congrats for this new beginning as elite pro! but you said that you will make a last vid before since one you mentionned it in the promotion thread "The other is a fun one that's a pretty unique and cool opportunity relating to a past series I've done. I'm excited for that one, it should be a lot of fun to put together. " I was very excting about that one, do you still plan to do it?
As promised in his post, Nick released two Essential videos prior to moving up to Elite. The one you're referring to is this dual commentary video featuring BRICKANDCRAI. If you haven't seen that one yet I highly recommend you taking a look!
Good video and very good explanations! :) I liked this. Regarding your question about how to show the hand history, I like the way you do it here. Gives us a feeling of gameflow and dynamics that you just dont get by only seeing the highlighted hands. Continue with showing all the hands please. And thank you very much for this content :)
Excellent feedback, thank you. I'm with you on which video format you prefer. I enjoy seeing dynamics develop, and the game-flow across every hand. I worry that the series might be too long in this format, and that people may become tired of it by the end. Perhaps I will mix in some other videos in between videos from this series, so there is a little more variety.
Thank you for the feedback! It's especially valueable becasue I expect most people to have the opposite opinion. But as a video-watcher myself, I'm with you, I prefer seeing the entire hand history.
About 10 minutes in. Do you advocate min raising as a standard this deep pre anti, or is it just better for you specifically since you mention you like to open more hands at this stage than the average player?
Haha. How's that (and this) for a quick response! I'm moving the hand history very quickly because there are so many hands to get through, and I want to be efficent in producing this series. One consequnce of this approach is that I may end up moving on from an explanation too quickly. If you'd ever like more explanation on a topic mentioned in the video, please mention it here, and we'll get some in-depth discussion going.
Hi, Nick, congratulations on your promotion, sir. Deserved achievment :)
37:40, I think I like turning our hand to a bluff OTR (not being result orient). Given its a reg, we can expect him to valuebet all the two pairs+. And when he bets turn, check tiver he is often gonna have Ax, cause he is unsure with his hand and hoping for showdown. In the same time we can easily have all the nuts and really dont have bluffs in this spot (I mean its very hard for him to find the bluffing hand for us according to our line) and I doubt he ever can assume that we turn a pair of Q into a bluff here, cause its so thin and pretty much nobody turns Q into a bluff here :) => so we can credibly bet river large and fold out all the random better hands (naked Ax; KK; even KQ split, which he plays this way from time to time). I dont think its an obvious bluffing spot to take but its pretty delicate and I have feeling that betting river is slightly better than checking for showdown.
*Obv this way of thinking is good only vs good reg, not vs fishy opp who no brain check/calls AK otr.
41:45, why dont you overcall with 99 here? It looks pretty same like the 44 hand earlier in the video: sure we get worse price here, but its still about over 20:1 (including deadmoney) and MrAnderson shouldnt 4bet here a lot, so we can safely expect going flop 4way (and our friend Bino is on SB with us).
41:55, dont you like going ahead and 3bet here with 22? More agressive line pre here has some decent merits, considering we are OOP (when we just flat pre its hard to extract value OOP, when we hit our set vs good opp; 3betting let us take the pot down pre; when we get flatted after 3 bet its good to be deceptive with hand like 22 postflop when we hit etc)
48:34, Do you fold if he shoves river in ur face? Can we really cal here? I think we cant be 100% sure he cbets all his FDs on the flop, cause its good reg, he can try to be tricky against you etc. In the same time our range contains all the nuts and he cant bluff here often.
Hey buddy, let me apologize to you for taking so long to respond. Especially after you left a comment with several stimulating questions. I had plenty of time to respond before, during, and at this point even after Tcoop - so there is no excuse, it is my fault. I will do better for you (all) going forward. And you gave me a nice congrats on the promotion, (smh) at me not responding more quickly. Thanks for that as well.
37:40 KQo OTR: Yeah... Looking at this again I see a bluff, too. This river isn't great for him, especially on the surface, but I don't think it's bad enough that he won't value bet all of his 2p combos. That caps his rivercheck range at AK. Vs that range I have a very good chance of getting a fold on this board. My range is strong here, and I can credibly have all the nuts. I can even have AA and QQ... Although if he has Ax that all but eliminates any thought of his that I can have AA. 22 and 88 also get here this way, though 2 may fold PF. AQ gets there this way always. As does my JThh combo. I think the combination of him having Ax a good amount here, and the fact that he should/probably will be willing to fold it a fair amount, makes this an attractive bluff spot. And as we've noted, I can't have any/many bluffs! It feels dirty turning a hand with this much SD value into a bluff, but I don't really know why I feel this way - it looks like a great spot to do just that. I like a big bet size here if I do bet since he's capped and I have tons of nuts.
41:45 with 99: I should call here. My primary reason for not calling is pretty silly. In the past I was way too loose in these situations, and once I realized this I allowed my aversion to making this same mistake again overcompensate by folding these spots too often. Our price is good, and Andersen isn't going to be 4betting much. As you noted, our relative position, IP vs SB, is good. I posted more thoughts on this hand in a thread, the link is in the post below.
41:55 with 22. I don't like any of my options here! 22 is just such a poor hand. I like flatting more vs a tough villain. I'm not going to be 3bing a crazy high percentage in the SB vs such a villain, so I'd prefer my 3b blufs to have more playability (78s). Calling allows the BB to come in to the pot a we hold a hand that is okay with that outcome. This BB plays fine, so it's not a great outcome for us, but it does increase our pot odds. I really don't mind folding here, but the price is good preflop. It will be relatively hard to extract value here, but check calling a set here has a some benefits 1. It strengthens our check call range, which will be top pair 2nd kicker-heavy (think KQ a lot) and 2. A strong villain will be value betting thinly and bluffing multiple streets more often than someone who is passive, so we will get value by checking calling this villain more than mots. I'm not a big fan of that reason(ing) though. I think the value of 3bing 22 and flopping a set is overrated. In such a spot, say J82, we're repping JJ+ anyways, so having an extra 3 combos of strong hands in our potential 3betrange isn't going to make a meaningful difference in how villain plays his range vs us. If we were 200x deep, or IP, I would like this option more. 200x deep it does cool things for our range in giving us stronger hands vs a x/r and board coverage (we now cover the sets).
