you can use to apply pressure).
If both opponents fold to a c-bet then so be it - I just think the value of giving us the chance to win a big pot far outweighs ensuring that we win a small-medium pot (by checking flop).
Keen to hear your thoughts. Keep the vids coming!!
However, I don't think that's a huge factor in this particular hand. I choose to check the flop because of how my opponents' ranges matched up with that flop texture. I felt very confident they would bet with about 95% of the hands they would call my c-bet with, so I wasn't risking missing a bet and a chance to build the pot. I think the key note here is this: I can't build a pot versus them if they don't have a hand and will fold to my c-bet. I mean if the button is sitting there with JTcc, he will almost always fold (occasionally bluff raise or float) to my c-bet. I really think that ranges for calling c-bets, betting when checked to, and checking behind for my opponents in this hand won't really change at a stack depth of anywhere ~30bb+.
I hope that I'm articulating this well. It's something that I feel very strongly about. Too many times I've gone to c-bet monster hands at a deep stack depth with that very thought, let's build the pot and stack this guy, only to realize when he snap folds that his range can't continue much to a c-bet from me. One thing to note as well. If I thought he would check back a lot of hands that would call a bet, then I would absolutely be inclined to c-bet and build a pot. In this hand, I just felt that his range for calling a c-bet and betting when checked to were nearly identical, so I didn't lose anything (a chance to build the pot) by checking. In fact, I increased my chances to build a pot, because I've now given him the chance to one, two, or three barrel bluff that air he would just auto-fold to my c-bet.
Overall you are spot on with that consideration being of huge importance, I just think that this hand specifically is a rare exception where we shouldn't apply that idea and approach.
Let me know if I can clarify any of my thoughts here. Thanks! Glgl.
Great thoughts. I hadn't really considered and factored in either of these points to be honest. I'm not sure why, but it just never crossed my mind that the villain here has 6x a non-zero percentage of the time. I think this was because I assumed he would be opening a relatively tight range here Bvb vs me in the Million, with so many other good situations likely to present themselves. That said, I'm not sure he just looks down at 68cc and folds. He definitely has several 6x combos. For the same reasons that I failed to account for his 6x possibilities, I think that he won't assume I'm raising 3x here. Both are just applications of a pretty basic level of conventional wisdom. Mine was "he won't raise bad cards, so he won't have hands with a 6 in them." His is "He won't raise with 3x because he's basically turning his hand into a bluff". That quote is my assumption of his thought at the time. He definitely could realize that I would do that with 3x or 55, especially given my size.
He should still have more combos of overpairs than 6x, right? If true, that might give more weight to the viability of using the option to hammer the turn and river.
I also never considered that my flop raise is essentially dictating his turn bet size. I really like that, especially since it has the added value of me getting more money in good vs overs he peels one / contemplates calling down with. It just gives me a ton of flexibility going forward, as you noted with what we can do on turn cards that we pick up some equity on.
I felt a bit silly saying that I could do everything from check down, to bet down for value, and to pot down as a bluff. All of those things can't be equally true and optimal vs one player's range here. I mean it's either optimal to big bet bluff, or it's optimal to value bet, not whichever you want to be true at the time. So I felt a little awkward saying that. My point there was to note that making that flop raise gives me a ton of flexibility going forward in the hand, and leaves all options open to me. From there I'll gather more info and decide which is optimal! And little did I know that that flop raise had a couple of extra benefits as well, that you noted above. Great stuff man, thank you!
Im curious about the 66 hand at min 57. I find that I bust a ton of tournaments in that very same spot when one of the remaining players behind wakes up with a monster. Do you think calling and folding to a 3rd party jam could be better? I feel like that way we can avoid losing our stack to bigger pairs but still get HU with the short stack a decent amount of time without risking the rest of our chips. Would that leave us exploitable? Im not sure. Although you said the other players would know that you have a farily wide calling range there, to me calling always seemd slightly stronger than jamming because id put JJ+ in your calling range and not so much in your isolation range.What would you do with JJ+ here? Is jamming it in fine or would you be calling more to allow weaker hands to come over top? Also curious what your thoughts are on if any remaining villains have 77-99. Do they fold to your isolation and if so would they also fold if you just called? hope that made sence, appreciate any thoughts!
