Henry Lister great vídeos m8!! ATM playing and beatting NL10, obviously I am making the enffort to improve daily and your thinking process is helping me a ton!! There is something I would like to ser from RIO: How to analyse hud stats/data in general and get usefull info from good sample! Dont know if its possible, but would be great. Thank you once more coach �� greetings from Portugal
1) 6:30 with 88 on 863ss. BTN vs CO 3bet pot. When Henry Lister face a XR, I always wanna 3 bet this spot even with top set because of scare cards if opponent has JJ-99 region and an ace falls on the turn, he will slow down. Where he might stack off those hands on the flop. I am going off the premise lower stake players are more value oriented and less bluff heavy (merged), so want to just pile money in against them when we have value and not worry about protecting our calling range.
2) 25:50 AQo CO vs MP when you face a 4bet in this pool, I thought AQo would be closer to a pure fold given the lack of aggression factor. Then with a 1 SPR not going to realize equity very often. Are we calling just to continue on a flop like JT8 or flop a pair and hope villain spazzes? About 2 minutes previously you mentioned UTG can 4 bet AQo vs your CO JJ, but treat it as a 4 bet or fold and never call spot. I have a hard time distinguishing between IP and OOP calling range in such low SPR spots. In layman's terms why is AQo OOP (UTG VS CO) a fold vs a 3 bet and AQo IP a call CO vs MP vs 4 bet? I know position matters, but I would think AQo still dominates some of the 3 bet range making up for lack of position. Where as AQo IP vs 4bet gets dominated a lot.
3) 32:30 Jc4c BTN vs SB. mention check back 6c5d3s and bet + folding without clubs, so Jh4h more of a bet fold, but what about Js4s & Jd4d? I thought having OE + BDFD (to go with the same suite as top pair) would be more of a bet and continue vs a raise?
4) I noticed a lot of half pot sizing being used 1/3 or 1/2 on flop and 1/2 or 3/4 on the turn, but predominately 50% sizing. Is this an exploit? I'm used to seeing turn sizing being polarized with 3/4 to 1.5x.
I think the community as a whole loves your analysis and looks forward to more of these videos. Hopefully see more post audio videos where you are not timing out or rushing the analysis (as you said more relaxed fashion), but I know you do a wide mix of videos. Glad you had fun playing this pool and hopefully see more videos against this pool or student reviews of these lower stakes. Also #2 was my main question if you don't mind going pretty in-depth on that I would REALLY appreciate it! Thank You!
2) It's close in both situations. I don't want to call AQo to a 3 bet in the tightest formations as it's too dominated and you also will not realise as much equity out of position. COvMP is a slightly looser formation and we benefit from being in position. These are two reasons why AQo is now more attractive than in the former scenario.
I've also found that monker solutions agree that you should mix call/fold COvMP IP vs a 4 bet and LJvCO it mostly folds with some frequency 4 bet and a slither of call.
To sum it up you should therefore mix call, fold (and 4 bet when facing the 3 bet) in both scenarios.
Great Video! I appreciate you working through your thought process with us. Henry Lister One question about the AA hand at the 12:18 mark. You mentioned that you would balance the 4bet with some Ax and suited broadways. At smaller stakes like this in a LJ/HJ/COvBN spot where we are out of position when called, do you prefer a more linear or polarized range to 4bet with?
These videos are my favorite! I'm currently playing NL25 so learning the exploits that are more applicable to my pools is extremely helpful. I enjoy the zoom videos because you get to go through so many examples and as others have said, your thought process and analyses are always incredibly informative.
Hey Henry, enjoyed the vid as usual. At 14:30. Understand the logic of pitching more low suited connector stuff given lower eff stack, but struggling to see how we can claw back our 3bet here with a call with AQo. At 1 SPR, our positional advantage is quite eroded as we basically have to fold to most cbet sans pairing our Q or A or better. If opp checks, we are again in a awkward spot given low maneuverability with a hand that likely has little SD value.
As SPRs get lower we are forced to call with hands that do better in terms of raw equity instead of implied odds. Therefore suited connectors become less appealing whilst hands that can make a good pair (AQo) become significantly more attractive as they do realise their equity more often (i.e pair).
In this video we call 7.5 to win 23.75. Given stack depths are so short we do not need to take reverse/implied odds into account (this is where speculative holdings such as 67cc benefit more greatly). Instead we just look at the raw calculations and see if we can win enough to justify the call. I think we can win this pot just over 31.5% of the time therefore making this a slightly winning call. Assuming we just call to stackoff when we make a pair this is going to be breakeven to slightly winning vs most player profiles.