48:34: Yes I fold if he shoves. Barring some sort of hero read that he's one tabling and his FB status just got updated to "hot date tonight!!". You nailed the reasons - we are very credible in having many many nut combos, so he cannot bluff us too much. Even if he has the Ad blocker, he won't expect us to fold many flushes. He is more likely to make a tricky flop check back with a FD than he is to bluff this river. Many players are taking this tricky check back line I've noticed.
Fairly interesting hand at 41:43. I will also post in the HH forums.
Easy fold with 99 here after a 3bet and a cold call in the sb?
both hands at showdown shocked me.
Another great vid. I especially like how you play you play AQ IP on a few occasions and your explanation on 3 betting a more polar range pre ante with Suited connectors and KK/AA
Pumped for the rest of the Vid. Was live railing the last few hours of this, and will be interested to see your holdings in a number of spots.
Cliff notes, I should call with 99! I give some reasons why I didn't in your thread, but I wish that I had. I also talk about the hand a fair amount in the post above this one.
Thanks for the feedback man! It's good to hear that you're getting something out of the concepts discussed, and not just a certain line in a specific hand. Wow, that's fun that you saw this live! As I recall, there weren't any crazy hands I'll show up with. I think the most interesting pot was my calldown with 77 if you recall. That'll be a fun one to go over.
Hey nice video, but I don't understand how we can profittable peel 3 bets so wide pre-ante in the S500. Like for instance the T7s you opened UTG+2, which I think is a little of line already and then we still have to peel the 3 bet? It was the hand where you minraised and he made it 456 or so on the button. We're getting 3.4 to 1, but I still don't see how we're ever gonna make this a profittable play by adding a hand as weak as T7cc into our OOP UTG+2 vs BTN flatting range no matter how deep we are. We're gonna have to give up so often and the range your giving him of 97s and J7s in his bluffrange vs yourself seems a little optimistic. You have to remember that an average reg will not be playing as wide as you will, people are nitty in the Sunday 500 esp pre-ante and in the earlier stages.
Hey man, this is a great great question, I'm really glad you asked it. It's funny, reading your comment makes me realize just how wide I play... It does seem like it could be bad, pretty easily, especially to the naked eye. There is a method to my play here, and I'll explain. Before I get into all of the details involved in this concept, I want to say one thing about this spot in a vacuum - As I sit here now, I do think this is too wide. Both to open, and to peel the 3b. I wish I had folded this hand preflop at both of the points where I could have. I believe I said in the video that this was too wide, so hopefully viewers realize I recognize and acknowledge that this play is likely a mistake, and at a minimum this is a hand that doesn't need to be a part of my strategy.
Now, the details of the concept.
I open hands like this, seeking to get 3b, so I can call. I do this to exploit two common errors I observe in many of my opponents: 1. Sizing their 3bs too small. 2. 3bing too tight of a range in the early levels (particularly pre ante). Many players have the mindset that they're going to "coast" until the antes come into play. As such, they aren't three betting aggressively - they have few bluffs in their 3b range. However, when they get dealt AA, they look down at their hand and feel compelled to 3b. So they 3b.... Often times too small. Now I am more than happy to take my equity disadvantage preflop with say T7s vs AA, because 1. I'm getting better pot odds than I should (they 3b too small) and 2. My implied odds are through the roof.
For these purposes, the deeper the better for me. In the Sunday 500 we start out 250x deep. During this level especially, and the next two, I'll look to get 3b as much as I can, so I can attack their face-up range. In fact, this is the biggest problem I have with the T7s hand in question - we're not deep enough. At 100x I don't think my implied odds are good enough at this stack depth. Maybe at 150x I can profit. As the stacks get more shallow, another problem arises for my tactic here: Villain 3bs wider for value. At 250x deep most players know that it would be crazy and foolish to get QQ AIFP, so a lot of times they don't 3b it in the first place, especially vs an EP open. But at 100x, and vs my ridiculously wide range, hands like QQ and JJ start to get 3b for value more.
If I'm confident that villains range is something like AA, KK, and AK, well then that leaves a great many boards I can attack. I open 68s UTG, villain 3bs AA in MP. I call, and stacks are 250x each. Flop is 753r. I check, villain cbets. I x/r. Villains entire range is now a bluff catcher! And he has to bluff catch 250 big blinds more... Ouch. I can x/r and barrel at will on so many boards, and by the river, he's quite often folding. This has been my experience. This tactic has worked well for me in cubed and rebuy tournaments when we start deeper. In the video I mentioned villain could have some J7s and 97s stuff. Well, I opened this hand thinking he (many villains, not him specifically) would not have those hands in his 3b range - that he would be 3bing far too tight. Me mentioning those hands in the video was my thoughts sort of drifting to hand that I might be 3bing there OTB :D I should have made this more clear in the video.
Now, with all of that being said, this answer I just gave you about this strategy that I'm often implementing in the early stages of tournaments is a subjective one based entirely on my experience, and not at all on science. Basically, I have no math to show you for these spots. Human memory is far from perfect, so I suppose it's entirely possible that I only remember the times when I x/r a a wet board and barrel down, and villain flashes AA faceup as he folds on the river. Or the times I make 2 pair and win 150x vs a villain who is too stubborn to fold his bluff-catching AA. Perhaps I conveniently forget the times when my bluff fails and I bust in the first level, or the times when I check raise two pair, only to discover that villain 3b me with 76s and flopped a straight (his range wasn't nearly as tight as I thought). I'm curious how you feel about my response here? Please reply to this and let me know. GL.
