monkeyshines

P.S. I hope it's clear my previous post was supposed to account for the BB calling a mere $4 to see a flop. I don't perceive that as drastically increasing villain's % of Qx when he presumably just wants to take down the pot on a dry flop.

I'm very interested in the readless KK hand @ 35 min. (Please humor my shoddy reasoning; I'm a kitchen-table player in the US since I hate casinos and their filth-ridden chips and toothless people, so all I know about poker is what I see on run it once and 2p2.)

Okay, let's initially assume 4 things: a) average players at 1/2 Zoom are not tremendously high-level thinkers; b) on the button, there is indeed a fair % of Qx in villain's range; c) villain could conceivably have AA or QQ, but almost always would have three-bet those hands; d) villain almost never has a deuce on a QQ222 board, and if he does when we find a hero call OTR, gg, cooler.

So here is my line of interrogation:

1) When you c/c flop and then ck turn, I suspect some indeterminate percentage of villain's barreling range is now Ax (non-AA). What % do you think that might be?

2) From villain's perspective, you would have likely bet Qx by the turn. (From what I've seen in other vids/threads, Qx is rarely slow played in that spot, esp. at these stakes, except vs. a total monkey.) What percentage of the time would you expect a readless OOP player at 1/2 zoom to slow play the effective nuts? (In other words, I suspect OTT, villain perceives your Qx range to be near zero. Am I wrong?)

3) Now, on a QsQh2h2d board, given your c/c and then ck, with Ax, villain almost always assumes he's ahead/tied/able to win by barreling. From his POV, he could be blowing you off of another A high that's trying to get to showdown--especially if he holds Ahxh. (Agree/Disagree?)

4) If villain has Ahxh, from his POV, you could be a complete moron calling with a worse FD (great!), or you could have a pp like tens (np, he thinks, he has the FD + fold equity against that). So what % of the time does he have Ahxh (loving his NFD + fold equity) instead of Qx?

6) OTT, with ATC and a double-paired board, villain could quite reasonably be trying to blow you off A-high or a pp. What % of the time is that?

7) Villain could--maybe, but unlikely--have called w/AA or QQ OTB. We have to factor that percentage into our calculations. What percentage is that?

8) OTR when villain overbet jams the deuce (let's assume w/o Qx, deuce, or AA), all previous reasoning still applies, but now he's trying to scare you off of playing the board, where his perceived worst case scenario is a chop. It seems like three things could be going on in that situation:

8a) He is a sophisticated player who respects you/recognizes your SN from training vids & he thinks the overbet looks bluffy, therefore you will level yourself into folding, since to a thinking pro, bluffy=nuts.

8b) Villain saw Tim Dwane overbet the river vs. rich businessmen on High Stakes Poker in 2009, and it always worked for him.

8c) Um...What should I do? I know! I'll mash the jam button! He has put me on pocket queens!

9) Given your $147.60 stack, you need KK to be good ~56.4% to make this a breakeven call [147.60 / (147.60 + 114.20) = 56.4ish]. Do you REALLY think villain has Qx/2/AA 43.6% of the time in this spot? I can tell you with 100% certainty my curiosity would have gotten the better of me in that situation, and I would have time banked/called. How much of a moron does that make me?

10) A b/f seems like a consideration at some point, even tough OTT, you seem to rep nothing but a bluff. How confident are you in your line in that hand?

The vid was fascinating and I look forward to watching more of your stuff. All replies from the peanut gallery will also be thoroughly considered. Thanks!

This is one of my favorite poker videos. At first i wanted to think like a BBV troll, and then the light of Lucas' reasoning shone like a 100 watt light bulb.