2 Table $1/$2 6-Max Zoom PLO (part 1)
Posted by Leszek Badurowicz
Video Player is loading.
This is a modal window.
The media could not be loaded, either because the server or network failed or because the format is not supported.
Resume Video
Start from Beginning
Watch Video
10
Loading 17 Comments...
good video leszek. quick question, at 49:29 you open A765ds from the co for full pot, but AQJ9ss for 3x. could you explain why you do this? or if theres a video where you already explained this please link it below so i can watch. thank you.
Ohhh it's just an accident. Sometimes I open for 3x and sometimes for 3.5x and I don't think there is much difference between both options. However on the button your sizing can be much more important. Standard for me is 3x but I adjust it to blinds if necessary. Against passive blinds with low 3bet, full pot is usually better. Against aggressive blinds with very high 3bet you need to be more selective about your hands.
I was suprised when you decided to fold the set of nines on K96 2-tone board (@ 17 mins). But after you share your thoughts, it all makes sense. My guess is that you can make this kind of fold only when you know who you are playing against. Would you commit if you would have raised and get called by the same player in the button, and, let say, a decent player in the big blind? How relevant is the "there-is-a-recreational-limping-factor" in your decision process? Thanks for the great video, and I'm looking forward to read your book in english. I'm glad I won't have to learn polish :)
I think recreational player factor is important but even more important is position. Book1225 is in position so it makes no sense for him to raise with something like AQJ5 with nut FD as he doesn't block any sets, 2p and make other player fold lower FD's. Position is the most powerful on very dynamic boards like this and good players are aware of that. So if there is a decent player on the BB I would still act the same. However if Book was OOP, I would be happy to go AI as OOP his range would be much more draw heavy.
Regarding the book I am happy too and cant wait for the English version :-)
Hi Leszek, great vid as always.
@17 mins spot when you explained it's clear fold 99 on K96, I totally agree to your explanation and read on book1225. Yes, he is definitely winning reg. on this stakes, and his raising range especially against "YOU" is quite strong. Ofc, it also includes combo draw of FD+str8, however, KK is also the great part of raising range as you explained. All-in-all, I agree to your intuition that estimated EQ of you in this spot is not higher than 42%.
I think that the point is; "You know Him well, and He knows YOU well too" :)
In 49:20 we have two similar spots, but in the first one you decide to lead and in the second one you don't. Why you don't want to lead on KhThQs with nutflushdraw? seems like a good spot to lead instead chcalling especially if you chcall F and then you are faced with a bet on Turn.
Hey! Very good question!
So these are 2 different spots, even tough they may seem to be similar.
I think I explained in details my lead on table #2. On table #1 we have a different board texture. We have fewer hands that can c/r AI [only AJ, J9+FD, KK, 2p+high FD]
Because of that I will basically have 0% of donkbet on this board and always check to the agresor. On this board it will be very hard to balance your donkbet range. Another point is that PFR hits this board better than we do.
On K97dd we can donkbet some strong hands and still have a lot of decent hands in our checking range like naked sets, two pair, combo draws etc.
e.g. Donkbet: AJT+nut FD, QJT+FD, K9+FD, set+FD, weaker hands like AQJ9, AKJJ, QT98
Check/.raise: KK,99,K9, AK+nut FD, KQJ+FD, KJT+FD, K7+GS, etc.
As you can see - we can still balance both of those ranges. On this board the most difficult is to have a decent c/calling range that can stand some pressure on the turn, because most of your strong hands you will just c/raise on the flop. But that's another story.
On KQThh if we lead some stronger hands then our checking range will be pretty weak. It's very tough to balance both of those ranges. Therefore on #1 I will basically never donkbet.
Of course against weaker players feel free to exploit them they way you want, but against stronger competition I think you need to play your range in the right way.
I totally agree with folding the 99xx set in 13:30. I also think, that
raising pot and committing instead of minraise or 3x from the opponent is a sign of not wanting to see a turn card.
even if 50% of the time he has, lets say a FD+wrap combo, we still flip and the other 50% of the time KKxx is just winning. So its to our disadvantage to call against this range.
we also block small wraps like 78TJ, which makes it more likely that he does not have a wrap.
Hello Leszek. Thank you for another great video.
At 49:20, don't you think that your decision to bluff the river was made too hastily vs a solid thinking reg (which our opponent obviously is, considering his stats)?
I get that you got some sets/J9 combos in you range and you pretty much would've chosen the same line with them, but considering all the points I've stated above and the level of our opponent, wouldn't a river check/fold be a more solid option?
At 36:08, is it likely enough that our opponent will go for a second barrel in order for a check/raise line to be justifyable? The following points come to mind:
Wouldn't it be more profitable to charge all of his possible sets/straights/lower flushes on the turn and not to give all his 2pair/set combos an opportunity to boat up for free?
Thank you so much for all your content by the way. It's all pretty awesome in an educational sense. My mind is completely engulfed with it at the moment. That's why I ask so many questions =)
Hey, sorry to reply after one month but somehow I missed your post. Usually I reply on a regular basis.