Yeah.. Looking back at this hand I'm not too thrilled. Well, I'm not too stoked on my decision in the hand, but I feel like I've really got a good feel for this spot now that I've reviewed it and got a ton of good feedback. There was a poster above who made some really good comments on this hand, I like what he said a lot, and am keeping it in mind going forward.
One of the things he said was what are the tendencies and history you have with the players behind? In this case, there wasn't much history, and I'd didn't see anyone with particularly aggressive or opportunistic tendencies. Basically, if I were to flat call this 4bb shove, I hadn't identified anyone behind me who would think "Oh, Pure is calling this shove so wide here, let me fold him off most of his range by shoving my J9cc here". Since there is none of those types behind, I really don't think we get penalized much for calling. In fact, it might save us, because we can comfortably fold to their shoves because we're confident we're well behind their range. You ask a good question again, would this leave us exploitable. And the answer is well yes in a purely theoretically sense, or to more perceptive opponents. But to these guys who are basically playing their cards and more or less waiting for good ones, they will not be exploiting us here, so it actually doesn't matter that we're making an exploitable move. Now, don't try this in the 200r, or everyone behind you will exploit you! But we're safe in the Million.
Since it is the Million, I think we should be even more cautious than normal, which is even more of an argument for calling and folding to a shove behind. That's a nice observation, about what I would do with JJ+. I would definitely call with it, this time hoping someone shoves from behind. I leave my range for shoving over his 4bb shove pretty exposed because of this, so now it seems obvious to me that calling with my whole range in this spot is the best way to go.
It's tough to say exactly where villains behind would draw the line for getting it in vs me if I shove or if I call. I see your point here. I think the main argument for shoving would be to fold out hands like AT that might shove over us. There are a lot more combinations of those hands than say his borderline 77. When we do just call the 4bb shove, we do expose ourselves to get shoved on by a wider range than would call our shove, so we get heads up with the 4bb allin player less often, and end up folding our hand to further action behind more often.
I can't say for sure what the specifics are for how the villains will react to each potential course of action of action our part. I can say for sure that what's more important here, and what I love to hear, is how you're thinking about this hand. That broad mindset, seeing the entire picture and all the possibilities, is exactly the kind of thing I'm trying to emphasis and encourage in you guys. Great players might be not be able to quote the exact ranges for everyone in this hand, for all of the different options, but they will be thinking about the hand with the same framework that you're using here.
Your game seems like your auto-pilot is shut off most of the time. So my question is: how many tables are you capable of playing simultaneously in this style?
I mean, at the and of the year, you have to get in a couple of k of MTTs, so I guess you can't sit there and play just two tables and try to play like Ivey, right? How does your typical daily schedule look like?
The best example is with continuation betting. I've always thought I was all-pro at it. I would raise a bunch of hands preflop, and everytime I would fire away at it. Until one day I kind or realized that a lot of my c-bets weren't working. What was up with that? One time I was going to c-bet and I was like man... This really just isn't going to work vs his range. I had to learn to account for his range, for him accounting for my wide opening range, stack depth, positions of the opener and the caller, etc. Once I realized how much was involved, I got a lot better at continuation betting. It was crazy to think I was doing something so common, so seemingly routine, sub-optimally for years.
