$50/$100 HUNL: Battling Fiilismies
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 16 Comments...
What do you introduce yourself as in the beginning of the video? I listened to it like five times and I can't figure it out
barewire
~20min left table J63ss flop and 33min left table A63hh, if Fiilisimies over-cb's , isn't the best counter to c/r bluff less, c/r value more+ expand value region to more vulnerable stuff like 6x and 3x
Why wouldn't we x/r wider overall? Both with bluffs and with additional protection hands. This would be my plan against someone who is cbetting too wide (especially too wide with bluffs that have overcards to 6x).
Excellent video as usual. Whenever I see a new barewire video it just lights me up :)
At 13:52 you mentioned he is more likely to check high diamonds with a pair, but the fact that that he has a pair shouldn't that make it more likely that the opponent has a flush? And inturn make him more likely to bet?
Also at 22:00, at the right table, don't you think your call with A4 no club against 1/2 pot is way too light? I am almost positive that pio would fold in that spot .
13:52 - are you referring to his likelihood of betting turn or river? I think it's pretty rare for non-nut flushes to bet turn and in practice this turn just checks through super often with all hands.
22 - you appear to be correct, assuming there's no exploitative benefit to calling wide here. I ran a quick sim that shows A7+ calling with either club, but A4- only calling with Ac. Two overcards are pure continues and Q9/J9 type stuff is mixing with clubs. Good catch!
Great vid as usual. one quick question:
39:30 table 1 with JJ on T85 two-toned flop, do you always choose 30% pot with this class of hand? I assumed you were going to use a larger bet size on that board with that specific hand. Am I looking at the situation wrong, or is a smaller more frequent bet strategy with your range more effective here? Thanks in advance!
I don't generally use multiple sizes on this board in heads up, but I can't say for sure it's not worthwhile. Villain has lots of 2pr+ and good draws on these textures, so my default size is the small one.
I think we see this hand class using large sizes quite often with restricted preflop ranges (ie 3bet pots in general, or in certain 6max setups). It's definitely a hand that likes to size big when it can, but are we going to have enough hands that want to size large here to make it worth creating a separate range?
Perfect, thanks so much..I was looking at the situation wrong. I don't play very much heads up NL and didn't account for the ranges being so wide. Simplifying with small size definitely seems more practical in this spot.
Great video as usual, waiting for 6max part
This is Great elite content . Really appreciate,
30:40
How do you randomise those hands when you prob turn with weak flush draw ? At 50% or more ?
41:00 Last hand
I think the 8 is not a card who interacts a ton with you value range here. I don’t see 89 raising the turn and 85 would be raising a lot on the flop.
Blocking Str8 and value is more important than bluff for me (especially when hero is polarized like that) , in terme of combo and blocking effect.
Do you prefer to call A8 or a hand like 78 , who blocks (76 75 combos) ?
Gl at the tables
He did say 87 is preferred bluffcatcher. I agree that blocking value is more important for calling river shove, because different villains probably like to bluff with different blockers here, but value range will always look similar . The question is which hands are best for bluffcatching beyond 87/86
Sorry I missed this earlier!
30:40 - I don't think we need to randomize much with our weak flush draws, we have lots of offsuit Qx to probe and we will have higher equity draws to mix into check/call or check/raise strategies. I'm betting fds like this one pure.
41:00 - I agree w comment below. Definitely prefer 87/86 but that's not nearly enough...if I'm choosing my 3rd favorite bluff catcher I think A8 is the one unless we always have 66/77 available in this turn bet/call range (I very much doubt this though). Maybe 46/47s are betting turn occasionally and would definitely want to call river if that was in this spot.
Really love the way you broke down the AKx board at around 29:51, I have been close to thinking about this spot the right way and this breakdown really crystallized the concept for me.
This video like always was worth the time TY
On the five-diamond board, shouldn't our split for bluffs be unblocking the K, since the most frequent no-diamond betting hands in our opponent's range will have a K in them? Given how easy it is to have one diamond in your x/c range and how hard it is to have 0, I wouldn't be surprised if we just bluff all Qx.
I end up giving this a closer look in Pio on a future video, but yeah, Qx should bluff river a lot given my options for zero-diamond hands. It appears to be too many combos, and Q9 is a reasonable non bluff, although I seem to have missed a turn lead...
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.