@Nick Rampone This was a great answer! Personally I use this strategy myself in the early stages of the sunday million. I also find myself doing the same mistake that you said something about, exactly that I continue this very fun and enjoyable strategy, when the blinds get bigger, simply because this is the poker I really really enjoy to play! Discipline is hard!
Also something that I find worth mentioning is that I find myself do this when my stack increases while the villains stack decreases. Where I sit with 200+bbs, and they slowly get to under 100bbs. Hard to adjust away from such a fun way of playing! Glad I figured this discipline leak out, and thought Id share it :)
Anyways; the answer was great! I really like your content :)
Will we see a review of the super tuesday as well? :)
Discipline is hard, haha, funny quote. You're quite right though - it is hard. After all, if it were easy wouldn't everyone be disciplined, and receiving the benefits of such an approach? =) The first step to becoming disciplined is realizing you're undisciplined. You've had this realization, and honestly that's half the battle. Now it's about discovering and understanding when is the right time to push the limits, and when is the right time to show some patience. This is the art of poker!
As far as the Super Tuesday goes, I'm not sure. I feel like after this series I should create some content other than a HH review, just to give people something different. Especially those who prefer other formats. I'll listen to any and all feedback, and we'll see what happens. Thanks for giving your opinion in these threads.
Sure, no trouble to ask of course. I do things like hide from search and not have an avatar in the hopes that it will make me stick less in the memory of my opponents (hmm, these videos aren't exactly incognito, hah). I'm not sure that it actually works, but it couldn't hurt, unless of course friends are trying to look up my tables! :O My friends just open up the lobbies of the big tournaments and look for my name in them. A good thing to do to see if I'm playing is to check the Big109 or something first. If I'm not in that, I'm probably not playing. It's a bit more work, but still manageable! Cheers man.
41:45, why don't you over call with 99 here? I'm guessing it has more to do with philborts post flop play than it has to do with you being worried about the original raising putting in a 4bet?
I should have overcalled here with 99. My price is very good, and justifies a call. And you're right, I'm not concerned about a 4bet here much at all. For one I didn't think Philbort would be nearly this wide, and that yes, he would apply significant pressure postflop, to the point where it would make this preflop call a losing play. Thinking on it now, I imagine that he can't play his range postflop in such a way that it makes my preflop call losing. I discussed other reasons for my fold and why I wish I didn't in posts above, and in this a thread which is also linked in a post above.
obvious question about 99 in 41:45 and then the 22 in 41:55 - what do you flat here with ? I know not many players would like to 3bet 22 OOP, but do you flat hands like 76s ? Because you kinda need them to balance your checkraises. And do you agree that it would be easy fold vs 3x openraise from any solid reg no matter how deep because we just wont get paid often enough ?
And one overall question : I am ok with you having those far above average 3bets. And I am ok with your minraises if you think you have good enough edge preflop. But it doesnt really go together. Shouldnt you either make std 3x opens and maybe 4x SB and UTG if you are making 3,5+ 3bets IP 250deep? Or make smaller 3bets if you go for minraises? Shouldnt it go hand in hand ?
Your question about what I flat here with is making me think: I need to have a better plan in these spots. I tend to make a decision on the fly in these spots, and I don't even have some major rules of thumb for guidance. I need to change this going forward. Generally speaking though, hands that will allow me some semibluffing opportunities. JTs, etc. Hands like 99 are mostly binary in these 4 way spots - We make a set or we don't. Even if I'm winning chips overall, I don't like that 7/8 times I'm losing 6BB. Looking back at the hand again, yeah.. We're plenty deep, this should be an easy call. My reasons for folding were poor, and the reason for calling pot/implied odds was paid far too little attention to.
Oh, now I see that you're asking what I flat with in the 22 SB spot! The top half of unsuited high card hands, and all of the suited ones, down to T9s. I'll 3b 87s. I tend to play these spots without a x/r range. No I don't necessarily agree that it would be an easy fold for 3x vs many regs. I will like this spot less vs a 3x, that's for sure. I have the same qualms about the strength of my hand, and now my pot and implied odds are worse as well. And I go 3 way with the BB less. All of those things hurt me, and I nothing beneficial is happening for me when he 3xs. I think we're still deep enough to justify a call, but I'm not wild about calling either a 2x or 3x here. I'd have to see some math showing that a 3x pushes this to a -EV play (if it isn't in the first place vs a 2x!) to be convinced it's -EV.
No, I don't see why my openraise size and my 3betsize have to both be big or both be small. They are not correlated. My openraise size is a (perhaps perceived) exploit of people not punishing me for it by calling more with their pot odds and implied odds, and 3betting me relentlessly to take advantage of the stack depth IP. The benefits for me are that I risk less to steal (minor without antes and when you're stealing 1.5BB out of 250 in your stack!) and also I go HU with the BB a lot more often, IP of course. It also leads to multiway pots, which should work against me, but tend to work out alright. Perhaps the biggest trick of this 2x preflop is that when people 3b me, they 3b too small and too tight. This allows me to call with great pot odds and amazing implied odds, and play vs a faceup range. My early stage 3b strategy seeks to protect me from those very exploits, and exploit players for folding too much to pressure at deep stack depths. Making a big 3b size here is correct to reduce their pot and implied odds. It also begins to build a pot, and as that pot gets bigger, I tend to have increased fold equity vs many villains (though this shouldn't be the case theoretically) simply because they are unwilling to stack off / commit a lot of chips with a "marginal" hand and deep stacks. Lately I'm thinking that I can 3b smaller as an exploit, but I haven't tested this idea out. And finally, one thing to consider: What sizing do you see HS cash players using in this spot? PFR is bigger because there is nothing to exploit, and a "big" 3b size is the standard because it's the optimal approach mathematically.
