Shorthanded 4 Tabling $2/$4 NLHE Review (part 2)
Posted by teunuss
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 6 Comments...
hey man. you seemed to have given both yourself (as the OOP BB caller) and the IP pfr the same pre-flop ranges. you have AA/KK etc in your range in the simulation @11:04.
Hey I believe this might source from having "square size proportional to range" unchecked. If you look a bit more closely the ranges differ so I think this is just based on the visualization option.
Eldora is correct :)
31:15 you elect to check back the turn to induce bluffs on the river. You cold 4 bet AQ, bet 1/4th on the flop and checked back the turn. You stated 8 bluff combos T9s & J10s as potential bluffs. If a A, 9, J, or T land on the river are you ever folding? Seems like you give 5:1 odds on the flop, then let villain realize equity really cheaply. I agree with preflop & flop sizing, but feel you cap you range a bit on the turn while letting villain realize at the same time. If you had QQ, KK, AA, or AK are you checking the turn?
Clearly want to be checking KK and QQ at a very high frequency, bc you want your opponent to improve to 2p and lower sets, and potentially turn some hands like 78s or 99s on some rivers into a bluff.
However I agree with you that AQ needs more protection and I totally agree with all your arguments there.
AQ benefits way more from betting than checking indeed.
Given the SPR, couldn't you just "milk" the OOP player by going small on every street given the range advantage? Even 1/3 on turn and river gets stacks in still.
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.