In part 7 of this Mentoring series the guys review Chris' first shot at $200 NL 6-Max. They recap on his improvements and talk about some of the things he still needs to work on. Concepts they cover include; the importance of keeping wide ranges and always considering one's overall range rather than focusing on the way someone would play one specific hand.
Table 1 with the J9s hand in the beginning. U said u would be vbeting stuff like A5, 77,88 etc otr. But why do u think c/r is better with this hand? I didn't really understand that. What goes through my head in this hand is that when he checks back the jack, he prooobably have a hand with showdownvalue that is looking to bluffcatch the river. So what I'm a bit concerned about is that he checks back river with sth that might would have called a riverbet, given his turn check. What do u think about that?
50 min ~ Table 3 chris calls in bb with 77 vs a btn open. Flop comes 69Tr, and he c/c. I think that this is a board that is pretty rarely gonna be 1 and done. And I'm not sure really how happy we are calling multiple streets with 77 here. So what do u think about c/r flop? We are gonna be bluffing with the best hand sometimes, but to me, it just seems like we are gonna make less mistakes that way. Cuz we can rep quite a few valuecombos also.
This was a really good video!! As u said in the video, it doesn't need to be actionpacked to be good. Hope it doesn't take long before next video is out. GL chris! :)
I will answer ur questions later on Joeyyy , just wanted to chime in to say GG to the guy that rated this video 1, since it was one of the better videos I have done in my experience, so I challenge u to tell me based on what u thought this was worth 1 out of 10 points.
I hope u guys will still find ignore the bad rating this ''one '' guy gave wether or not to watch the video, since its really one I was very happy with.
GL all and I'll answer soon Joeyyyyy , gotta go now, just really disapointed that some people have nothing better to do than to go troll around the internet, sad to be u.^^
While I was watching it, I saw the student make the mistake of checking river. While you could say its a close spot and could go either way, you did stop the video and talk about it and reached conclusion you like checking more. I'm convinced that its more of a bet and less of a check here. Good to have both plays but to advocate cr over leading in general here seems flawed.
So can you really try to describe why you think this is a check raise spot on the river because i am not convinced. I am positive someone like aejones (been watching a lot of his vids, he is the stone cold nuts) would probably be betting this river more then he is checking with his range. maybe we will be lucky enough for him to watch the first 2 mins of this video and to get his input.
better overall game theory wise to bet your jxss most of the time. id rather not have that high of a balanced cr % here (against most opponents it doesn't seem like best play overall) and I would get tilted if he ever checks back some pp or ax and we show down the boat to ship the pot which will happen some % of the time. dont take winners to sd when you dont have to.
"50 min ~ Table 3 chris calls in bb with 77 vs a btn open. Flop comes 69Tr, and he c/c. I think that this is a board that is pretty rarely gonna be 1 and done. And I'm not sure really how happy we are calling multiple streets with 77 here. So what do u think about c/r flop? We are gonna be bluffing with the best hand sometimes, but to me, it just seems like we are gonna make less mistakes that way. Cuz we can rep quite a few valuecombos also."
Great spot to cr 77 imo. any 7x or 8x that we now got to as played I like cr.
Hey guys, reallyyyyyy goood discussion.Since u guys ask about the same spot, >Im gonna give u an overall explanation here.
First of all, let me start by saying I dont think I got my idea across the way I wanted to in the video.
So if we take a look at something that both of u mentionned , checking being bad because our opponent is gonna go to showdown too often, I would say the following:
We should be betting the vast majority of our range on the river, which would be a5 ,66+.
Why should we bet more often than check the river?
Betting most of our value hands is important here,because we will be bluffing all our random floats and flush draws on the river, so in order to be able to bluff the river , we need to be betting the biggest portion of our value range.
If we start checking most of our value range, it suddenly doesnt become attractive at all for our opponent to ever valuebet wide enough.
What does this do to our river checking range?