1) So back to your question. Actually I still think this is a good bluff. I agree that 2 FD's are missed but it doesn't matter since nobody bet on the flop or on the turn. If you bet on the board with 2FD's it is possible that you have FD. So when FD misses on the river it is more likely that you have a busted draw. But I didn't bet, so why should my oponent put me on the busted FD? ;-)
2) Also why should our oponent have a busted FD? :-) He didn't bet at any street so he is as likely to have busted FD as other hands, excluding the strongest ones
3) I think many players will bet KT+ on such a draw heavy turn. And at the same time we still could be having straights. This is not the board where people bluff so imo it is really a good spot for a bluff.
Your question is very good but this particular player had very low turn fold IP after flop check back. This means he has strong check back range on the flop so my exploitation in this case will be not to semi-bluff too much ;-)
For the 99xx hand, wouldnt it not be optimal to just check?
You have a good hand but not a great hand, 1 blocker for the flush which is better than nothing.
The ranges of hands that can raise you are too large, K9-QJ10 with FD etc etc.
You are in middle position, so even if the guy after you fold you still have to deal with 1st position.
We are not happy with any raise from either player. So we have to think about that there are 8 cards on the field that we have to deal with(2 players) and the chance of someone not connecting well feels very low and someone connecting very well is high %. We are happy with a call or a check I feel. We also block one of our FH draws with the 6
Card we would like to see on turn/river, 6(2x left), 9(1x left), 4(3x left) 5(3x)(4 and 5 have to be runner runner essentially)
Mediocre on turn/river, K(3x left), 2(4x left) 3(4x left), A(3-4x left)
BadFlush Cards(min 8x left), Straight Cards(10-3-4x, J-3-4x, Q-3-4x, 7x 3-4x) (which also have straight flush draw implications too, but thats not really too big of a worry)
That would be my reason for the check atleast. The odds of the turn/river are not in our favor currently. At best maybe a coin flip situation. Im at work so I can run the numbers currently, but I hope you catch what I am trying to say.
Action could still go bet by Villian 1, 3bet by Villian 2, easy fold for you. It could go check-check-check, check-check into 3x call
While the I see the merit to bet(make people pay to see stuff) I feel the positions a little weird for us to do so
I think we can be checking with naked K9 or K6, e.g. AKT9 without FD, or AKJ6 no FD. However 99 are just too strong. Checking will be missing too much value. We look very strong so I expect BTN to raise mostly with KK and very strong hands that are more or less flipping against us. Also there are many worse hands that they can call us with like KJT, K+FD, FD+GS, 978 etc. Of course most of turn cards will make a new nuts, but it doesnt mean we will check-fold. They can't hit every possible card.
Also if BTN checks, I am pretty happy to stackoff against MP.
This is maybe more of a general question but it was prompted by a specific hand in the video, the 3467r just before the 9min mark.
You talk about ranges - that on turn you would have also some stronger hands in your check-call range as not to get exploited and how on the river as you are in the bottom of your range you should fold if facing a bet.
I understand this as a theoretical concept, but I have a really hard time of applying this to practice as a way of thinking about specific hands and my strategies against my opponents strategies. What makes it difficult is the fact that there are so many different board textures and situations and against any particular opponent you rarely get to the same situation so many times that you can make a definite analysis of their approach.
One thing which actually was very enlightening about this was in when in some of your previous videos you talked about breaking the strength of a players flop range based on several stats. But I don't see that approach necessarily being useful in these kind of specific board textures when our opponents might have differing strategies.
So if this is a bit of a ramble, I apologize for that :) Maybe my question is that is there some method that you use to break down this whole question in to approachable parts, and not to feel overwhelmed by it all? Thanks!
This kind of thinking requires some effort but really helps in many situations. In order to develop that you need to start thinking about your range in different spots and how you would play your top, middle and bottom range. There is no shortcut, you need practise. E.g. in this example
Flop
Top range: wrap, A7+, A4+GS
Mid range: 47+GS, A+GS/OE, naked A4
Bottom range: naked Ax, 7+GS, KQJ7
Turn
Top range: sets, straights
Mid range: A4+ w/GS+, A7, our hand
Bottom range: naked A3/A4, 47+GS
River:
Top range: sets, straights
Mid range: A45,A75, etc.
bottom range: 347, naked A3/A4
So on each street we can divide our calling range into 3 parts and on the river we can easily fold bottom range, call with a top range and middle range will be very player dependant ;-) Dont worry that on the flop or on the turn your hand is in the bottom range because your range is protected by stronger hands. The most improtant is that your call is EV+ against your opponents range. Hope that clarifies a little bit ;-)
Thanks for the in depth reply! I should just start shoveling the snow then :)
might be a bit too late, but would like to put in my few cents.
the 9865 (3b BNT-UTG) ~21min seem like counter intuitive fold OTT for me, so I checked it thru PJ. seems like you were right.
we need to have 34% to breakeven shove here (or around this), but only having 28% (hopefully the x/r range OTT I set is not too bad)
thanks for your videos.
probably the best PLO essential content
Hey, thank you for that screen. I can agree with most of UTG range. However imo AKQ:ss is a hand that he would either donkbet on the flop or lead on the turn but the result should be the same - we dont have a pot odds to call.
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.