2 Table $1/$2 Zoom NLHE Live Session
Posted by James Hudson
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 48 Comments...
We've been missing you!
Zoom + live commentary = awesomeness. Going to watch now!
Yeah these are the best.
Yeah, glad to see another video from you, you are def. one of my favorites.
Enjoyed watching the video, maybe a future video on normal tables live with 6-8 tables, could be a good idea, i know id enjoy that :)
Don't listen to Swirel. Zoom is a million times more enjoyable. Both to play, and to watch.
1 question james about the Ac4c hands at the beginning, where u 3bet BU vs CO. You said that you will check flop on that pretty wet board to induce. I dont get that philosophy at all...isnt esp that board way too wet to do anything but betting, cauz we cant - as seen - stand any heat on later streets? would prefer to checkback the A92r board way more
With regards to the hand in question, I check back because villain should have a decent number of hands in his range that can check raise the flop and few worse hands that can check call (KQ, QJs, J10s). When I do check back the flop I should probably be calling 2 barrels a decent amount of the time with my hand. However, on that river I now beat very few hands in his range unless he's turning almost all his hands <Ax into bluffs (77-88, KJs seem like the only obvious hands to bluff).
the AQ hand 2 min in where you get raised on an Qd6d3x flop: what is your calling range on the river? this is the perfect run out for your hand. He's repping 3xdd (maybe peels a couple combos of those pf, maybe), 1 combo 66, 1 combo 33, 1 combo QQ, and maybe 1 or 2 combos of AA or KK combined (given that most will 3b pre). On the river you're getting 3-1 on your call meaning if we give him 6 value combos he only needs to be bluffing 2 combos of air here for this to be a profitable call. I just don't understand how you can fold this. Maybe he's never bluffing and you're not being exploited by folding, but this hand should be at the top of your bluff catching range as it blocks combos of AA and QQ, and if he's merging KQ or something you're ahead.
more importantly, if you believe that his range for raise barreling is so heavily weighted towards value I think you can probably fold the turn.
lol kept watching and it sounds like you feel like it was a call too. oh well.
Totally agree with themightyjim. Also If you are planning on folding the river if he bets again I hate calling since most people will often follow through with their whole range in situations like this. You also state that the river is a good card for you which I agree with despite that you fold getting very good odds. I do agree that he should understand that the 6 isn't a great card for him and should be less likely to bluff but I still think he can get stubborn with a missed Fdraw and on top of that he could even be value betting worse (KQ) or the same hand.
james I don't really agree with your logic that sometimes you have the nuts so you aren't being exploited by folding here. The question is how often he's trying to raise flop and barrel you off your hand, and what your flop cbet continuing range is. If you're basically only continuing with the nuts and calling the river with the nuts it's certainly exploitable.
You may be right that he isn't exploiting you and is never taking this line without value that is ahead of AQ, but if that is the case then folding the turn (maybe even the flop depending on notes/stats) would be the way to exploit his imbalanced nutted pure value range.
Regardless it appears that your read/stats weren't strong enough to fold flop or turn, and if that is the case then I think the river is a call. If you are justified in folding the river then I'd fold the turn instead when he bets a size that is setting up the old half pot river jam. I just don't think the b/c-x/c-x/f line can ever be best with this holding on this run out.
Folding the turn could certainly be the right play if I had a read on the villain. However, I`m curious which hands you call the flop raise with in this spot that then fold the turn and which hands do you call the turn with but then fold the river? You certainly shouldn't (most of the time anyways) have a turn calling range that is always calling the river for the obvious reason that villain should never bluff rivers and likely only bet high equity hands on the turn.
I think it's definitely possible that you continuation bet this flop in this situation wider than I do and therefore feel obliged to call down lighter than I would in this spot to protect your ranges.
As far as the numbers, lets say for arguments sake that I get to the turn with 60 combos of hands (9 combos of sets, 12 combos of overpairs, 24 combos of KQ/AQ, 15 combos of flush draws). Villain bets 57.50 into 85.20 so I need to defend roughly 60% of my hands to stop him from auto profiting on his turn bet. Therefore I should be defending roughly 60 x 0.6= 36 combos of hands. Lets take 1 combo of quads, 6 combos of full houses, 1 combo of trips, 12 combos of overpairs, 12 combos of AQ and 3 combos of KQs which gets us to 35 combos. On the river villain bets 102$ into 200$ so we need to defend roughly 67% of our range that gets to the river. 67% of our river range would require us to call down with 0.67 x 35= 23 combos of hands. We have 2 combos of quads, 4 combos of boats, 12 combos of overpairs, 50% of AQ combos (12 total, only using 6) which would get us to 24 combos defended on the river.
