grogheadflow - $25 NL Leak Finder Part 2

[grogheadflow]

Dan completes his review of robbyd86's play at $25 NL 6-Max on Party Poker. Dan places heavy emphasis on the need for attention to detail while 4 tabling and as part of this stresses the importance of timing and especially bet sizing.

[robbyd86]

download link not working for me

[amsterdamaged]

I can download the wmv, but Windows Media Player will not open it.

[Vitas23]

Originally Posted by robbyd86

download link not working for me

Originally Posted by amsterdamaged

I can download the wmv, but Windows Media Player will not open it.

Both should be working now.

[guitarizt]

28:20 A8 I triple barrel him to get him to fold pp's AJ AQ and 9x.
29:00 98 I really like a flat here too unless the blinds are squeeze happy. They look like fish though.
37:00 AK I would make a river raise probably to 4.50.
44:45 AK I don't think he can have a bluff and I think he just has like QJhh or J9hh here.
47:00 KK 3bet seems big. I usually never make it bigger than 3 here with 100bb. I think it's really hard to balance because you're giving yourself such a bad price on the 3bet and like grog said a smaller 3b still lets you get stack in easily on three streets. I would flat here a lot because btn looks like a tighter tag and bb looks like a recreational player.

[robbyd86]

Thanks for part 2! Imma bout halfway thru so far. In my defense i was playing 6 tables (2 were off to the side in case things got slow), my note taking I always do afterwards, and some of the spots you told me to bet on wet boards I checked b/c i know the plr will ch/r a lot. i.e about 27min in on T96ddd one plr's ch/r is like 12% or something if i remember correctly, and does it a lot on wet boards.

Anyways, I've definitely taken more time to think things through with each decision since this recording. And you pointed out some leaks that I'm trying to plug up. thanks Dan!

[Koerperkarle]

08:00 How about ch/calling the flop, because do you expect even a fish to float here with close to everything?
I mean by ch/calling the flop we keep his range wider for sure, but I guess he could also chb something he would have folded to our cbet and is not guaranteed to bluff all his range and he bluffs in a bigger pot if he floats. Main thing I think is wrong with ch/calling ott is that if we cbet, we probably fold out a lot of his air which means he only bets draws and made hands ott (I guess he would chb ace high most of the time, thinking it might be good, or not thinking at all) and because there are not that many Draws available except for the mentioned wheel-draws we might get valuebet there quite often.
But then again, fish do like to chb the turn with made hands and bet the river so his turnbettingrange would be more air-heavy again. Guess I agree with cbetting and ch/calling now (interesting what writing a post does) , because those cards higher than a T probably didnt improve his flopcalling range (I'd expect the KJ or QT or something to fold the flop, you agree?) and he wont vbet his lower pairs since their pair is now worse in absolute terms

[Koerperkarle]

[28:30]Imo we should triple barrel this A8s always (as guitarizt mentioned) because this turn bet is probably profitable in itself because he might fold sometimes with weak pairs and we have good equity, but a 3barrel is probably very profitable, because this T is an overcard to lots of his range and we probably dont even have that many implied odds anyway (except for the slowplayed Kx that pay off) because a 3flush looks so scary so if the guy is particularly passive we might even have to 3barrel this always to make the 2ndbarrel profitable because he will peel this turn a lot imo

[40:48]Dont you think a doublebarrel ott is better than a chb with the QQ, because most of his range is Pairs or draws and almost no air so he probably only bets with missed draws otr and checks his pairs but would call a bet ott with everything and a small bet otr with the pairs aswell

[44:07] Do you expect a tight guy like this to open suited connectors utg because if not and if he doesnt raise nothing but a flush (which I think is likely -> dont think he'd raise TT or a slowplayed flopped set on this river) it leaves only QhJh because that's probably the only flush in his utg raising range) I dont think this fold is good because sometimes people do turn pairs into bluffs whether they know what they're doing or not and since he's not repping nothing I wouldnt mind a call (because of combinatorics), or do you think he could be raising sets here aswell, thinking it's unlikely that we have the backdoorflush but a lot of 2pairs and sets?