But 2 points. 1) Wouldn't we expect a 70bb stack 50NL player to be less likely to have a developed GTO 4betting range with things like KQs, KTs, A5s, etc? If we assume a fairly face up range, AQo doesn't do well vs this. 2) Given lower SPR pot we would be less likely to realize our equity further devaluing our preflop odds.
If we only get to see flop and his 4bet range is face up, we only have 18% equity. I get we can bluff, but most likely OP on flop line is bet or shove. And if check, as pointed out above, we have a awkward spot to construct a bluff.
Thx, Henry, for a lot of valuable videos and your way of explanation both simple and complicated details of different aspects of poker. It is a pleasure to listen to your clear speech.
Seed2Shade Possibly. If you believe that is the case and wish to try and exploit villain by overfolding then this would be the correct adjustment. However on what grounds are we making this assumption? Do we have data or significant reads on shortstacked fish in this pool to know this is rarely A5dd and mostly just AA-KK? -
Ultimately the spot is close and we have no significant data available in the hand to make either option significantly better than the other. If we assume the fish is more likely weighted towards an overly nitty 4 bet range than one which is too wide then this pushes the AQ towards a breakeven scenario rather than a slightly +EV one.
It therefore comes back to the original argument which is 'it's close' and it doesn't really matter whether or not you call or fold here.
Around the 8-9 min. mark, I totally understand the mentality of never folding a set and I personally would flat the flop vs 3bet in that spot as well. However, on the river I'm struggling to give V really any bluffs, and very few value hands that we beat. These are spots that I am currently struggling with, I think this hand needs to be folded.
The 7 on the river completes 45 and T9, both of which could have raised flop and barreled turn. The flush is there and I just don't think we can make this river call. I'm not seeing people take this line with the As enough to justify it. Not enough combos of 66/33 to make it profitable vs all the flush and straight combos.
Maybe this is just a micro stakes meta that differs from your regular games, but I very much believe that people are under bluffing rivers.
We are in a loose formation meaning ability for villain to have more bluffs is perceived higher. We also dominate part of his 'value' range being a set of 3s, slowplayed overpair or some merged hand like AsJx. Our opponent could be bluffing with a hand like AsQx or KsQx with. We are getting 3-1 to call down a set. This is a call without significant information on villain.
In order to justify an exploitative fold we need data to allow us to exploit. We do not have that here and so we proceed with the standardised play which is to pure call.
Hey Henry, for changing the stars setups you can change it to a normal layout - not the software itself. If you want to have "help" like starshelper offers, starscaption is now compatable with the new aurora grafics.
Pokerscientist or Piosolver - I have made a video with referral link to Poker Scientist in a previous video. Otherwise check out my 'how to study and get better' video.
Thanks Henry, great job! You look so refreshing and vibrant, do you work out regularly? What you do to keep you in great shape physically and mentally? Cheers.
No working out as of past 4 months due to lockdown! But can definitely advise taking some walks, enjoying the small things in life (coffee and friendships) and don't aim to get your dopamine from poker alone...!
That was a gutsy turn barrell with middle set lol on the scare card 7 multi ways at 16 minute mark. 2 points about that as this video was great for my current poker environment.
One of those stacks is also a double stack once the 7 hits the turn.
Can this be an automatic check with a hand like QQ if one of the stacks is a double stack also?
This would be easier to double barrell the 10-10 on a more pro day right/ a non weekend?
I have heard that if you are new to a stake, that playing with a double stack is bad. Lets say I move up to 50 NL, soon, and I get a double stack.....can it be fine to leave yourself with a double stack on the weekend to generate more action, especially at your normal stake?
Nice comment on database vs pio importance also. Thanks. It gave me a lazy day Monday study idea. At 19:57 i think we could turn our hand into a check raise bluff but we probably want J-x to bluff more so we can unblock Q-x;. If this sounds horrible let me know. I know youre future ev is massive here so its obviously ok to pass it up.
Loading 31 Comments...
Henry Lister great vídeos m8!! ATM playing and beatting NL10, obviously I am making the enffort to improve daily and your thinking process is helping me a ton!! There is something I would like to ser from RIO: How to analyse hud stats/data in general and get usefull info from good sample! Dont know if its possible, but would be great. Thank you once more coach �� greetings from Portugal
Feedback = Really appreciate listening to your comentary at these stakes, very informative. Also.. you look great! cheers!
Thanks, appreciate the positive words in all forms!
1) 6:30 with 88 on 863ss. BTN vs CO 3bet pot. When Henry Lister face a XR, I always wanna 3 bet this spot even with top set because of scare cards if opponent has JJ-99 region and an ace falls on the turn, he will slow down. Where he might stack off those hands on the flop. I am going off the premise lower stake players are more value oriented and less bluff heavy (merged), so want to just pile money in against them when we have value and not worry about protecting our calling range.