That sounds like you are flatting a lot on SB compared to other regs. So your SB 3b range is pretty much polar? I think most regs just dont want to play SB pasively so they 3bet pretty much linear with some exception of playable QJs KQo type of hands semideep vs. fish. And of course pocket pairs, so their flatting range is kinda faceup.
Yes, it's fair to say that I'm flatting the SB more than most of our peers. I'm trying to estimate some numbers... Perhaps I flat the SB more than 90% of players? Somewhere around there. Of course this plan changes based on the position of the open, but I expect that I flat the SB vs a raise from any position more than most. Yes, my range is polar. The most important thing to me about me OOP 3 ranges is being able to cover every board texture - so I'll sprinkle in hands from all over the spectrum into this range. I mean I'm not flatting QTo vs UTG1, but I am still flatting more than most. I don't like when my ranges are faceup! That is a something I think about a lot. I don't think of flatting the SB as playing more passively, although I suppose technically this is a correct definition since I did not raise when I had the chance to. I still plan to play my 3b range very aggressively, but I also think that certain hands are better used as calls rather than 3bs. I'll use useless hands or hands in between useless and great for my 3b range! There are certainly opponents and situations in which I 3b more linear.
Hey Nick, great video as always! Congrats on ur promotion as well!
I got a question regarding the JTcc hand from min 22:20:
If this was a HU pot vs UTG player, I love leading flop big and think its the most +ev play vs his range, which otherwise will often check back TP/OP on this flop vs our defending range, but will still sigh-calldown safe runouts, as our perceived and actual range will contain "enough" semibluffs (KTs,KJs,76s,etc.) and potentially 87s´s etc. turned into a bluff.
When this pot is 3 way though and we´re facing 2 pretty strong ranges, which def can smash this flop hard, our donklead looks just super strong (2 pair +), but I still think leading is the best way to get the most value, as again, a lot of worse (but strong) hands will often check back and only go for max. 2 streets of value. Maybe there is an argument for checking and hope CO will put us on a weak 8x/9x/Qx and barrells off with his KT/KJ hands? Although, combination-wise, he´s more likely to have TP here (AQ,KQ) than a gutter to potentially barrell off, as I´d expect him to call any combo of AQ and more offsuit combos of KQ, as compared to KT/KJ, which very likely will only be suited combos to flat an UTG open preA (and we block 2 of these already).
Now,I finally get to my actual question: Given the fact that we are facing 2 strong ranges here, would u still wanna be leading hands like KTs, KJs, 76s in this spot, mostly for balancing-reasons vs regs and our barrelling potential (BDFD is the nuts!), even though our FE drastically decreases 3 way?
Really cool question, this is a fun one to think about. Thanks for the congrats! (\0/)
I agree that if this pot were HU vs UTG, leading here is my best option, because just like you said, he will be checking back for pot control with many many hands that will call a flop lead (and quite likely call down 3 streets). It's very easy for me to find bluff combos I want to add to this leading range to balance it.
My plan when checking 3-way would be to x/r, not x/c. My thought (hope really) is that one of the two players will cbet, and ideally UTG will cbet and IP will call and then I can pounce. But in reality, how often does it happen like this? Both players can easily check back top pair hands here for the same pot control reasons. But I sort of like taking the check raise approach - it's a gambit in that we risk losing one street of value, but if one of our opponents bets, and thus opens the betting back for us to check raise, than we're well on our way to building a pot where we can get full stacks in on the river. If we lead, it's possible for villains to just call us down with a set since our leading range is going to be polarized between straights and gutters. Now that i think about it, I suppose that this gambit logic applies to a HU pot as well. Although I think the likelihood of the pot checking through HU is greater than it is 3 way.
Now for your question. I think that whether I choose to play my straight (and the range built around it) as a x/r or as a lead, that those hands are the exact hands I'd want to include in my range to balance it. This is of course only if I was intent on playing as optimal of a range in this spot as I could. It's quite possible that in a tournament setting like this I would be employing a range that is either value-heavy or bluff-heavy in a spot like this, depending on my assumption of how the specific villain(s) in the pot would react to my line here.
I'm not sure if I answered your question entirely, so please let me know if you have any follow-up questions.
48:34: Yes I fold if he shoves. Barring some sort of hero read that he's one tabling and his FB status just got updated to "hot date tonight!!". You nailed the reasons - we are very credible in having many many nut combos, so he cannot bluff us too much. Even if he has the Ad blocker, he won't expect us to fold many flushes. He is more likely to make a tricky flop check back with a FD than he is to bluff this river. Many players are taking this tricky check back line I've noticed.
This explanation seems a little off since I would think Philbort would bet his Adx, Kdx, hands pretty much near 100% on this flop. I think he is more likely to get tricky and check back a flush draw than he is an Ad, Kd without another diamond in his hand. He could also have some Qx here
Thanks for the comments. I like that you left some stuff that's more thinking out loud than direct questions. That's kind of fun for me to read and respond to.
First off, the 22 hand. No, I am no way certain that I'm making a profit here. In fact I suspect that you suspicion is spot on, and that this is a losing flat pre. 22 is just such a trash hand. I would/could 3b this occasionally vs some people, but not vs Philbort. If I had a chance again I think I'd fold. Normally I'm not one to turn down good preflop pot odds, so that's an argument in favor of calling, however I just don't know that I'll be making enough postflop to win the pot the 1 in 3 or 4 times I need to to profit. My PF pot odds also figure to increase with the BB coming along, but then so does my equity postflop of course, with a 3rd piece of the equity pie being present.
Regarding the river bet spot vs Philbort, I find myself nodding my head in complete agreement with your analysis. I think you nailed it and I really agree and don't have anything to add.
Thanks again for taking the time to chat here! GL.
Loading 32 Comments...
congrats for this new beginning as elite pro! but you said that you will make a last vid before since one you mentionned it in the promotion thread "The other is a fun one that's a pretty unique and cool opportunity relating to a past series I've done. I'm excited for that one, it should be a lot of fun to put together. " I was very excting about that one, do you still plan to do it?