So with those numbers in mind, with the range I'm getting to the turn with I only need to call the river with my AQ's just under half the time to be unexploitable if villain bets 100% of his flop raising range on the turn and 100% of his turn betting range on the river. Both of these conditions seem unlikely and I already think villain's flop raising range is going to be strong to begin with given that I raised from early position, he was in position (so he could just call with a bunch of hands comfortably), and that there was a player left to act behind him.
Whether or not I'm going to have to take some of my strong hands out of my flop bet calling range because they 3 bet the flop or whether you bet call the flop with hands like QJ is going to change the math a little on later streets but I think this post should show you that the decision on the river is likely a lot closer than you thought and likely just an easy fold in reality.
I hear your arguments but aren't your ranges a bit off? Or at least me personally wouldn't have that many boats, quads on the river since I'd be 3betting a lot of them on the flop. I think same thing goes for overparis to some extent. Also with flush draws I'd be 3betting a healthy amount on the flop as well (especially nut flush draws). So I'd think that AQ would be higher in relative hand strength on the river (at least in my game).
Also vs this particular player he seems to be a 30/25 over what you mention 800 hands. I know you say that his W$WSF is low but that could be a sample issue. I'm thinking that he may be wider than we think here? But having that in mind I think one aspect is if he could be capable of flatting some QQ,KK, or AA pre. given his stats and that you don't have any massive history I'd say it's unlikely and that adds to my feeling that AQ should be a call on the river.
I wouldn't really be 3 betting overpairs on the flop here very often at all and I actually think that slow played overpairs are going to be some of his mostly likely flop raising hands in this spot. If you still disagree with me in this spot show me why. Break down your range preflop, on the flop, on the turn and finally on the river. I think I'm able to fold some AQ combos (if not all of them) here and be perfectly fine in terms of not not being exploited. If you feel differently from a balanced/GTO type perspective show me why. If you think I can make an exploitable call due to villain's range being overly bluff heavy let me know what you think he can/does bluff with in this spot.
When this video got released I remember seeing a lot more comments and answers from james on other hands in this video.
Did they get deleted and why?
This is the second part. Here is the first part: http://www.runitonce.com/nlhe/hudson23/
Hey, I am well aware of that.
When this video got released I am almost 99% sure two different members posted up a lot of questions about specific hands and James answered them, but can't see them now. Maybe I dreamt it?
Deleted since it was unnecessary...
here are my disagreements with your points, although you've certainly strengthened your case:
1) I think I cbet that flop with a wider range and thus have to continue with a wider range on the turn when he makes a relatively small flop raise (22 into 65 thus I have to continue with 67%).
2) sometimes I play back at the flop both as a bluff and with made hands as I think it's difficult with low FDs and some strong made hands to play this hand OOP. For example if you plan on calling all 12 combos of overpairs when we get to this river I'd suggest that some of them would make more sense as a 3bet on the flop since you're not going to be able to make perfect decisions on the turn and river with those hands. So when I get to the turn and river I think a few combos of overpairs (and maybe even a combo of middle set) could be gone from our range. (fwiw I disagree with your thought that slowplayed overpairs are a large part of his range. I wouldn't give any one more than a couple combos of AA or KK that didn't raise pre, and those hands aren't going to be raise the flop that often especially with a diamond since they'll simply want you to just barrel off).
3) I think AQ is a better bluff catcher than AA or KK on the river, due to blocking 1 combo of QQ (and hand very likely to be played this way) and 3 combos of AA. KK offers no real blocker value, and while having AA would block 4 potential combos of AA for our opponent, I don't really expect that all of the AA combos would be in his pf flatting flop raising range.
4) lastly, I really think the turn should be a fold. Basically, my opinion is that regs will often raise a flop to get a cheap river cards, try to force a quick fold, or as a semibluff (along with all of the value reasons). But when they barrel the turn and set up a half pot shove they're not often checking back the river. I don't think his range is going to be dynamic or balanced in this spot. I think he bets the turn the river shove is coming like nearly all of the time. if you can't call the river with AQ, I wouldn't call the turn.
lastly let me just say I really appreciated you taking the time to reply and give some solid evidence for your line. I don't totally agree with your assessment because I feel that attempting to play exploitatively again villain (based on stats) is probably going to be more profitable than trying to play GTO (even OOP). So I would try to exploit villain's overly tight range (that I don't believe is balanced in his continued barreling) by find a fold earlier in the hand. If I got to this river for the reason that I thought he has some decent semblance of a bluff range (like a couple of hands) then I'm just not going to fold what I think is the best bluff catcher.