Ah damn, just reached 44:22 where you say the same thing so disregard the above
- and I also noticed that it was MP so he's more likely to have suited connectors, would him being utg make it a call for you? (specifically not saying "more" of a call )

[grogheadflow]

Originally Posted by Koerperkarle

08:00 How about ch/calling the flop, because do you expect even a fish to float here with close to everything?
I mean by ch/calling the flop we keep his range wider for sure, but I guess he could also chb something he would have folded to our cbet and is not guaranteed to bluff all his range and he bluffs in a bigger pot if he floats. Main thing I think is wrong with ch/calling ott is that if we cbet, we probably fold out a lot of his air which means he only bets draws and made hands ott (I guess he would chb ace high most of the time, thinking it might be good, or not thinking at all) and because there are not that many Draws available except for the mentioned wheel-draws we might get valuebet there quite often.
But then again, fish do like to chb the turn with made hands and bet the river so his turnbettingrange would be more air-heavy again. Guess I agree with cbetting and ch/calling now (interesting what writing a post does) , because those cards higher than a T probably didnt improve his flopcalling range (I'd expect the KJ or QT or something to fold the flop, you agree?) and he wont vbet his lower pairs since their pair is now worse in absolute terms

Sorry about the time it's taken to reply.

Check calling the flop is fine, albeit makes it a little harder to play which shouldn't be discounted. In terms of pure ABC poker theory in the sense that we don't fold anything out, or get value from worse, then CC is the best play in a vacuum. Villains have a wide range of different reactions to this line though, so if we don't know anything about him I'd rather minimise our potential mistakes and just cbet the flop. Fwiw I'd expect KJ and QT to call from a fish on the flop, they loves them overcards. So yeah I like cbet and cc turn.

My main problem with Robby in this hand and indeed in this vid is that he barely even stopped to consider it. Cbet/ snap cf, no thought, doing himself and his poker knowledge a disservice by not taking the time to utilise it.

[grogheadflow]

Originally Posted by Koerperkarle

[28:30]Imo we should triple barrel this A8s always (as guitarizt mentioned) because this turn bet is probably profitable in itself because he might fold sometimes with weak pairs and we have good equity, but a 3barrel is probably very profitable, because this T is an overcard to lots of his range and we probably dont even have that many implied odds anyway (except for the slowplayed Kx that pay off) because a 3flush looks so scary so if the guy is particularly passive we might even have to 3barrel this always to make the 2ndbarrel profitable because he will peel this turn a lot imo

Yeah I sorta agree. Opponent dependent obviously. We're only doing it because we turned the NFD so we know we're not hideously out of line going 3 streets here.

Originally Posted by Koerperkarle

[40:48]Dont you think a doublebarrel ott is better than a chb with the QQ, because most of his range is Pairs or draws and almost no air so he probably only bets with missed draws otr and checks his pairs but would call a bet ott with everything and a small bet otr with the pairs aswell

Yeah these spots come up a lot.... before deciding to bet we should know the effect a bet will have and a check will have. Betting = maximises value from draws that will call, minimises bluffs from air/GSs etc, maximises losses VS Ax that wouldn't lead river had we checked. Checking to bluffcatch = minimises value from draws that will call, maximises VS bluffs, minimise losses VS Ax that wouldn't lead river. In summary, when a fish is passive stationy and doesn't bluff I'd bet, if he isn't such a station but bluffs a lot, I'd check. If he's a combination of both I'd decide which of his traits were more prevalent and decide based on that.

Originally Posted by Koerperkarle

[44:07] Do you expect a tight guy like this to open suited connectors utg because if not and if he doesnt raise nothing but a flush (which I think is likely -> dont think he'd raise TT or a slowplayed flopped set on this river) it leaves only QhJh because that's probably the only flush in his utg raising range) I dont think this fold is good because sometimes people do turn pairs into bluffs whether they know what they're doing or not and since he's not repping nothing I wouldnt mind a call (because of combinatorics), or do you think he could be raising sets here aswell, thinking it's unlikely that we have the backdoorflush but a lot of 2pairs and sets?

Originally Posted by Koerperkarle

Ah damn, just reached 44:22 where you say the same thing so disregard the above
- and I also noticed that it was MP so he's more likely to have suited connectors, would him being utg make it a call for you? (specifically not saying "more" of a call )

It still wouldn't make it a call for me, just based on a population read that people aren't capable of this move with any kind of frequency. So population read trumps combinatorics, and yeah he can have sets anyway.