Hi Lafauriea,
As promised in his post, Nick released two Essential videos prior to moving up to Elite. The one you're referring to is this dual commentary video featuring BRICKANDCRAI. If you haven't seen that one yet I highly recommend you taking a look!
oups sorry I missed it
Good video and very good explanations! :) I liked this.
Regarding your question about how to show the hand history, I like the way you do it here. Gives us a feeling of gameflow and dynamics that you just dont get by only seeing the highlighted hands. Continue with showing all the hands please. And thank you very much for this content :)
Excellent feedback, thank you. I'm with you on which video format you prefer. I enjoy seeing dynamics develop, and the game-flow across every hand. I worry that the series might be too long in this format, and that people may become tired of it by the end. Perhaps I will mix in some other videos in between videos from this series, so there is a little more variety.
like the format and the vid a lot! keep up the good work...looking forward to part2
Thank you for the feedback! It's especially valueable becasue I expect most people to have the opposite opinion. But as a video-watcher myself, I'm with you, I prefer seeing the entire hand history.
About 10 minutes in. Do you advocate min raising as a standard this deep pre anti, or is it just better for you specifically since you mention you like to open more hands at this stage than the average player?
aaand you explained it later in the vid, haha
Haha. How's that (and this) for a quick response! I'm moving the hand history very quickly because there are so many hands to get through, and I want to be efficent in producing this series. One consequnce of this approach is that I may end up moving on from an explanation too quickly. If you'd ever like more explanation on a topic mentioned in the video, please mention it here, and we'll get some in-depth discussion going.
Hi, Nick, congratulations on your promotion, sir. Deserved achievment :)
37:40, I think I like turning our hand to a bluff OTR (not being result orient). Given its a reg, we can expect him to valuebet all the two pairs+. And when he bets turn, check tiver he is often gonna have Ax, cause he is unsure with his hand and hoping for showdown. In the same time we can easily have all the nuts and really dont have bluffs in this spot (I mean its very hard for him to find the bluffing hand for us according to our line) and I doubt he ever can assume that we turn a pair of Q into a bluff here, cause its so thin and pretty much nobody turns Q into a bluff here :) => so we can credibly bet river large and fold out all the random better hands (naked Ax; KK; even KQ split, which he plays this way from time to time). I dont think its an obvious bluffing spot to take but its pretty delicate and I have feeling that betting river is slightly better than checking for showdown.
*Obv this way of thinking is good only vs good reg, not vs fishy opp who no brain check/calls AK otr.
41:45, why dont you overcall with 99 here? It looks pretty same like the 44 hand earlier in the video: sure we get worse price here, but its still about over 20:1 (including deadmoney) and MrAnderson shouldnt 4bet here a lot, so we can safely expect going flop 4way (and our friend Bino is on SB with us).
41:55, dont you like going ahead and 3bet here with 22? More agressive line pre here has some decent merits, considering we are OOP (when we just flat pre its hard to extract value OOP, when we hit our set vs good opp; 3betting let us take the pot down pre; when we get flatted after 3 bet its good to be deceptive with hand like 22 postflop when we hit etc)
48:34, Do you fold if he shoves river in ur face? Can we really cal here? I think we cant be 100% sure he cbets all his FDs on the flop, cause its good reg, he can try to be tricky against you etc. In the same time our range contains all the nuts and he cant bluff here often.
Hey buddy, let me apologize to you for taking so long to respond. Especially after you left a comment with several stimulating questions. I had plenty of time to respond before, during, and at this point even after Tcoop - so there is no excuse, it is my fault. I will do better for you (all) going forward. And you gave me a nice congrats on the promotion, (smh) at me not responding more quickly. Thanks for that as well.
37:40 KQo OTR: Yeah... Looking at this again I see a bluff, too. This river isn't great for him, especially on the surface, but I don't think it's bad enough that he won't value bet all of his 2p combos. That caps his rivercheck range at AK. Vs that range I have a very good chance of getting a fold on this board. My range is strong here, and I can credibly have all the nuts. I can even have AA and QQ... Although if he has Ax that all but eliminates any thought of his that I can have AA. 22 and 88 also get here this way, though 2 may fold PF. AQ gets there this way always. As does my JThh combo. I think the combination of him having Ax a good amount here, and the fact that he should/probably will be willing to fold it a fair amount, makes this an attractive bluff spot. And as we've noted, I can't have any/many bluffs! It feels dirty turning a hand with this much SD value into a bluff, but I don't really know why I feel this way - it looks like a great spot to do just that. I like a big bet size here if I do bet since he's capped and I have tons of nuts.
41:45 with 99: I should call here. My primary reason for not calling is pretty silly. In the past I was way too loose in these situations, and once I realized this I allowed my aversion to making this same mistake again overcompensate by folding these spots too often. Our price is good, and Andersen isn't going to be 4betting much. As you noted, our relative position, IP vs SB, is good. I posted more thoughts on this hand in a thread, the link is in the post below.
41:55 with 22. I don't like any of my options here! 22 is just such a poor hand. I like flatting more vs a tough villain. I'm not going to be 3bing a crazy high percentage in the SB vs such a villain, so I'd prefer my 3b blufs to have more playability (78s). Calling allows the BB to come in to the pot a we hold a hand that is okay with that outcome. This BB plays fine, so it's not a great outcome for us, but it does increase our pot odds. I really don't mind folding here, but the price is good preflop. It will be relatively hard to extract value here, but check calling a set here has a some benefits 1. It strengthens our check call range, which will be top pair 2nd kicker-heavy (think KQ a lot) and 2. A strong villain will be value betting thinly and bluffing multiple streets more often than someone who is passive, so we will get value by checking calling this villain more than mots. I'm not a big fan of that reason(ing) though. I think the value of 3bing 22 and flopping a set is overrated. In such a spot, say J82, we're repping JJ+ anyways, so having an extra 3 combos of strong hands in our potential 3betrange isn't going to make a meaningful difference in how villain plays his range vs us. If we were 200x deep, or IP, I would like this option more. 200x deep it does cool things for our range in giving us stronger hands vs a x/r and board coverage (we now cover the sets).