It looks like our river checking range is made out of mainly Ace highs and 33 44 and some weaker 5x.
Based on what our perceived range looks like our opponent is going to be betting most of the hands that u think u were gonna get value from , wth the exception of ace highs.
However, since u were talking about a theoritcally optimal approach , having a somewhat balanced checking range, by including some nutted combos in ur range ( not all nutted combos!!!) is gonna be more optimal than betting ur entire value range.
So we can conclude from these arguments:
a) our opponent cannot bluff us off the best hand, since its very unlikely he s perceived to be bluffing by taking the bet check bet line, in this particular spot.Why can he profitably bluff us here?
If he assumes we are a competent opponent, he can exploit the fact that his perceived bluffing range is very narrow here, compared to his valuebetting range, and make us that way fold incorrectly.
Another way he could now exploit us would be by overbetting suddenly both as a bluff and 66 plus since our checking range clearly only contains very marginal hands. Im stressing this , only because we were trying to dissect the hand from a theoratical point of view.
b) When we bet we are never gonna get raised, but we will get called some of the time we check raise.
Finally , to sum it up , I would still lean towards betting with the vast majority of my range and trying to strenghten my checking range a bit, for the mentionned reasons.
Fwiw Mootang, I relistened to the footage, and even though I wasnt stressing enough on the reasons of why we should also check the river, I dont think I was trying to say we should always do so, at least it wasnt my attention, so Im sorry if it came across that way.
Hey guys, reallyyyyyy goood discussion.Since u guys ask about the same spot, >Im gonna give u an overall explanation here.
This was a good video zaza. I am not sure why anyone would rate it so low, but if you play 200nl and think anywhere close to this you should be doing well. However, seems like you are being sarcastic here? :(.
We should be betting the vast majority of our range on the river, which would be a5 ,66+.
Board is 522ss afaik. So how different do you think fair here then above range. Instead of saying I would slightly widen it, and bet river for the times he has Ax which is the hand I really want to get to call.
What do you think about betting relatively small on this river? Pot is $24 on river, so anywhere from 4 to 15, as your balanced game plan. Give him a good price with his Ax. We can also get a good price with our missed fd bluff.
Betting most of our value hands is important here,because we will be bluffing all our random floats and flush draws on the river, so in order to be able to bluff the river , we need to be betting the biggest portion of our value range.
If we start checking most of our value range, it suddenly doesnt become attractive at all for our opponent to ever valuebet wide enough.
yeah agreed
What does this do to our river checking range?
It looks like our river checking range is made out of mainly Ace highs and 33 44 and some weaker 5x.
Based on what our perceived range looks like our opponent is going to be betting most of the hands that u think u were gonna get value from ,wth the exception of ace highs.
However, since u were talking about a theoritcally optimal approach , having a somewhat balanced checking range, by including some nutted combos in ur range ( not all nutted combos!!!) is gonna be more optimal than betting ur entire value range.
So we can conclude from these arguments:
a) our opponent cannot bluff us off the best hand, since its very unlikely he s perceived to be bluffing by taking the bet check bet line, in this particular spot.Why can he profitably bluff us here?
If he assumes we are a competent opponent, he can exploit the fact that his perceived bluffing range is very narrow here, compared to his valuebetting range, and make us that way fold incorrectly.
Another way he could now exploit us would be by overbetting suddenly both as a bluff and 66 plus since our checking range clearly only contains very marginal hands. Im stressing this , only because we were trying to dissect the hand from a theoratical point of view.
[QUOTE=mootang;155460]This was a good video zaza. I am not sure why anyone would rate it so low, but if you play 200nl and think anywhere close to this you should be doing well. However, seems like you are being sarcastic here? :(.
Thanks man, appreciate it, and Im not sure what u thought I was sarcastic about, but I like the fact that u read Joeyys questions and went further and added some of ur thoughts on the hand and agreed upon the check raise proposition he made on the 77 hand.This is the way to get the most out of the video for all of us, since I also had to go back and watch the video, and reflect on the hand even more deeply than I was during the video, so +1 for that.
