Tim reviews as many hands as possible where he won or lost 10bbs, in under 2 min per hand. Topics include betting the river to induce a bluff and pot control in multi-way pots.
why not bet 80$ yourself on that 4 straight instead of checking? I can't see any reg checking behind that board when obviously you're always folding to any kind of bet above 30$
I really think you have to bet this turn, especially readless. You're not getting cr'd enough and 88-JJ alone is 24 combos. You are getting a great price on the bluff and are building a gigantic pot for a river where you will be in position, with the betting lead, with a ton of ways to make the best hand.
I would also bluff river way smaller. Better risk reward, way better for your ranges because you can rep much wider for value, and just as effective when it comes to folding out the under pairs you put him on.
Vitas and the tech guys migrated the server. We expected there to little to no issues but it appears we lost some posts from within a two hour period. Sorry about this guys but the post is lost forever.
I'll give this another shot... on the K9s hand, I ran a quick pokerstove and it seems to me we don't have enough equity to be betting here. This is assuming he has all suited kings like you said in the video, I feel like his range could well be tighter though.
Board: Kh Tc 5d Qc
Dead:
equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 42.911% 38.74% 04.17% 1432 154.00 { Ks9s }
Hand 1: 57.089% 52.92% 04.17% 1956 154.00 { JJ-TT, AQs-AJs, K2s+, QTs+, J9s+, T8s+, AQo-AJo, KJo+ }
If we take out some of the suited kings obviously our equity decreases.
So it seems like a check/fold to me and a valuebet on a blank river if he were to check behind. Thoughts?
I'll give this another shot... on the K9s hand, I ran a quick pokerstove and it seems to me we don't have enough equity to be betting here. This is assuming he has all suited kings like you said in the video, I feel like his range could well be tighter though.
Board: Kh Tc 5d Qc
Dead:
equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 42.911% 38.74% 04.17% 1432 154.00 { Ks9s }
Hand 1: 57.089% 52.92% 04.17% 1956 154.00 { JJ-TT, AQs-AJs, K2s+, QTs+, J9s+, T8s+, AQo-AJo, KJo+ }
If we take out some of the suited kings obviously our equity decreases.
So it seems like a check/fold to me and a valuebet on a blank river if he were to check behind. Thoughts?
Thanks for doing the stove on this one. It is good to check these kinds of close spots. Turn equity isn't the only factor, but it is pretty huge in this case, especially since if we c/f the turn we dont' get blown off our equity too badly at all and we don't have great implied odds on the river (some reverse implied odds too).
I agree now that c/f and vbet blank river is slightly better. It is interesting to note how much the Q changes our equity vs. his range and how it affects our equity when we check and face a bet and how it affects our river implied odds.
I really think you have to bet this turn, especially readless. You're not getting cr'd enough and 88-JJ alone is 24 combos. You are getting a great price on the bluff and are building a gigantic pot for a river where you will be in position, with the betting lead, with a ton of ways to make the best hand.
I would also bluff river way smaller. Better risk reward, way better for your ranges because you can rep much wider for value, and just as effective when it comes to folding out the under pairs you put him on.
I still think bet/folding or checking this turn is very close readless given the stacks and our 15 out draw, since I don't think we can 3 barrel the river as a bluff and he can have a ton of pairs and better draws that he is c/cing with. Building a pot with implied odds is pretty nice though.
I'm not sure that a much smaller bet is as effective for bluffing underpairs/Qx as a bigger bet. A lot of weaker players seem to find the line I took pretty suspicious. That said, looking back on the sizing I think slightly smaller would have been a bit better. I kind of fell back on a more "standard" size bet size her.
why not bet 80$ yourself on that 4 straight instead of checking? I can't see any reg checking behind that board when obviously you're always folding to any kind of bet above 30$