48:34: Yes I fold if he shoves. Barring some sort of hero read that he's one tabling and his FB status just got updated to "hot date tonight!!". You nailed the reasons - we are very credible in having many many nut combos, so he cannot bluff us too much. Even if he has the Ad blocker, he won't expect us to fold many flushes. He is more likely to make a tricky flop check back with a FD than he is to bluff this river. Many players are taking this tricky check back line I've noticed.
Cheers and GL.
Fairly interesting hand at 41:43. I will also post in the HH forums.
Easy fold with 99 here after a 3bet and a cold call in the sb?
both hands at showdown shocked me.
Another great vid. I especially like how you play you play AQ IP on a few occasions and your explanation on 3 betting a more polar range pre ante with Suited connectors and KK/AA
Pumped for the rest of the Vid. Was live railing the last few hours of this, and will be interested to see your holdings in a number of spots.
Cliff notes, I should call with 99! I give some reasons why I didn't in your thread, but I wish that I had. I also talk about the hand a fair amount in the post above this one.
Thanks for the feedback man! It's good to hear that you're getting something out of the concepts discussed, and not just a certain line in a specific hand. Wow, that's fun that you saw this live! As I recall, there weren't any crazy hands I'll show up with. I think the most interesting pot was my calldown with 77 if you recall. That'll be a fun one to go over.
Hey nice video, but I don't understand how we can profittable peel 3 bets so wide pre-ante in the S500. Like for instance the T7s you opened UTG+2, which I think is a little of line already and then we still have to peel the 3 bet? It was the hand where you minraised and he made it 456 or so on the button. We're getting 3.4 to 1, but I still don't see how we're ever gonna make this a profittable play by adding a hand as weak as T7cc into our OOP UTG+2 vs BTN flatting range no matter how deep we are. We're gonna have to give up so often and the range your giving him of 97s and J7s in his bluffrange vs yourself seems a little optimistic. You have to remember that an average reg will not be playing as wide as you will, people are nitty in the Sunday 500 esp pre-ante and in the earlier stages.
Hey man, this is a great great question, I'm really glad you asked it. It's funny, reading your comment makes me realize just how wide I play... It does seem like it could be bad, pretty easily, especially to the naked eye. There is a method to my play here, and I'll explain. Before I get into all of the details involved in this concept, I want to say one thing about this spot in a vacuum - As I sit here now, I do think this is too wide. Both to open, and to peel the 3b. I wish I had folded this hand preflop at both of the points where I could have. I believe I said in the video that this was too wide, so hopefully viewers realize I recognize and acknowledge that this play is likely a mistake, and at a minimum this is a hand that doesn't need to be a part of my strategy.
Now, the details of the concept.
I open hands like this, seeking to get 3b, so I can call. I do this to exploit two common errors I observe in many of my opponents: 1. Sizing their 3bs too small. 2. 3bing too tight of a range in the early levels (particularly pre ante). Many players have the mindset that they're going to "coast" until the antes come into play. As such, they aren't three betting aggressively - they have few bluffs in their 3b range. However, when they get dealt AA, they look down at their hand and feel compelled to 3b. So they 3b.... Often times too small. Now I am more than happy to take my equity disadvantage preflop with say T7s vs AA, because 1. I'm getting better pot odds than I should (they 3b too small) and 2. My implied odds are through the roof.
For these purposes, the deeper the better for me. In the Sunday 500 we start out 250x deep. During this level especially, and the next two, I'll look to get 3b as much as I can, so I can attack their face-up range. In fact, this is the biggest problem I have with the T7s hand in question - we're not deep enough. At 100x I don't think my implied odds are good enough at this stack depth. Maybe at 150x I can profit. As the stacks get more shallow, another problem arises for my tactic here: Villain 3bs wider for value. At 250x deep most players know that it would be crazy and foolish to get QQ AIFP, so a lot of times they don't 3b it in the first place, especially vs an EP open. But at 100x, and vs my ridiculously wide range, hands like QQ and JJ start to get 3b for value more.
If I'm confident that villains range is something like AA, KK, and AK, well then that leaves a great many boards I can attack. I open 68s UTG, villain 3bs AA in MP. I call, and stacks are 250x each. Flop is 753r. I check, villain cbets. I x/r. Villains entire range is now a bluff catcher! And he has to bluff catch 250 big blinds more... Ouch. I can x/r and barrel at will on so many boards, and by the river, he's quite often folding. This has been my experience. This tactic has worked well for me in cubed and rebuy tournaments when we start deeper. In the video I mentioned villain could have some J7s and 97s stuff. Well, I opened this hand thinking he (many villains, not him specifically) would not have those hands in his 3b range - that he would be 3bing far too tight. Me mentioning those hands in the video was my thoughts sort of drifting to hand that I might be 3bing there OTB :D I should have made this more clear in the video.
Now, with all of that being said, this answer I just gave you about this strategy that I'm often implementing in the early stages of tournaments is a subjective one based entirely on my experience, and not at all on science. Basically, I have no math to show you for these spots. Human memory is far from perfect, so I suppose it's entirely possible that I only remember the times when I x/r a a wet board and barrel down, and villain flashes AA faceup as he folds on the river. Or the times I make 2 pair and win 150x vs a villain who is too stubborn to fold his bluff-catching AA. Perhaps I conveniently forget the times when my bluff fails and I bust in the first level, or the times when I check raise two pair, only to discover that villain 3b me with 76s and flopped a straight (his range wasn't nearly as tight as I thought). I'm curious how you feel about my response here? Please reply to this and let me know. GL.