2) 25:50 AQo CO vs MP when you face a 4bet in this pool, I thought AQo would be closer to a pure fold given the lack of aggression factor. Then with a 1 SPR not going to realize equity very often. Are we calling just to continue on a flop like JT8 or flop a pair and hope villain spazzes? About 2 minutes previously you mentioned UTG can 4 bet AQo vs your CO JJ, but treat it as a 4 bet or fold and never call spot. I have a hard time distinguishing between IP and OOP calling range in such low SPR spots. In layman's terms why is AQo OOP (UTG VS CO) a fold vs a 3 bet and AQo IP a call CO vs MP vs 4 bet? I know position matters, but I would think AQo still dominates some of the 3 bet range making up for lack of position. Where as AQo IP vs 4bet gets dominated a lot.
3) 32:30 Jc4c BTN vs SB. mention check back 6c5d3s and bet + folding without clubs, so Jh4h more of a bet fold, but what about Js4s & Jd4d? I thought having OE + BDFD (to go with the same suite as top pair) would be more of a bet and continue vs a raise?
4) I noticed a lot of half pot sizing being used 1/3 or 1/2 on flop and 1/2 or 3/4 on the turn, but predominately 50% sizing. Is this an exploit? I'm used to seeing turn sizing being polarized with 3/4 to 1.5x.
I think the community as a whole loves your analysis and looks forward to more of these videos. Hopefully see more post audio videos where you are not timing out or rushing the analysis (as you said more relaxed fashion), but I know you do a wide mix of videos. Glad you had fun playing this pool and hopefully see more videos against this pool or student reviews of these lower stakes. Also #2 was my main question if you don't mind going pretty in-depth on that I would REALLY appreciate it! Thank You!
2) It's close in both situations. I don't want to call AQo to a 3 bet in the tightest formations as it's too dominated and you also will not realise as much equity out of position. COvMP is a slightly looser formation and we benefit from being in position. These are two reasons why AQo is now more attractive than in the former scenario.
I've also found that monker solutions agree that you should mix call/fold COvMP IP vs a 4 bet and LJvCO it mostly folds with some frequency 4 bet and a slither of call.
To sum it up you should therefore mix call, fold (and 4 bet when facing the 3 bet) in both scenarios.
Great Video! I appreciate you working through your thought process with us. Henry Lister One question about the AA hand at the 12:18 mark. You mentioned that you would balance the 4bet with some Ax and suited broadways. At smaller stakes like this in a LJ/HJ/COvBN spot where we are out of position when called, do you prefer a more linear or polarized range to 4bet with?
4 bet ranges in looser formations are generally linear and you 4 bet calloff the top of your range, folding the bottom of that range.
These videos are my favorite! I'm currently playing NL25 so learning the exploits that are more applicable to my pools is extremely helpful. I enjoy the zoom videos because you get to go through so many examples and as others have said, your thought process and analyses are always incredibly informative.
Keep up the great work Henry!
Hey Henry, enjoyed the vid as usual. At 14:30. Understand the logic of pitching more low suited connector stuff given lower eff stack, but struggling to see how we can claw back our 3bet here with a call with AQo. At 1 SPR, our positional advantage is quite eroded as we basically have to fold to most cbet sans pairing our Q or A or better. If opp checks, we are again in a awkward spot given low maneuverability with a hand that likely has little SD value.
What do you think? Thanks!
As SPRs get lower we are forced to call with hands that do better in terms of raw equity instead of implied odds. Therefore suited connectors become less appealing whilst hands that can make a good pair (AQo) become significantly more attractive as they do realise their equity more often (i.e pair).
In this video we call 7.5 to win 23.75. Given stack depths are so short we do not need to take reverse/implied odds into account (this is where speculative holdings such as 67cc benefit more greatly). Instead we just look at the raw calculations and see if we can win enough to justify the call. I think we can win this pot just over 31.5% of the time therefore making this a slightly winning call. Assuming we just call to stackoff when we make a pair this is going to be breakeven to slightly winning vs most player profiles.
But 2 points. 1) Wouldn't we expect a 70bb stack 50NL player to be less likely to have a developed GTO 4betting range with things like KQs, KTs, A5s, etc? If we assume a fairly face up range, AQo doesn't do well vs this. 2) Given lower SPR pot we would be less likely to realize our equity further devaluing our preflop odds.
If we only get to see flop and his 4bet range is face up, we only have 18% equity. I get we can bluff, but most likely OP on flop line is bet or shove. And if check, as pointed out above, we have a awkward spot to construct a bluff.