That's the kind of the thing that makes me not want to play a lot of tables. I have a few reasons though, for not playing many tables. Today for example, I was at 5-6 for most of the day, occasionally 7, and maybe briefly at 8. For me, I just think it's optimal though. I think I'm at my best when I'm getting deeply into my opponents heads. I'm picking up a ton of information on them and really sitting there thinking about what it means. That's something I simply don't have time to do when I'm on 10-14 tables. I spent all of 2012 playing lots of tables. I really tried to get better at it by practicing overwhelming myself during most sessions. I know it sounds silly to say that I can't play 12 tables, and it might not be totally accurate to say that. But what is fair to say, is that I'm a much better player as the table load gets lower. I'm sure this is true for everyone, but I think it's much more true for me specifically.
Basically I think it's the best EV for me. I think my EV drops too much as the tables increase for it to be worth the extra EV those extra tables provide. Also, consider this. Last year when I was playing tons of tables all year, I had a hard time playing more than 4 sessions a week. It was just too much for me. I actively tried to improve on it, but the fact is I feel like I reached a limit of sorts. Instead of pushing it to the limit everyday and ending sessions burnt out with a fried brain, I decided to drop table load. All of a sudden I'm playing 6 tables all day, I'm able to comfortably play all day without any stress of timers going off constantly and having to make rushed decisions. I'm also able to play more sessions. I can play several days in a row like that because I don't get fried. To me I'd rather be fresh for the Big162 everyday, than add a bunch of $27 turbos the days I play, and leave myself too burnt out the next day to play the Big162. When you take all of this into account, to me it's the best EV for myself.
Finally, I think it's best for improving my skills. I'm thinking about poker constantly, not just making rushed reshoves or instant decisions. I make better, more accurate decisions in hands because I've got more info on my opponents, and more time to think about that information and process it into a purposeful action. Perhaps most of all, I have much more fun when I play that way, and that's always a good thing.
My schedule for the last month or so is to start playing with the early 100r, usually pick up the 22r Action Hour 30 minutes later, and then the Big 109 right after. I'll add the 50 turbo 2x chance on occasion right after, as well as the 320 6m and 33r. I'll often skip the 33r though, because I really like getting to know my table in the Big109, 100r, and 320. I'll never miss any of the Hots or the Big162, but other than that, I'll mix and match tournaments depending on my current load at the time, aiming to keep about 6 going. I'll typically register through the Hot44, or do a longer session through the Nightly 162.
Quantity or quality? It's an age old argument. In terms of mtts, there's no question that the more volume the better. But there has to be to a point right. At some point your edge and EV drops off so much the other tables aren't worth it. For me that point is much lower than most anyone. I also think the quality of my play is higher than most.
Your comment here a poignant one. It's made me realize a discontinuity in the logic I used in this hand. I first state that I expect the villain to perceive (correctly) me to be very active and wide here in the early going. I then assign that villain a tight range for three-betting me, perhaps QQ+ and AK. Now both of those can things can be true, so that's not the issue. The problem arises when I estimate the villain to have a tight range, yet choose to continue with a hand that doesn't fare too well vs. that range. I think part of the reason for the lapse in judgment on my part is that I was too focused on my actual range. In my own mind I knew I was raising so wide here that AKo became an even stronger holding than usual. As I added more hands to my range, extending the bottom of it, AK saw its status as a top of the range holding solidify, and carry more weight. Of course this isn't a legitimate consideration when the villain isn't responding to my true range, but responding to my perceived range, with a relatively static range of his own.
Oddly enough, I didn't consider folding preflop. It sounds silly to say, but during the hand, and during all subsequent analysis that thought never occurred to me. I think I became so fixated on him having AK himself the majority of the time, based primarily on his sizing, that I felt comfortable in proceeding. I also tend to think that if I have a blocker, it's impossible for them to have a combination containing that rank. Because of this folly , I discounted AA and KK almost completely, while acknowledging that QQ was a good possibility. In short, I felt comfortable proceeding against his tight range, because I felt it was weighted enough toward hands I do well enough against to justify continuing. I also feel that postflop play will be relatively straight forward. If he bets a dry Axxx twice, I can feel pretty comfortable folding, assuming that his range is AK and AA, figuring KK QQ and the occasional JJ will check behind. Similar story on Kxxx. I want to make the argument that I can bluff good textures, but I don't like the idea of trying to make a player fold APTK or an overpair in the first orbit when I've communicated nothing but aggression to this point.
