$5/$10 4 Table Zoom HU (part 2)
Posted by Kevin Rabichow
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 29 Comments...
Awesome series, Barewire. I do think the zoom format made it a bit difficult to focus in on some points, since there is a lot happening at any given moment(diff tendencies, frequencies(diff opponents)). Never the less, this is my favorite HUNL series so far. When watching RIO vids I dont often learn something completely new to my game, and that happened multiple times throughout the series. It probably was the zoom format that helped this, as you were able to cover a very wide array of concepts. So yea, I don't know if I love the zoom format or not, but I do love your vids! Stoked for the next.
Thanks for the feedback, much appreciated!
@3:50 As4s on Q3K6A, you mention that you don't have many bluffs, and no JT nuts. And also your opponent could have an ace with a better kicker (you have no kicker) or a hand that he was checkraising on a previous street and you make a large bet of 122 into 170. Why not bet smaller, because all these conditions are arguments for a smaller bet here.
122/170 isn't that big...is it? I mean i like 1/2 pot perhaps but his sizing is close enough to get the idea. Probably just execution error no?
If you bet larger with your range, you have to call larger/more raises also. So I'd rather bet 60 than 120 here, maybe Kevin loves his 72% button too much.
Your sizing (half pot) is probably closer to correct in this spot in theory given all the Ax I can have, although I think I understated how many bluffs I get here with.
I don't think not having JT is important, since neither of us will ever have it - ranges are capped quite low here for both players (AQ is the only big hand that makes sense for him, maybe KK sometimes, and I'm perceived to have probably A6 at best). As you pointed out I certainly just default to that size with my ranges where I haven't worked out a reason to bet a different size beforehand.
Hi Kevin, thx for the video.
You mentioned you didn't have many bluffs in this spot, why cant u start turning 22-55 into bluff to incentivize to call with Kx/Qx/JJ?
I'd usually not be defending 22-55 preflop, so I think that using hands like 98o and the likes are my best chances to bluff this situation. I'd definitely want to pick whatever air hands I show up with, because the amount of Ax in my range is quite large. A smaller sizing is also important as GameTheory pointed out, because of the lack of availability of bluffs compared to my frequent Ax combos.
In general, or against a player like I am Bobbie that likes to make small raises on the river, do you have multiple sizes for leading the river other than your standard 2.8x?
I assume you're referring to a river stab after it checks down? If so that's a spot that I use one size in.
i really like the zoom format. i think its best method for guaranteeing to get into interesting spots.
@46:30 table#1, we flat ad8s in bb to minraise from iambobbie, flop 9d-Th-3d, chk chk. turn Ah, we lead 72pct pot, why not protect our checking range here?
I am not leading here much, definitely checking with this hand in particular. Roughly what kind of hands make the most sense as leads ott vs. just having a cr and cc range here? If we have some weak draws it'd be nice to lead those and we can add in some aces and stronger hands but obv this card favors in position. Either way you ended up maximizing wayyy more value as played, :).
I seem to disagree with a lot of regs in this spot, but I have a leading range in spots like this that includes basically the hands you mentioned. There's some top pairs I'll check and surely everything worse than Ax, but when hands like Tx or 9x are already an easy c/c in most turn/river situations here I don't see much reason to check even more strong paired hands.
Kevin,
11:15 9c5c when your opponent (I am Bobbie) puts in the small raise on river (which I wouldn't do often for the record)...I guess Im thinking about it differently. If I was him I would keep it small w/ a raise for the following reasons:
-He is capped and his value hands are beat almost too much to raise.
-If I were in your shoes I would 3b this spot relatively a lot b/c you can have the nuts and he can't. THUS, If he's "thin" and you can check raise often... he should use a smaller size.
What do you think?
My river 3bet range will be really wide here because I can still have quite a lot of flushes and straights while I'm fairly confident his range is capped at 222 and includes hands as weak as 72. So basically if I'm not wrong I can 3bet shove sets+ and bluff however many combos that lets me bluff, which is a disaster for him if he's never strong.
I think it makes no sense.
If you are going to raise with a capped range and you choose a really small sizing how much value are you really getting with the play when you are re-opening yourself up to getting owned?
Well...so, yes obviously we all tend to agree that raising is bad (as I said in the above post). Reopening the betting shouldn't happen with these range distributions from villain's perspective. Agreed. BUT if you do raise (which is the assumption for discussion) and do so with a CAPPED RANGE and HARDLY ANY BLUFFS, then a large size is mathematically a disaster. You bet bigger when your range is more nuttier uncapped AND you will be bluffing more. 101 bet sizing is to always bet smaller with the weaker range and/or with less bluffs unless you are adopting some sort of explo adjustment.
I can go into the math if you want, but its been done so many times ad nauseum on this site I don't want to be redundant.
His raise size is most likely appropriate for the strength of value hands he's going to be raising and his presumably low bluff frequency. I don't think he should be raising at all unless he sometimes has the nuts and the EV he'd be losing by taking this line with the nuts is far too high.
Great series - I learned a lot!
95s perfect hand to bet 3 bet river huge
I don't really see the reason 95s would be a good hand choice, it looks to me like it blocks some of his worst value raises which is not what I want to be blocking. Are you just saying it's a good spot to 3bet bluff him or do you think 95s is a particularly good hand to use to bluff?
j36 r you have ace king and said you nearly always chk call here wth ak and aq. Do you not like to bet for value and protection and spots to turn barrel with the best best blockers. I think you win more money betting flop. range is protected by chk 6/3
i think i bet vs stations chk vs tags. your thoughts?
What's the timestamp for this hand?
5.00 bottom left table. Is there a ways to actually link the time? thanks for response
No way to link the time as far as I know, just needed it for reference.
You definitely make a valid argument for betting here, although I'm not convinced our blockers are any better than when we have QT, KQ, etc. Those are the hands I bluff here most often. Protection is definitely something I'm sacrificing here and that might cost me some EV. I'll be looking into this spot in more detail soon - if the result is anything interesting I'll think about putting it into a video.
ok nice one thanks :)
Also a tip for you when your running low on time bank. Leave the tables and rejoin :)
lol yep I definitely need to do this
Awesome vid! Few eye-openers and new concepts! Keep it up!
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.