$500 6-Max Zoom NLHE (part 4)

Posted by

You’re watching:

$500 6-Max Zoom NLHE (part 4)

user avatar

Adrian Milroy

Elite Pro

Video Player is loading.
Current Time 0:00
Loaded: 0%
Duration -:-
Remaining Time 0:00
  • descriptions off, selected

Resume Video

Start from Beginning

Watch Video

Replay Video

10

You’re watching:

$500 6-Max Zoom NLHE (part 4)

user avatar

Adrian Milroy

POSTED Jul 03, 2013

Adrian cuts to the chase and zooms straight to the interesting hands in an effort to give them a more in depth treatment.

8 Comments

Loading 8 Comments...

Matus Kopf 11 years, 8 months ago

I think you are sometimes talking too much about rly standard spots.


The 7d6d hand I think we should be just folding the turn, unless we have some very good read on him being very unbalanced in barreling. When people jam here I feel this is often very unbalanced and weighted heavily towards draws, all NFD are obviously bet/calling as well as TT(folding would be rly terrible) vs some I would be b/c a hand as weak as AQo aswell. What hands are you shiping here for value? Do you have a calling range aswell? Wont you be overfolding the river since you have to jam turn with some of your value hands to be balanced?

I liked the 66 hand, at first it seemed pretty close, but he can have rly any flushdraw(stuff like 92s like you said etc) since he checked the BB and if hes valuebeting only Ax+ we have an easy call.

I am also quite interested in your limping strategy-why do you think its good?(people adjust poorly?). 

Adrian Milroy 11 years, 8 months ago

I can't argue with a fold on the turn with 76dd, I mean it would definitely be prudent, but as I explained in the video this is a rare play that I make.  I don't know who you're calling AQo here against, but I would have to think that they would have to be a "special" player...I'm never calling that light personally.  For value in this spot, I think I'd be shipping KJ/KQ against the right opponents, and sets/2prs vs anyone else...  Balance has no bearing in this particular hand because I have no history with my opponent, and probably never will considering we don't play the same stakes over a large sample of hands...  So I'm not concerned with overfolding rivers or having proper river calling ranges...

For the 66 hand, I'm glad you liked it.  I don't think he's ever value betting AXss high here and I'm still pleased with my play based on how the ranges play out when we get to the river.

Chael Sonnen 11 years, 8 months ago

Is there a video or post where you elaborate on why you have a limping range?

Adrian Milroy 11 years, 8 months ago

I've said it before.  I'm going to be very honest with you.  I moved up the stakes by open limping and chiseled my game accordingly.  As I moved up, I had to limp less. I built my own game from my experiences and thought process, and not from some strategy that I found somewhere or to emulate what others are doing...  I limp because its my style, just like 4Xing, making large 3bet sizes, etc...  And I don't think it hurts me whatsoever so until it does, I'll continue to do it.  I don't think open limping necessarily gives me an edge over the rest of the professional world that just open raises everything.  But since this is a different creative side of the game that I possess and many others don't, I would hope to be more experienced in the spots that are created by unique style of play, than my opponents.

Andrew Sweeney 11 years, 8 months ago

Nice video. I like the how you have increased your propensity to focus more on interesting hands relative to your last series. Although I do agree that you sometimes go into excessive detail on somewhat standard spots but at the same time I feel some of the ideas you discuss is great detail are not and I feel there are concepts you discuss that other instructors do not delve into which I have found quite beneficial for my thought process. On balance Id be happier if you kept discussion long relative to cutting back if you are having trouble differentiating between which thoughts us grinders at the lower stakes think are standard relative to which ideas would likely be foreign to us.

The 76dd hand, im more inclined to called here. For starters its hard for us to have any straight draws in our range 76 is the only one that seams even close to 'standard' and he probably expect us to fold it pre a decent % of the time. When we call OTT I think our implied odds are pretty good on our 6 clean outs, coupled with the bluffing value of having good fold equity on hearts.

Adrian Milroy 11 years, 8 months ago

Thx for the input.

76dd hand: Chances are, that all 8 of our outs are good, 6 seem "clean" (no hearts) and 4 seem "very clean" (we have a BD club draw on the turn now.)  With 6 outs, our odds of hitting are about 13.04%.  So lets approximate that to 1/8 = 12.5% for calculations sake.  We will call 7 times and lose 840$ if we never win the pot unless an 9 or 4 comes.  IF we stack him every time we hit an 9 or 4 (unlikely), we win 320$ + our stack (~440$) = 760$ which is less than 840$ so we are losing money in the long run.  If we give ourselves our full odds of 8 outs (17.4%), stacking our opponent every time we hit (about 1/5.8), we lose 576$ before we can win our 760$.  That calculation seems more appealing to make the call then.

However, there's a variance of poker that exists in between the ranges of two opponents in any one given pot.  It's not just whether we hit our draw or not (or whether someone wins a flip, or puts a beat on another), it depends on what are opponent has and what he chooses to do with it, not to mention factoring in the variance of river cards that don't actually improve any of our hands, but leans our opponent towards betting or checking depending on what it is...  If our opponent is bluffing, there's no guarantee that he will ship the river if we make our hand, and no guarantee that he will give up if we miss.  If he's got a big hand with tons of value, he might decide to ship for value on a brick river, or might decide with such a draw heavy board and a K out there, that it's best to C/C instead.  Our opponent might still ship for value on a heart river, decide C/Cing is better, or actually C/F.  

In this case, I don't know anything about my opponent, so with such a small window for profit based on making our hand, I thought it was better to fold or ship here.  This way, we fold out almost all bluffs and weak draws, and have our 17.4% vs. the big hands as fallback equity.  In the calling scenario, depending on how things mesh together we can have runs where he ships into us or Check/Snaps on an 9 river, and C/Fs on a Jd river and we bluff-ship.  On the other hand a 4 river can hit, and he C/Fs, brick rivers hit and he bluffships into us (in his mind) with Qhigh and wins, and other brick rivers, or heart rivers hit and he Chk/Snaps off our bluff.  We do have the benefit of position, but I feel that that is not enough in this scenario and we will very often be letting our opponent triple barrel bluff too often, and sometimes bluff catch on the river vs our hand that looks like what it is, a draw on a very draw heavy board.



Be the first to add a comment

You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.

Runitonce.com uses cookies to give you the best experience. Learn more about our Cookie Policy