@Nick Rampone
This was a great answer! Personally I use this strategy myself in the early stages of the sunday million. I also find myself doing the same mistake that you said something about, exactly that I continue this very fun and enjoyable strategy, when the blinds get bigger, simply because this is the poker I really really enjoy to play! Discipline is hard!
Also something that I find worth mentioning is that I find myself do this when my stack increases while the villains stack decreases. Where I sit with 200+bbs, and they slowly get to under 100bbs. Hard to adjust away from such a fun way of playing! Glad I figured this discipline leak out, and thought Id share it :)
Anyways; the answer was great! I really like your content :)
Will we see a review of the super tuesday as well? :)
Discipline is hard, haha, funny quote. You're quite right though - it is hard. After all, if it were easy wouldn't everyone be disciplined, and receiving the benefits of such an approach? =) The first step to becoming disciplined is realizing you're undisciplined. You've had this realization, and honestly that's half the battle. Now it's about discovering and understanding when is the right time to push the limits, and when is the right time to show some patience. This is the art of poker!
As far as the Super Tuesday goes, I'm not sure. I feel like after this series I should create some content other than a HH review, just to give people something different. Especially those who prefer other formats. I'll listen to any and all feedback, and we'll see what happens. Thanks for giving your opinion in these threads.
Nick, I have to ask, why do you make it so that others can't see what you're playing? Being in the U.S., i enjoy railing my coaches on Sundays.
Sure, no trouble to ask of course. I do things like hide from search and not have an avatar in the hopes that it will make me stick less in the memory of my opponents (hmm, these videos aren't exactly incognito, hah). I'm not sure that it actually works, but it couldn't hurt, unless of course friends are trying to look up my tables! :O My friends just open up the lobbies of the big tournaments and look for my name in them. A good thing to do to see if I'm playing is to check the Big109 or something first. If I'm not in that, I'm probably not playing. It's a bit more work, but still manageable! Cheers man.
I'm not gonna get any kind of response to my comments? =\
41:45, why don't you over call with 99 here? I'm guessing it has more to do with philborts post flop play than it has to do with you being worried about the original raising putting in a 4bet?
I should have overcalled here with 99. My price is very good, and justifies a call. And you're right, I'm not concerned about a 4bet here much at all. For one I didn't think Philbort would be nearly this wide, and that yes, he would apply significant pressure postflop, to the point where it would make this preflop call a losing play. Thinking on it now, I imagine that he can't play his range postflop in such a way that it makes my preflop call losing. I discussed other reasons for my fold and why I wish I didn't in posts above, and in this a thread which is also linked in a post above.
obvious question about 99 in 41:45 and then the 22 in 41:55 - what do you flat here with ? I know not many players would like to 3bet 22 OOP, but do you flat hands like 76s ? Because you kinda need them to balance your checkraises. And do you agree that it would be easy fold vs 3x openraise from any solid reg no matter how deep because we just wont get paid often enough ?
And one overall question : I am ok with you having those far above average 3bets. And I am ok with your minraises if you think you have good enough edge preflop. But it doesnt really go together. Shouldnt you either make std 3x opens and maybe 4x SB and UTG if you are making 3,5+ 3bets IP 250deep? Or make smaller 3bets if you go for minraises? Shouldnt it go hand in hand ?
Your question about what I flat here with is making me think: I need to have a better plan in these spots. I tend to make a decision on the fly in these spots, and I don't even have some major rules of thumb for guidance. I need to change this going forward. Generally speaking though, hands that will allow me some semibluffing opportunities. JTs, etc. Hands like 99 are mostly binary in these 4 way spots - We make a set or we don't. Even if I'm winning chips overall, I don't like that 7/8 times I'm losing 6BB. Looking back at the hand again, yeah.. We're plenty deep, this should be an easy call. My reasons for folding were poor, and the reason for calling pot/implied odds was paid far too little attention to.
Oh, now I see that you're asking what I flat with in the 22 SB spot! The top half of unsuited high card hands, and all of the suited ones, down to T9s. I'll 3b 87s. I tend to play these spots without a x/r range. No I don't necessarily agree that it would be an easy fold for 3x vs many regs. I will like this spot less vs a 3x, that's for sure. I have the same qualms about the strength of my hand, and now my pot and implied odds are worse as well. And I go 3 way with the BB less. All of those things hurt me, and I nothing beneficial is happening for me when he 3xs. I think we're still deep enough to justify a call, but I'm not wild about calling either a 2x or 3x here. I'd have to see some math showing that a 3x pushes this to a -EV play (if it isn't in the first place vs a 2x!) to be convinced it's -EV.
No, I don't see why my openraise size and my 3betsize have to both be big or both be small. They are not correlated. My openraise size is a (perhaps perceived) exploit of people not punishing me for it by calling more with their pot odds and implied odds, and 3betting me relentlessly to take advantage of the stack depth IP. The benefits for me are that I risk less to steal (minor without antes and when you're stealing 1.5BB out of 250 in your stack!) and also I go HU with the BB a lot more often, IP of course. It also leads to multiway pots, which should work against me, but tend to work out alright. Perhaps the biggest trick of this 2x preflop is that when people 3b me, they 3b too small and too tight. This allows me to call with great pot odds and amazing implied odds, and play vs a faceup range. My early stage 3b strategy seeks to protect me from those very exploits, and exploit players for folding too much to pressure at deep stack depths. Making a big 3b size here is correct to reduce their pot and implied odds. It also begins to build a pot, and as that pot gets bigger, I tend to have increased fold equity vs many villains (though this shouldn't be the case theoretically) simply because they are unwilling to stack off / commit a lot of chips with a "marginal" hand and deep stacks. Lately I'm thinking that I can 3b smaller as an exploit, but I haven't tested this idea out. And finally, one thing to consider: What sizing do you see HS cash players using in this spot? PFR is bigger because there is nothing to exploit, and a "big" 3b size is the standard because it's the optimal approach mathematically.
