12:00

2 Spots: AKKKhh Can you elaborate a little on why 4betting isn't good. SPR would be ~2 which make our hand easier to play while getting max in while ahead PF. Flatting still puts us in a tough spot with just an overpair yet a hand that we won't want to fold on many runouts (as played we probably folded a hand with >50% equity in a $1400 pot) . I'm not saying I think the flat call was bad instead that I thought it was close and it seems you didn't. I think I preferred the 4bet option.

TT24 on 93458hhh You said we arent repping any straights except maybe 67. Why do you feel that to be the case? Firstly, are you saying you would xc river if you had A2, or 26? Additionally if you apply your universal read that if people have enough to bet prior street and you xc and then they check when a FD arises they rarely have the FD, he should rarely have a FD. 

edit: you started 4betting much wider as the footage progressed, to the point you 4bet/6bet AQQ3hhh. Given he could be 4betting KKxx and that neither hand has great playability I am still thinking the AKKK hand was best to 4bet especially if AQQ3hhh 4bet is deemed as optimal. I also agree with your commentary that the fold on T56ss with BDSD BDFD and current best hand most often was too tight and was surprised you folded.

24:32 I haven't seen if you call river with QQ or not yet on T777 to avoid being results oriented. As PF 3btr IME I have called plenty of times in that spot and have NEVER seen a bluff. I think turn is close but river is a fold. Sure its a little exploitable to fold but until I see any evidence somebody is exploiting me in that spot I'm going to exploit them by not paying off. And as a little added bonus you can fold here from a range perspective given you have better than QQ often (KK, AA). 

39:30 QQ33 on K26cc I agree a cbet is probably best in vacuum and I think it is for range as well. Your 3bet range hits this flop plenty hard and we arent strong enough to be looking to induce. Yes he will float somewhat wide making turns tricky but given we have KK combos PF he prob shouldnt be calling with naked middle pair type hands. So FD combos are going to be most of his calls.

I disagree with your present Phil commentary yet agree with your past Phil play. I think its bet>xf>xc. I don't like xc because we dominate very little and our visibility is really bad. There is only 1 out we can confidently c/r turn with. All our other set outs either complete a flush or straight. Likewise when we miss we will have a hard to realizing our equity.

Why do you think at 100bb KKxxds is a better 4bet than weak KKxx. I think that it is the other way round vs wide 3bet ranges. Vs a wide 3bet range KKxx has an equity edge and by just 4betting with the weaker ones you push that edge, and manage to make a lot less postflop mistakes like folding out equity. For example with the AKKKx in the video. The KKds hands whilst they also have more of an equity edge preflop, actually play better postflop to the point that in some spots whilst 4betting would of been fine calling becomes better. I think at infinite stack depths 4betting a hand like KK74 rainbow would be bad and worse than 4betting the good kings. But at even up to 100bb seems like it has to be the other way round?

At 19:00 on the bottom right table, is it a mistake to check/call the AQ34?

I assume villain will always vbet lower flushes and check behind with 2pairs so that would mean the only way for hero to make money would be leading even without diamond blockers. And that would also allow us to lead some busted straight draws, as you mentioned.

Or is it the case that if we always lead AQxx and flushes our checking range on the river will be too weak? So vs a strong villain we will be blown off Axxx and weak 2pairs too often, so by checking AQxx we're protecting that part of our range.

What is the correct statement?

Hey Phil,

I really liked your point on the AA3 board about SET frequency being lower at certain 3betting frequencies.  I checked it out a bit, and on the AA35 turn, it looks like SET+ frequency is maximized at around 30% if he's 3betting 11%, is at around 25% if he's 3betting between 17 and 25%, and is as low as 20% if he's 3betting 6%.  I'd never thought of that particular effect before, ty.

Hey Phil, how bout some deuce videos?

Quick question regards min 20 table 3 (bottom right), 3bet Pot on T77fd. You say given you have less trips then villain here you decide to go with a more passiv game plan right? I am wondering how you come up with that conclusion because i think you have  trips+ at least as often as villain, probably a tiny bit more ( i ran a sim with my own 15% range (to avoid using the PPT ranking) and stoved vs a 90%!aa range (to make it simple) and cam up with you having trips+ 18% vs him having trips+ 17%?

regaarding postflop playability advantage i think that vs someone with a decently balanced 3bet range and good postflop frequencies on a lot of boards they end up having a playability edge because of how hard hands like say KKq4 rainbow become to play. And whilst you could argue that they have a playability advantage if you 4bet as you have a more faceup range. To some extent they do too and just the fact that once an spr reaches a certain inflexion point it doesnt matter how they play their ranges. The preflop equity advantage is too much to overcome. I guess the question is where is that inflexion point?

I think with the good kings you have the playability advantage, because your hand plays so much better there will be more times where they end up putting money in bad either by folding out equity incorrectly on turns or rivers, or by calling valuebets. I think that hands like good kings dominate parts of their 3bet range and whilst sometimes if you 4bet the money would of gone in either way or they will call and then fold ( a good result generally) i think with hands like this there will be more situations postflop with a higher spr where you put a lot of money in good. Whereas with hands like the weak KKxx, weak aaxx its hard to put in a lot of money in good apart from in spots where you are making big bluffcatches, which vs better players with decent ranges becomes hard to do.

great vid :)

seeing his 3bet% and joining this to autocall to 4bet, I think that 4betting close to 100% of KKxx can't be a big mistake at all 100bb deep. Just think about how often u can

 1) cbet and win a really nice pot (regarding to stacks)

 2) cbet, call the shove and see that u're a favourite (not that strange if our opponent is 3bet/c JJ with rags).

Anyway, also if he's stacking off quite well against us because he's putting us exactly on AAxx or KKxx, I think that we're still showing a small profit by the times he's simply c/f a x% of his range OTF and gamble in the range of 40-60% equity. (if some math genius likes to make a sim... :p)

OFC, put the stacks up to 150bb deep and 4betting bad kings becomes way less sexy.

@Phil I see u calling a lot OOP, can I ask u why? It's pretty clear that Eire isn't the kind of guy easy to outplay OOP. Also if he's opening close to 100%, why don't u give up preflop with the bottom of your range (let's say, a bottom 40%?) 

About when u're IP: seeing his gigantic 3bet %, why don't u just decide to limp a chunk of hands? I'm talking about: "Ok I limp. U raise? I call. Cbet flop? I call. Now play deep stacks poker, mate."

Hero loses less by defending wide oop than folding the bb preflop, given hero can play. Id like to hear as well when should we generate a btn limping range. I remember mr. Sulsky limping some vs isildurr1. Maybe he has some insight on this issue?