You're assessment of the hand was excellent in the thread (despite my disagreement), and more commentary on why you feel that attempting to play with balanced GTO-type ranges OOP is better than attempting to play exploitatively based on stats and reads would be interesting.
thanks again for the thoughts and replies. much appreciated.
James got a lot to do but here is as fast break down. I did this in a hurry so very possibly that I made mistakes or made wrong assumptions which I apologize for if that's the case. Will have more time to look it through later.
First like I said I don't believe slow played AA, KK are much of his range at all because of what I said before.
Villain Flop: Sets, Perhaps 1 combo of QQ and 3 combos of 33 and 3 combos of 66 (which obv will be reduced later on due to the turn and river cards.) Flush draws, AQo + AQs, maybe some KQ. A ll his AA+KK that he didn't 3bet which I'm questioning how many those really are?
Villain Turn: Same as flop but perhaps take away the KQ and a few of the flush draws.
Villain River: Same as turn but take away some flush draws and maybe some AQ..
My range would look like a lot like yours with a few modifications (added in bold)
TURN
2 combos of sets (would probably 3 bet the sets almost always) , 6 combos of overpairs (would 3 bet say half of the combos), 24 combos of KQ/AQ, 10 combos of flush draws (would be 3 betting a few of these)
So 45 Combos Total that I see the turn with
Have to call with 27 combos (60%)
2 combos of nuted FH or quads, 6 combos of overpais, 12 combos of AQ + 6 combos of KQ = total of 26 combos that see the river.
RIVER
Have to call with 17 combos (67%)
2 combos of nuted FH or quads, 6 combos of overpais, 9 combos of AQ = total of 17
So in this little example we have to call with 9/12 combos of AQ so 75% of the time. If we aren't calling with AQ the only hands I'd be calling with here are the few nuted hands and the overpairs which are 8 combos and less than half of the combos in order to be GTO. Sure we could go for an explo fold but vs someone we don't know much about with those stats and his range I gave him I don't like it. If anything I think we should go in the other direction and go for an explo call, calling with all our AQ hands.
moral of the story, it's a close spot. and my initial response might have read a little more antagonistically, and if it did I apologize. enjoyed the discussion, and thanks for the contribution Rob.
Thank you for having this discussion James and Jim. Really interesting and informative. Very clear how our thoughts differ because we play our ranges differently on the flop.
Hey Hudson, I just come to say that I like your video. I enjoy this live video, your thought process helps a lot. Thanks.
more live vids pls, they are valuable for me in terms of learning (i seem tio remember things much better from live play vids and can translate the thought process over to my play in game better than a replayer vid)
Good video.
Re: AQs hand:
Putting ranges to one side momentarily, and making a decision based purely on actions, sizings, and timings, villain does look very strong. In addition, villain is a very good player and not a random fish deciding to overvalue KQ or bluff a missed FD on the river.
Raising with a fish to act on the flop gives weight to a strong hand. Also, any solid player knows the board pairing on the turn decreases the likelihood that you can find a fold with your TPTK+ hands. Plus it reduces his concerns that his [possible] OP is being slow-played by hero's [possible] set.
AA makes the most sense of course, and not just combo-wise. Positionally it's very likely that a good reg will often just flat pre, seeing as your raise is from EP (as his 3B would look strong) and there are three players left to act with an attractive squeezing opportunity.
I think reluctantly folding the turn is probably the best option, no matter how exploitable it may appear.
I think people do a better job these days of picking bluffing hands with equity and often following through with at least a turn barrel but you could be right that in a vacuum against this player pool we could perhaps find a turn fold.
Hey james, at 7:45 you c/c AJdd on QJ9ss and I was wondering why you wouldn't just bet there because it would make your hand very difficult to play on later streets based on the board texture. You normally advocate having some sort of protection for various turns such as a ten or the ace of spades before taking such a face up line.
Like at 26:30 you just bet there with KK because you didn't have a club in your hand so why wouldn't you do the same for the above hand? Is the sole difference that in the latter situation you can actually get a good amount of value from the fish? Or am I missing some other variables that I should be considering? Also would you still bet if the guy in the KK hand was a standard reg?
In the first hand I have villain marked as a recreational player (green tag) even though I don't have more than 5 hands showing up on him. This makes me believe that he's more likely to be wide preflop and be less aggressive postflop. So I should be able to get him to put in some bets with zero equity hands but also not put me in tough spots by 3 barreling often.
In the second hand, I bet because the player is a perceived weaker player due to his stack size and I also have position on him. I doubt he check raise bluffs me very often so I should be able to get away with one or two thin value bets before checking back the river. Bloating the pot OOP with these kinds of hands makes my life a decent amount more difficult than it does in position due to my ability to check back turns or rivers when in position.