I'm not entirely sold on my thinking here. At a minimum I'm disappointed I didn't even consider folding. You make a great point that it's going to be difficult for me to actually get value in this pot, since any time I've got a hand to value bet, he's usually got it tied or beat. In light of that, I'm really giving folding preflop a lot of credence. What do you think of my considerations? What is your final stance on my optimal course of action preflop?
I'm glad you enjoyed the video! Thanks again for watching. Cheers.
Next time around I'll feel pretty comfortable in folding this spot. And I'll absolutely be more aware of all of my options and take them into account before acting. Thanks for chiming in here man! Cheers.
Enjoyed your enthusiasm for making vids, its clear you think about the game a ton and clear to see why you’re successful in the game.
the KQos shove towards the end of the vid seems like a real high variance move as you still have some big stacks who, when called your bang in trouble. It’s not like your short in chips. But saying that I am a NIT!
I would have thought though, someone who is one of the better players at the table does not need to take the higher variance plays?
Not one to criticise but I too didn’t like the format to much of the hand replayer. As someone mentioned, the stack sizes are up there one hand, next hand you had half your stack etc without seeing what happened, So hard to get a feel for game flow etc (for me one of the most important parts of MTT’s)
Looking forward to seeing maybe a live Sunday session in the future.
Benny
I agree with you that my KQo shove was pretty high variance, especially in a tournament like the Sunday Million. I think a nit approach is a good one in a situation like this. I still feel that with that particular hand, KQo, that shoving is best there. I talked about the reasons why, with the main one being what it communicates to the player who had opened. I also think that if I made a small three-bet, and got shoved on by one of the two big stacks behind, I play decently vs. their range. They will have any pair 88 or 99 and bigger, and I do fine vs. those hands up until QQ. Plus I block combos of those bigger hands. I think it would be a mistake to make a small 3b, and fold to a shove from behind if they had 88-JJ, because of my equity vs those hands, and the odds the pot would be laying me at that point. Basically, I think KQo has just enough equity vs the ranges the players behind would be willing to get all in with (something like 88+ AJs+) that I should just shove and make sure I get to realize that equity when called. I can see making a small 3b being a fine option here too, maybe even the best. I would be curious to hear more opinions on this.
You say you think that the better players at the table shouldn't be making the higher variance plays. I would totally agree with you here. I just feel that with 25 bb effective vs only two players behind, it's not as high variance as it looks. Especially with a hand like QK that plays decently vs get-in ranges behind me.
You're not criticizing! Thank you for letting me know what kind of format you want to see. I made my second video today (to be released soon) and I kind of felt the same way as you. I talked in depth about a lot of hands, but I could see it possibly being boring for some people who want to see more action and live action. My third video will be from the final three tables down to my bustout in 4th place, so that should be a little more exciting and will definitely have gameflow. I really agree with you about gameflow too. I want a lot of videos, and that's my favorite style to watch as well. After this Sunday Million, I'll definitely do a live session soon after. I might try my first live session on a day other than Sunday though, but we'll see. Thanks for the comments Benny!
Being someone who barely plays NLHE at all - and only when dabbling at a very low stakes 8 game tourney; it's interesting to see how much I'm learning about general approaches to poker from watching the vids - making me think in different ways which should help my Omaha and Stud games over time I hope...
If you ever decide to torture yourself with Razz and see a Si_the-Climb at Stars or FTP (low stakes at the mo but one can hope!) say hi.
I appreciate you open-minded and well-rounded approach to learning about poker as a whole, not just NLHE. I think with your mindset, you have a bright future ahead of you. Especially if you keep doing what you're doing, exposing yourself to a lot of information and being careful to consciously process it.
