$25/50 Three Tables PLO Zoom (part 2)
Posted by Phil Galfond
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 10 Comments...
Good video
50:13 Ac8h8s2s review table
you discuss leading club rivers if you were to call and you also mention the fact that you think you might x/r some ac hands on this turn. I think both of those considerations speak to the fact that x/r this turn might be worth considering. It doesn't seem like he can viably three bet a x/r and it also seems that even thought he might not delay Cbet a lot he might do it enough that you have some immediately turn fold equity in addition to the potential river fold equity you will have on CC and possibly the straightening cards in which 88 is relevant. I think there is also a very small chance that you can check blank rivers and have him check back a worse hand. Do you feel that these considerations might be overly optimistic? And if so wouldn't it perhaps be an argument for not calling that hand pre because not only is it a bad hand but in many instances it might be too thin to use its blockers effectively?
Very cool vid, Phil. I learned a great deal about PLO from it. =)
In this hand, by the way:
I'm not sure if you noticed it in game, but the flop was checked around. I think 87 and KK/AA with clubs would be betting the flop fairly often, especially 87. That said, what do you think about leading the turn? It can fold out naked AA/KK right away, and since you wouldn't run into many strong hands, I thought your equity + fold equity should make this play worthwhile.
-- midori
Thanks for the video. Enjoyed it.
46:00 AcQs8d7h where you lead/call a raise on 642ssh oop, this seems spewy to me. Do you stand by that play? I ask because I found it surprising. You mentioned you may bluff spades, however your blocker isn't the NFD blocker and most of his EP PFR range that hits this flop well enough to raise your lead is going to contain the NFD. Also you just have a gutter. And SPR is fairly low such that he is probably stacking off on many turns unimproved with his combo draws.
41:30 Table 2 AKJ9; on Q8956. Turn checks seems good for the reasons you stated. River looks like a good bluff spot given much of his range will be unimproved AA, KK and your 9x has near 0 SD value. Likewise there are plenty 7x PR+SD hands that you would check turn with.
Thanks for the video. Good job
Can you tell us how to get HM2 stats like cb on diffrent types of boards? (monotone etc?)
14mins into the video. top right hand table you have 4587ds. sorry if this offends you phil but that has to be one of the worse hands iv ever seen someone play. flop comes 722cc and u bet out $83 into a $400 pot WTF! The player re raises you and you flat call :-S turn comes As and you bet again. turn comes 3c which completes straight and flush draws and then you check behind WTF atleast try to bluff and represent the flush or 7's full. Worse hand iv seen in a long time phil
Don't be so quick to critique subjects you don't understand. Does Phil misplay hands?, sure he does. Although you'd be better off asking him about his thought process to learn instead of deeming it wrong. In this case he played the hand non standard yet well.
He has explained his choice for small sizing on paired boards numerous times when he holds an equity advantage yet a top end strength tie or disadvantage.
Firstly, you butchered the action. The turn was the As, not 3c. Phil had a cheap price to peel vs Berry's cr bluffs and to occasionaly improve when wrong vs 2xxx. When checked to Phil bet turn and Berry xc. River was the 3c and again you probably missed that this gave Phil a straight which has SD value vs some 2x non boats and Axxx cr flop bluffs so betting river would be a blunder.
Hi Phil,
Can i ask you why you use the pot size bet PF OTB all the time? What is your strategy here?
And thanks for this serie :)
First of all. I didnt ask you!
Second. The hand was played very poorly.
Third. Phil should of replied as the comment was made to him. I pay $100 a month which means i am entitled to my opinion. Phil should reply to my comment himself
Wow, what a childish comment.
Above all, paying $100 a month has nothing to do with entitlement to your opinion, dude. You do have access to all vids, yes, but pros are not obliged to reply to your (or our) every question. They often do, and Phil's definitely one of the more responsive ones, but you shouldn't take it for granted. Especially when this guy just got married the other day. :)
By the way, your original comment wasn't even a question, it was a paragraph full of dissatisfaction that probably came from your belief that Phil misplayed that hand. So when Zach chimed in and you said "I didn't ask you," it doesn't really make much sense because you didn't ask anyone.
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.