Thx, Henry, for a lot of valuable videos and your way of explanation both simple and complicated details of different aspects of poker. It is a pleasure to listen to your clear speech.
Thanks!
Seed2Shade Possibly. If you believe that is the case and wish to try and exploit villain by overfolding then this would be the correct adjustment. However on what grounds are we making this assumption? Do we have data or significant reads on shortstacked fish in this pool to know this is rarely A5dd and mostly just AA-KK? -
Ultimately the spot is close and we have no significant data available in the hand to make either option significantly better than the other. If we assume the fish is more likely weighted towards an overly nitty 4 bet range than one which is too wide then this pushes the AQ towards a breakeven scenario rather than a slightly +EV one.
It therefore comes back to the original argument which is 'it's close' and it doesn't really matter whether or not you call or fold here.
Fair. I don't have access to Poker Stars but from my database from lower stakes, 4bet range's are fairly face up in general.
Around the 8-9 min. mark, I totally understand the mentality of never folding a set and I personally would flat the flop vs 3bet in that spot as well. However, on the river I'm struggling to give V really any bluffs, and very few value hands that we beat. These are spots that I am currently struggling with, I think this hand needs to be folded.
The 7 on the river completes 45 and T9, both of which could have raised flop and barreled turn. The flush is there and I just don't think we can make this river call. I'm not seeing people take this line with the As enough to justify it. Not enough combos of 66/33 to make it profitable vs all the flush and straight combos.
Maybe this is just a micro stakes meta that differs from your regular games, but I very much believe that people are under bluffing rivers.
We are in a loose formation meaning ability for villain to have more bluffs is perceived higher. We also dominate part of his 'value' range being a set of 3s, slowplayed overpair or some merged hand like AsJx. Our opponent could be bluffing with a hand like AsQx or KsQx with. We are getting 3-1 to call down a set. This is a call without significant information on villain.
In order to justify an exploitative fold we need data to allow us to exploit. We do not have that here and so we proceed with the standardised play which is to pure call.
Thanks for your reply, I enjoyed this video format a lot. The way you explain your thought processes in real time is fantastic.
What do you mean by being in loose formation? I'm not familiar with that term
Nelsonwelson Looser formation = button vs cutoff
Tighter formation = LJ v HJ (ranges are alot tighter)
Generally looser formations give the opponent more combos/possibilities to bluff with.
Hey Henry, for changing the stars setups you can change it to a normal layout - not the software itself. If you want to have "help" like starshelper offers, starscaption is now compatable with the new aurora grafics.
And there is soooo much value in your videos ... keep up the lower stake session. So useful!
Hi, great video thanks. You touched on my biggest shortcoming, lack of aggression.
You mention finding the right combo's and the right spots for aggression, not ATC.
Any advice on finding/learning these spots to expedite the process?
thanks
Pokerscientist or Piosolver - I have made a video with referral link to Poker Scientist in a previous video. Otherwise check out my 'how to study and get better' video.
Hey man, great video. liked it a lot & got a ton of value for different spots. would love to see more like this
great stuff. the no-hud analysis is helpful. would love more of these.
Thanks Henry, great job! You look so refreshing and vibrant, do you work out regularly? What you do to keep you in great shape physically and mentally? Cheers.
No working out as of past 4 months due to lockdown! But can definitely advise taking some walks, enjoying the small things in life (coffee and friendships) and don't aim to get your dopamine from poker alone...!
:)
Great video, I love the way you are into ranges in your analysis, could you share which preflop ranges do you use?
A variety of different ranges but for no ante or straddle specific game formats (zoom in particular) monker preflop solved ranges.
That was a gutsy turn barrell with middle set lol on the scare card 7 multi ways at 16 minute mark. 2 points about that as this video was great for my current poker environment.
One of those stacks is also a double stack once the 7 hits the turn.
Can this be an automatic check with a hand like QQ if one of the stacks is a double stack also?
This would be easier to double barrell the 10-10 on a more pro day right/ a non weekend?
I have heard that if you are new to a stake, that playing with a double stack is bad. Lets say I move up to 50 NL, soon, and I get a double stack.....can it be fine to leave yourself with a double stack on the weekend to generate more action, especially at your normal stake?
Nice comment on database vs pio importance also. Thanks. It gave me a lazy day Monday study idea. At 19:57 i think we could turn our hand into a check raise bluff but we probably want J-x to bluff more so we can unblock Q-x;. If this sounds horrible let me know. I know youre future ev is massive here so its obviously ok to pass it up.
Thanks if u get time 2 answer, nice video.
33:04- love this comment and reaction ��������
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.