Thanks for leaving your SN! I do have hopes of actually sitting down to learn these games. If I do, I'll keep my eyes peeled for you at the tables. Best of luck as you keep learning all of the games!
I do understand your argument why not to, but i dont think it changes his range for conteniue a lot if you bet or check.
BTN he may bet some hands here when you check but there are also posibilityes he will check behind when he has somesort of weak hand with SD value.
However checking gives you a lot less chance of winning a big pot compared to a Cbet.
There are many hands BTN he may call with. Small overpairs, FD draws, SD. sets, 2 pairs, + he can float some overcards hoping to take it away from you on turn if you check turn OOP.
Also the BB can have a part of this texture very often.
There are some turns where they will give up even if we bet. Turn Q+
I like to bet flop, and check/raise or check-call most turns. somewhat depending on reads on villain.
Also u mention you are new to using a HUD. I think here is a big factor to determine the best line is to know the villains agresion factor. Against somewhat passive players cheking the flop is real bad, and likwise against more agresive players cheking can certanly be the better option.
Just my 2Cents anyway
Hey Klondike, not sure how I missed this post until now, but I'm trying to catch up over Xmas, so I'm looking through all past threads.
I'm not convinced one way or the other here. The thing that strikes me about this hand is that you can construct the "what ifs" in such a way that either option is massively better than the other. And that construction, those assumptions that form those views, are so subjective. The way I see it now, I'm likely to take the same line. A lot of your arguments about villains potential options to VPIP OTF vs my bet seem less likely since he has a player behind. Though, that could be an argument for a sophisticated player for increasing their frequency to play back, but I think this is rare on the whole.
A couple other perspectives. Combinations wise, OTB has much more air than value on this flop. The question is does he put more money in with that air vs. a hero bet, or vs a hero check? I'd say it's vs the check. I think villains value and showdown hands VPIP similarly vs a bet and a check. My assumption of him VPIPing more with his air vs a check was my primary reason for a check. I also thought BB villain more likely to VPIP vs an OTB bet than either a lone bet by me, or a bet by me and an OTB villain call. I could see this making it more difficult to win a bigger pot more often, but I don't think we lose that potential too often.
The times we do lose that big pot with this line is the center of my final point. Checking here has huge implications for me range balance. I don't have a functional range for x/r here. I did it in this hand purely as an exploit, and would not be keening on doing this much with bluffs in this spot. If villain determines this would be an unlikely spot for me to bluff, and/or an odd line to bluff with, he may fold a hand that would call down if I bet/bet/bet. I think this soncquence is much more severe in theory than it is in practice, though.
@ about 33 mins when you've got 9Tdd, are you calling off if villain c/shoves turn? I find myself checking back a monster draw OTT often in spots like this because I'm just sick if I face a c/r and have to figure out if I'm getting the price to call, and villain is usually gonna have a strongish Kx hand here which he's not folding anyway. Given how deep the eff stack is in this hand, I wouldn't put it past villain to flat your 3bet OOP with AK, so he could show up with that. Mind you, he's often c/r'ing that OTF, but still.
Hey Brad, I'm not sure how I missed this post until now, but I'm hoping a response is better late than never.
I imagine villain would x/c AK OTF here most often, though I could (and do) certainly see a raise from time to time. It's pretty ugly if he check shoves. I don't think I was here because I don't think the price was right. If we invested the time, we could come up with a plausible and pretty accurate range for villain OTT. We could determine our equity vs that range and see if our price is right. Now without having done this math, and with realizing this action by villain is possible and a negative consequence of us betting OTT, I think a bet is better than a check. We fold out so many hands on the turn that will either bet OTR and make us fold our air, or check call us if we bluff OTR. We can fold out a significant portion of his range OTT (all of which beats us) by betting. The value we gain from that is greater than the value we give up by betting and and folding to a raise. I think this is especially true on a board like this, since villain can have a lot of PPs that will usually give up to a bet here. A final note is that if we're checking back hands like this, it's very concievable that our range won't have enough value hands, or hands period, that bet OTT.