I hope that clarifies that a little. Let me know if that still doesn't seem right to you.
If in both of those hands you were against a standard TAG reg what would you do differently?
Also in the second hand if you were OOP against a reg (in CO against button) would you still c/c without a club or are you just betting? Betting makes the hand a lot easier to play but I think it might be a bit too thin to bet for value. At the same time c/c seems like the right play but it makes the hand harder to play without a club in my hand. I know it depends on the villains post flop tendencies but as a general game plan what would you do?
For the first hand I would just bet because like I said our hand will be tough to play OOP on such a wet board. We can get value from AK, ATs, KJs, JTs, TT, T9s, and QTs so it's not like I would bet here purely to make the decision easier. Also I think there are better hands we can include in our c/c range like JTs, AsJx, KsJx, TT, T9s, and sometimes QQ and KsQx, which give us protection on various turn cards.
In the second hand I would check back because the board is fairly dry besides the FD which makes it less likely that the board would run out badly and we have position. There's not much value in betting imo because we block a lot of gut shots with two kings in our hand like KQ and KJ which are always calling a flop bet. So we're hoping to get value from Tx (we block some KT) and flush draws which might c/r us off our hand. So I think our hand just plays better by checking back flop to induce bluffs on the turn.
In the third scenario, I think I would still c/c the flop since the board is fairly dry compared to the first hand and I think betting the flop kind of turns our hand into a bluff since I'm not sure if we can c/c a blank turn (maybe you could correct me on this). I'd rather not bloat the pot OOP with a marginal hand that has only 2 outs to improve and no back door equity.
For the first hand I would just bet because like I said our hand will be
tough to play OOP on such a wet board. We can get value from AK, ATs,
KJs, JTs, TT, T9s, and QTs so it's not like I would bet here purely to
make the decision easier. Also I think there are better hands we can
include in our c/c range like JTs, AsJx, KsJx, TT, T9s, and sometimes QQ
and KsQx, which give us protection on various turn cards.
I'm fine with playing our range like this. I'm generally going to have a few more flush draws/ straight draws in my range than most here though so I don't have to be quite so worried about being blown off of my hand on scare cards.
In the second hand I would check back because the board is fairly dry
besides the FD which makes it less likely that the board would run out
badly and we have position. There's not much value in betting imo
because we block a lot of gut shots with two kings in our hand like KQ
and KJ which are always calling a flop bet. So we're hoping to get value
from Tx (we block some KT) and flush draws which might c/r us off our
hand. So I think our hand just plays better by checking back flop to
induce bluffs on the turn.
This also seems reasonable. I think both decisions are going to be somewhat close in EV and are going to depend a decent amount on how our opponents play and how we want to construct our ranges.
In the third scenario, I think I would still c/c the flop since the
board is fairly dry compared to the first hand and I think betting the
flop kind of turns our hand into a bluff since I'm not sure if we can
c/c a blank turn (maybe you could correct me on this). I'd rather not
bloat the pot OOP with a marginal hand that has only 2 outs to improve
and no back door equity.
I'm fine with check calling the flop in the third scenario. We just need to make sure there are some flush draws and Ax in our check calling range too. Also, it's not the end of the world for a hand to only be able to call one street. We shouldn't build a range where 100% of our flop check calling range is calling the turn because we then disincentivize people from bluffing turns.
Hey man nice vid!
Think the format is great 2 zoom perfect for a live vid, just 2 tables to concentrate on and also getting allot of hands in. Altough i also like regular table sessions or reviews.
@15.10 you barrel down UTG-SB w 78cc on K62cc 2o 9o vs what seems to be a tighter player.
TT-JJ = 12 combos, But i would also give him KQ and AK both 16 combos maybe discount a little bit.
Then i also would think he might fold TT some of the time on the turn.
Idk i would give up allot on rvr there as i dont see him fold Kx.
Is my thought process wrong ? could you elaborate why you think its a good 3barrel spot ?
James, could you do a video where you walk us through running the math on that AQ hand? I think some of us could really benefit from this. Thanks in advance if you follow through with my request. Oh, and I think these types of videos are great, thanks for making these. What are your typical games and stakes?
Yeah I think that would be a good topic for a video so I look forward to your reasoning for a fold with the AQ on the river when you were getting pretty good odds with a pretty good hand. Thanks for the quick response too!
Timestap: 32.57
Looks like you are checking your left to see if you can open A4o. Would you have openend? Why or why not?
I probably need to cut down tables a bit to think about all those dynamics going around. It might be a bit to much to play 6 tables. On the other hand, with 6 tables I can get experience + moving up faster.
Thank you for explaining!
Assistindo!
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.