Board is 522ss afaik. So how different do you think fair here then above range. Instead of saying I would slightly widen it, and bet river for the times he has Ax which is the hand I really want to get to call.
I think it really comes down to how aggressive his turn % is and how often he actually bets.I mean I expect a lot of nl200 regulars to always bet the turn with 66 plus, so vs those u could widen ur river value betting range.That being said we were talking about a theoratical spot, so he shouldnt just always have ace high or air in his turn checking back range.I also dont think he can really call here with ace high every single time, since its such a good spot for us to value bet almost any pair.
Im not saying people will fold their ace highs alot, but if they were trying to play well they should fold them some % if the time on the river.
What u r suggesting is basically an exploit of their unbalanced turn checking range, and subconsequently bad river call frequencies, cos most their whole range is made out of ace highs and some very weak pair.If u have the read he s never checking a pair on the turn, than by all means valuebet the shit out of this guy and bet ur entire range on the river.
What do you think about betting relatively small on this river? Pot is $24 on river, so anywhere from 4 to 15, as your balanced game plan. Give him a good price with his Ax. We can also get a good price with our missed fd bluff.
I think betting around 16 is a pretty good idea here, its not too small and its not too big, I mainly dont wanna bet too small cos our range is so value heavy here, and his perceived turn checking range , doesnt look like it s going to be folding alot on this particular river.
I answered the spot about the 77 hand yesterday but I guess my browser must have fucked up.:/
Ok. so u both mentionned check raising 77 on 1096r being a better play than check calling.
I tend to agree that check raising is superior to check calling it. I would prefer to have a different hand for it though, something with overs, a gutshot plus an over, a pair plus an over and a backdoor flushdraw, We dont really have outs when called with 77 here besides 4 of them being clean. I wouldnt say check raising 77 is bad as i said but from a pure hand selection stand point I would prefer to have something else as my overall check raising range and dont feel like its necessary to have 77 in there. I mite be more inclined to add it into my check raising range , if I knew villain was cbetting too much on this type of boards, as he basically did with 88 if i recall correctly, so basically if villain has a depolrized cbet range here we can start check raising with higher freq since our range on this board is just really strong, especially when it is rainbow and he cant really continue with a hand as weak as 88 or 6x, for the same reasons we cant really check call with 77 here.
I hope people that watched the video are still reading the thread, since it really shows the power of exchange can have. We took a spot in the video that might seem pretty straightforward as its surface since its such a small pot, and took it sooo far. This should really encourage most of u , to post questions, especially when u disagree with something that is being said in the video. As u see , there s room for disagreement without being disrespectful or a douche, and it can create a lot more shit to reflect on than if u would have just closed the vid and went on grinding ur 6 tables.:)
hey I have a question concerning the KJ hand on QQA x x where you say we should check the river because we have the best non value hand.
If I understand correctly you say not betting is correct because game theory wise our river betting range will be too bluff heavy.
What I'm confused about though is: in a vacuum this must be a good bet because villain should fold a small pocket pair or hands that made a pair on turn or river a big portion of the time.
If he's usually going to fold it doesn't really matter what hand we are bluffing with. The only point at which this becomes a problem is if he realizes our frequency is too high and adjusts, but that should take a while (if he ever notices).
So why do you decide to take a GT approach and pass up a clearly immediately profitable option. Most likely he will fold and we can continue to do this play until he calls us and perhaps realizes that we are too bluffy and adjusts at which point we can adjust by checking that hand in the future and be less exploitable.
But this hand is just an example I'm interested in your general view on taking (perhaps) non GT optimal actions to realize immediat expected value. Are there situations where you do this? Or do you think its best to start with GT until you realize that you have a place where you can exploit someone.