Haha, totally forgot about that post. Thanks for answering, wow. I see what you're saying and it makes perfect sense to me. Better to take the small risk of getting blown off our equity by a turn x/jam in order to fold out the majority of his bluff-catchers rather than check back turn, making our potential river decision much more difficult by chopping the top off our range.
Hi enjoyed the video
44 year old guy from UK, not typical here I guess
New here so please bear with me, you asked what we would like to see. I'm a live player. I win at cash (small stakes) and have recently started playing more live tournys and on line satts to larger live tournys
Started watching, and enjoying, you videos got me thinking about applying your concepts to live situations.
I'd be really interested to hear your thoughts.
Mine are that
Live tournys have a much softer field at the level I play ( below £500 buyins)
You are right, a lot of players ( including me) are unsure what to do when 3 bet , calling is usually last on my list in tournys.
I re shove light 15 -30 bb to steal attempts but I'm not sure of range I should use in these spots.
I don't use these as intensely as you as I don't feel it's necessary as an abc approach is a good basis I think.
I've have a good insight to body language thanks to books and use this in close decisions but not alone
You will no doubt cover these subjects in your vids but you did ask for feedback
Richard
Ps a basics video would probably be easy to produce and I for one would enjoy, maybe edit some situations together? Is that easy to do?
Richard, welcome!
You said your demographic here is not typical. Well not typical is not a problem. I imagine the new and additional perspective will be beneficial to the community. Thanks Richard, for all of the feedback and questions here. Also, I apologize for taking 3 weeks to respond.
First all of, you're asking important questions here, they're just very broad. I will distill them as best as I can. Generally speaking, live tournaments at the 500 pound or below level are going to require a different approach than live tournaments with a higher buyin, or many many online events. The reason is simple: the quality of play. The way to beat live tournaments 500 or below is to play good cards. Play solid as a default. Of course there will be specific opponents at the table who are passive or scared that you can target. But before running a bluff, make sure you're aware of if they have the ability to make a fold or not. With more experience you'll see new ways to earn chips and to make moves, but you cannot fail with this simple default gameplan.
In terms of your specific questions:
-Unsure of what to do when 3bet. In live MTT 500 and below the defualt is to fold all but the best hands. Two reasons here, one is that you're often not very deep, whereas in a cash game you're more familiar with playing or a bigger buyin tournament, you'd be deep enough to call 3bets profitable a fair amount of the time. Secondly, they often have very good cards when they 3b. Of course, you must know your opponent (as best as you can). Some take advantage of this very thought.
-15-30 BB reshove, what range should one use? First note that there is a major difference between 15bb and 30bb. You should use much much different ranges for these two stack sizes. 15-20 is a general amount of BB that should use a similar range, and then 20-25 is another. 30bb you rarely want to be shoving. My thoughts when shoving hands here are hands that have good equity when called, but don't play that well on a flop with low effective stacks. Pocket 44 is a good example of this. So is A7o and like A2s. It will require a bit of effort and can be tedious, but looking into the math of these spots is very useful. I would start by going to pokerstrategy.com and downloading their free program Equilab. Play around with that to learn some of the math. Also, don't be shy about asking questions on the forums. That's what they're there for!
-Body language. I think there is a TON of accurate information that can be learned from observing one's opponent's body language. It sounds like you have a good feel for this already, that's great. There should be much given away and thus much to learn at these stakes (any stakes really). Just as you've developed your experience and ability in observing and interpreting body language, you must do the same for more math and strategy based fundamentals of poker.
PS. About your video request... I've recently been promoted! I no longer make new videos for the the Essential Plan, I'm not making videos for the Elite Plan. Your idea for a video is a good one, I'd suggest posing it to one of the current coaches. Perhaps on the forums? And a lot of what you seek is likely to already exist. Both in videos and in the forums. I'd invest a good amount of time in searching for this information on this site and twoplustwo.com.