That sounds like you are flatting a lot on SB compared to other regs. So your SB 3b range is pretty much polar? I think most regs just dont want to play SB pasively so they 3bet pretty much linear with some exception of playable QJs KQo type of hands semideep vs. fish. And of course pocket pairs, so their flatting range is kinda faceup.
Yes, it's fair to say that I'm flatting the SB more than most of our peers. I'm trying to estimate some numbers... Perhaps I flat the SB more than 90% of players? Somewhere around there. Of course this plan changes based on the position of the open, but I expect that I flat the SB vs a raise from any position more than most. Yes, my range is polar. The most important thing to me about me OOP 3 ranges is being able to cover every board texture - so I'll sprinkle in hands from all over the spectrum into this range. I mean I'm not flatting QTo vs UTG1, but I am still flatting more than most. I don't like when my ranges are faceup! That is a something I think about a lot. I don't think of flatting the SB as playing more passively, although I suppose technically this is a correct definition since I did not raise when I had the chance to. I still plan to play my 3b range very aggressively, but I also think that certain hands are better used as calls rather than 3bs. I'll use useless hands or hands in between useless and great for my 3b range! There are certainly opponents and situations in which I 3b more linear.
Hey Nick,
great video as always! Congrats on ur promotion as well!
I got a question regarding the JTcc hand from min 22:20:
If this was a HU pot vs UTG player, I love leading flop big and think its the most +ev play vs his range, which otherwise will often check back TP/OP on this flop vs our defending range, but will still sigh-calldown safe runouts, as our perceived and actual range will contain "enough" semibluffs (KTs,KJs,76s,etc.) and potentially 87s´s etc. turned into a bluff.
When this pot is 3 way though and we´re facing 2 pretty strong ranges, which def can smash this flop hard, our donklead looks just super strong (2 pair +), but I still think leading is the best way to get the most value, as again, a lot of worse (but strong) hands will often check back and only go for max. 2 streets of value.
Maybe there is an argument for checking and hope CO will put us on a weak 8x/9x/Qx and barrells off with his KT/KJ hands? Although, combination-wise, he´s more likely to have TP here (AQ,KQ) than a gutter to potentially barrell off, as I´d expect him to call any combo of AQ and more offsuit combos of KQ, as compared to KT/KJ, which very likely will only be suited combos to flat an UTG open preA (and we block 2 of these already).
Now,I finally get to my actual question:
Given the fact that we are facing 2 strong ranges here, would u still wanna be leading hands like KTs, KJs, 76s in this spot, mostly for balancing-reasons vs regs and our barrelling potential (BDFD is the nuts!), even though our FE drastically decreases 3 way?
Really cool question, this is a fun one to think about. Thanks for the congrats! (\0/)
I agree that if this pot were HU vs UTG, leading here is my best option, because just like you said, he will be checking back for pot control with many many hands that will call a flop lead (and quite likely call down 3 streets). It's very easy for me to find bluff combos I want to add to this leading range to balance it.
My plan when checking 3-way would be to x/r, not x/c. My thought (hope really) is that one of the two players will cbet, and ideally UTG will cbet and IP will call and then I can pounce. But in reality, how often does it happen like this? Both players can easily check back top pair hands here for the same pot control reasons. But I sort of like taking the check raise approach - it's a gambit in that we risk losing one street of value, but if one of our opponents bets, and thus opens the betting back for us to check raise, than we're well on our way to building a pot where we can get full stacks in on the river. If we lead, it's possible for villains to just call us down with a set since our leading range is going to be polarized between straights and gutters. Now that i think about it, I suppose that this gambit logic applies to a HU pot as well. Although I think the likelihood of the pot checking through HU is greater than it is 3 way.
Now for your question. I think that whether I choose to play my straight (and the range built around it) as a x/r or as a lead, that those hands are the exact hands I'd want to include in my range to balance it. This is of course only if I was intent on playing as optimal of a range in this spot as I could. It's quite possible that in a tournament setting like this I would be employing a range that is either value-heavy or bluff-heavy in a spot like this, depending on my assumption of how the specific villain(s) in the pot would react to my line here.
I'm not sure if I answered your question entirely, so please let me know if you have any follow-up questions.
You sure you are even going to be able to play 22 profitably by flatting the SB against a good aggressive regular?
48:34: Yes I fold if he shoves. Barring some sort of hero read that he's one tabling and his FB status just got updated to "hot date tonight!!". You nailed the reasons - we are very credible in having many many nut combos, so he cannot bluff us too much. Even if he has the Ad blocker, he won't expect us to fold many flushes. He is more likely to make a tricky flop check back with a FD than he is to bluff this river. Many players are taking this tricky check back line I've noticed.
This explanation seems a little off since I would think Philbort would bet his Adx, Kdx, hands pretty much near 100% on this flop. I think he is more likely to get tricky and check back a flush draw than he is an Ad, Kd without another diamond in his hand. He could also have some Qx here
Hey BC,
Thanks for the comments. I like that you left some stuff that's more thinking out loud than direct questions. That's kind of fun for me to read and respond to.
First off, the 22 hand. No, I am no way certain that I'm making a profit here. In fact I suspect that you suspicion is spot on, and that this is a losing flat pre. 22 is just such a trash hand. I would/could 3b this occasionally vs some people, but not vs Philbort. If I had a chance again I think I'd fold. Normally I'm not one to turn down good preflop pot odds, so that's an argument in favor of calling, however I just don't know that I'll be making enough postflop to win the pot the 1 in 3 or 4 times I need to to profit. My PF pot odds also figure to increase with the BB coming along, but then so does my equity postflop of course, with a 3rd piece of the equity pie being present.
Regarding the river bet spot vs Philbort, I find myself nodding my head in complete agreement with your analysis. I think you nailed it and I really agree and don't have anything to add.
Thanks again for taking the time to chat here! GL.
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.