Cheers!
Nick
22 yr old brazilian that can't stay much time on just one game. started playing NL 27SD, then NLH HUSNG, then moved to cash PLO and now 6 tabling NLH zoom.. but after ghosting a friend at MTT I'll change for it soon as possible, starting in SCOOP probably.
Your approach is excellent, I really can't stand much time playing low variance spots at a 8hr session but after seeing how you deal with it, I'd probably take it more seriously. Thanks and see you at tables (probably played you sometime, because you have a nice note in my PS acc lol)
Haha! That's awesome about the note you have on me.
I was the same way when I first started playing poker - I would play many many different game types. They were all new to me and I simply had fun playing them for a little while. Looking back on it now, I also think it's a good way to learn and to challenge your mind. If you are playing, or begin to play, poker professionally than there will come a time when you need decide what is the best game for you. The big factors in that decision will be what you enjoy most and what you think you can make the most money playing.
Learning how to approach and how to manage MTTs is really interesting to me. It's also a huge challenge, and something that I know I'm still working on and do not have a perfect grasp of yet. Some players hate this aspect of MTTs, but I like it. You'll have to decide if you like it, and like MTTs enough in general, and then if you can manage your variance and tournament approach =)
At 31'mn you reshov a big reraise river with top set AAA, im surprised to be honest you dont just call considering i dont see why QT is not possible here... ? (im perfectly okay with your first raise tho on his 900 kind of blocking-inducing bet" )
I mean you repeat a lot "this is a sunday million" ... I just call his 12k bet here on a sunday million lol.
Enlight me please.
Well the thing I forgot to mention, is that this is the Sunday Million. Haha. I'm just kidding (well, it is the Sunday Million, but see you see what I mean!)
I made this last, allin raise on the river here because I think the times that he has me beat (QT specifically, only) are fewer than the times I have him beat, and he calls my shove (If I shove and he folds JJJ every time, and calls with QT every time, I'm not accomplishing much). But I think he can definitely have KKK here, JJJ, AJ and KJ primarily, for hands that I beat and will call a shove. He can have some QT as well - it's a legitimate worry, but this player raised initially from early position, and many players just won't be playing QT in this position. Especially not QT offsuit. So I'm thinking he may not even have much QT to begin, but he always has AJ always has KK always has JJ and has a lot of KJ as well - all of which I'm pretty confident are calling my shove.
Does this make sense? I'm hoping it's not one of those thoughts that's only existing in my own mind and has some legitimacy to it in the eyes of others. Thanks for the question here!
GL,
Nick
I donk know if that make sense to be honest because im a fish in MTTs, never played them :)
Having said that, your reasoning seems to be perfectly okay.
4bet river on this spot in a HUSNG is a snap call for me but not even always a reshove but maybe i run very very bad... hehe
In a MTT, i just need to trust you coz i really dunno them.
Thanks a lot for your kindness and simplicity anyway !
I appreciate that you're even willing to consider trusting my reasoning here. I know it is difficult to trust in an idea that you do not directly see yourself, or do not entirely agree with. Experience in these spots is just so important. It will allow you to see how things happen in these spots. It will give you real instances to think about, instead of just an abstract idea.
I hope this is easy to follow, but you are right that it is going to take trust in what I say for now, and experience to verify my conclusions or come to your own in the long run.
Hey Nick, another great video.
I recently got here on runitonce.com and found so much good material.
I love the way you played every hand and, just that 3-bet with 9-10d was a little too loose for me, but now i understand that more aggressive style is needed to be able to get deep in these kind of tournaments.
Anyway, i learn so much from every video you post, thanks!
Thanks Darko :)
I just rewatched this video, I'm pretty happy with it, at least from a standpoint of how I explained my thoughts at the time. It was very clear and detailed, but not too slow. I may change the way I play some of these hands today though. However the T9dd hand, I would 100% 3b this hand PF in this situation. Darko, if you made a rule for yourself that you always 3b T9 suited in these positions in freezeout tournaments, I think you would be better for it. The hand is just very good in a lot of ways. If you 3b this hand, it's not like youre playing a super crazy, loose style or anything. This hand is 37 suited or something, it's T9dd!
Hi, Nick, started to see this serie and im enjoying your thought process, i think you explain all your movements very well, so thank you in advance.
Just have a few (noobish) questions though, if you don't mind to help me:
I remember one hand where utg opens and you make a tiny 3bet (i guess it was tiny, i mean, for me it was tiny) to ~2x his open. Why so small? Why not 2.5x? Is that to give the utg opener to call you with worse hands when you have KK-AA? Even though there are regs who open a somehow quite range utg, it doesn't happen quite often. In that case, i believe you had QTo. Whit these kind of hands (QTo in this case), shouldn't we be 3betting 2.5x once these are hands we don't wanna call, so we 3bet them to fold to a 4bet?
I might be missing something, but to summarize, my doubt resumes to this: why making a 2x 3bet with hands we will fold to a 4bet and not a standard (i believe it's standard) 2.5x? You make 2x to make it cheaper for you (once you are folding to a 4bet with those hands), once you believe the result is the same with 2x or 2.5x? Aren't we giving a good price to the utg opener to call our 3bet by 3betting small? Once QTo is not a good hand to flat, shouldn't we 3bet big?
Im trying to improve my 3bet sizing and im counting on you to help me.
Thank you, you're just great.
Francisco,
Great great post. You asked your questions in a very clear manner, and with much detail. That's great for me. And I have some good answers for you :)
The 3b was 3450 over a 1525 open. So, 3450/1525 = 2.26. The 3b was small, but 2.26x isn't small enough to be unreasonable. I agree that 2.5x is more "standard", and a better size overall. If I were playing this hand today, I would make it 2.5x for sure. I think you are exactly right - 3betting to 2x gives our opponent too good of a price to continue.
In general, I try to keep my bet sizes the same size if I have a good hand or a bad hand. If I have AA or QT here, I would be making a very similar 3b size. I do change it a little bit based on the strength of my hand, to encourage a more desirable outcome (i.e. 3b smaller when I have AA so he's more likely to call).
Does this fully answer your question? I am happy to continue this discussion if not. Also, I am sorry for taking so long to respond here.
Nick
Hey Nick, you're one of my favs and definitely one of the reasons I stayed on with subbing awhile back....sad to see you in premium when I just reupped, but I can understand it.
I am completely in tune with your hand reading and postflop game for the most part, but bc I never really grinded cash online (nlh) and didn't get into watching training sites will a couple yrs ago, I feel like I am missing the basics of where, when and why we're three betting in hands like the 109ss hand.
What are the stats, factors, stacks we are looking for when making a play or evaluating it preflop. If I had assumed the opener to be weak, I would in practice usually flat in an MTT and maybe 3B in a live ring game....as I like to reduce variance in MTTs and put pressure on weaker players with position in ring games.
Am I doing it wrong?
I feel like im really missing these three bet spots a lot that top players get and it's one of the final pieces in making me a solid MTT player at lower limits.
If there is a video series on here to help, i'd be all for it too.
I think the 3bet call with 66 vs a 15 blind open is pretty bad. His opening range is so polorized to premiums that your 66 are crushed. I think its an absolute fold pre. If he has marginal hands he wants to play he will shove. Prob already had this comment but im to lazy to read it all :)
Youre talking about dont want to bust this tourny and then the next hand when someone shoves 4bb EP, you jam a healty stack 25bb all in with 66 with 5 players behind for a max coinflip situation and the risky of running into another big hand, i dont like it.
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.