Not sure when to play fast or slow with Ace King? Start by reading SplitSuit's book "Optimizing Ace King" and fully understand this hand once and for all: www.splitsuit.com/ace-king-poker-book
sure he did..he's on the button and getting 2.5/1 odds...not a terrible call. just think of the number of times a "nothing" flop comes out and you get checked to on the button, make a small bet, and win...probably half the hands in no limit play out like that. the button is very powerful.
You will made the flush approximately 36% of the time in the turn and river (if you only see the turn and then had to fold cause someone raise you so you got only 18% or miss on the turn so again 18% to catch on the river), it's all calculations to say "you never get flush when you need it" is so stupid if ppl think that they should not play poker, By the way ppl always remember the times when the get unlucky but the amazing luck when they hit a set on the river with just 5% percent or something like that they will forget it after just a few hours.
@@oriboiman144 absolutely agreed. mathematically it is acceptable. past hands are independent events also that seem to trick people into thinking otherwise.
I find myself emulating you saying"it is what it is" when i lose a pot even though i was ahead when i shoved or called a shove only to get suckout on. what a calming mantra
I like the check-shove on the flop in this situation. If it checks through, thats ok, because we get a chance to improve for free. And if someone bet, the check-shove stands a better chance than a simple C-bet go get some made hands to fold. And also to get it in against some other draws, which we are ahead of. If a check induce a semi-bluff with AT or a worse flushdraw, thats just a fantastic opportunity to smack it back in their face with a check-raise.
I had to pause at the flop cbet. $25 into $83 on this texture is a nightmare; this is an easy check/jam IMO. This is a board where you'd be pot controlling with a lot of your range (or giving up with air) because it's likely your opponents hit this board. So your cbet will be low, but when you do cbet, it should be big. If you have 99, don't lay a random ten or queen a great price; charge it.
I completely agree 100% with your suggestions about the line to take, I would just love to hear one or two thoughts more from you about the remaining stacksize, when you criticise the small flop bet! Because I feel, that this may have factored into the reasoning for why it was so small....
It is a bit funny and monotonous when you hear "bet higher" or "bet more" over and over in all of these advice videos, but that just goes to show you how terrible most live low stakes players are with bet sizes. I used to be guilty of this a lot too. I still make plenty of sizing errors, but I've become much better with sizing my bets based on the pot and making sure I'm not giving players 3-4 to 1 to call my 3bets preflop. Most of your standard recreational live low stakes players think of bets in absolute dollar amounts instead of in correlation with the size of the pot. I'd say the single biggest across-the-board leak with low stakes live players is bet sizing. Most of the time it's atrocious, and in a lot of games if there's 1-2 players at the table that actually size their bets properly for the most part, the rest of the table thinks they're maniacs or bullies because their bets are consistently so "big".
Definitely a weakness of many low stakes players. I play in a weekly free league - so the lowest stakes you can get :-P - and it's funny how many players will min bet into a pot, regardless of pot size, draw potential or any other factors. There'll be like a 20+ BB pot on the turn, and they'll still min bet. It's just boggling. If they're doing it for value, surely they can get a similar amount of value while reducing the amount of opponents with a higher bet. If they're betting as a bluff, a min bet usually won't do it. I think the big thing for low-stakes/newer players is that many of them don't think through enough why they're actually betting. They might get to the first layer - "it's a bluff" or "it's a value bet" - but they don't get to the next layer, of "is this size the best for maximising value" or "will this size generate enough folds".
It's fairly sound advice. If I were to give a new player advice in a nutshell especially in low-micro stakes games it would be play very few hands from early position, never limp/call and make your raises bigger.
A reraise to 5xbet is not for pure value even if you say so, more like a semi-bluff if anything. 3xbet is still an over bet to me, in case villain has Aces or Kings and goes all-in or something. However, since hero got called and only flop a draw on a wet board that can hit a lot of villain's hand, I would check/call on the flop, keeping the pot smaller and easier to get away on the turn if hero misses and villain bet big to protect his hand. AKs looks pretty, but not a made hand. Many people dread playing it because they usually lose big pots, and win small pots. One should ponder why that is and find ways to adjust those issues, else might as well throw it away.
Well given stack sizes it makes sense to shove instead of call. 2 scenarios on the turn, either you make your flush or you don't: if you don't make it you now have 147 behind if villain shoves (which he most likely would with the nuts) the pot at this point would be 605 with 147 to call which given 29% pot odds so it makes sense to call with a 20% chance of hitting the flush. So shoving would have been better since the money is going in anyway and you likely have some fold equity on top. If you do make your flush on the turn villain might not be willing to bet the last of his stack so you just missed value.
The real question is should it be a fold, which really depends on the range you put your opponent on, if he only bets this big with a straight or set then by we aren't getting the pot odds needed to call (calling 38% of pot with 34.96% equity) So it should be a shove or fold (probably always a shove though unless the player is only betting with the nuts) for example if he did this with a jack you'd have 55% equity so a shove is definitely the right call.
Glad u r real about showing bad results too, but 1 more option in cash game is to go twice on the turn or river and maybe catch that heart and split that pot. I know u know that but other viewers may not.
at a live 2/5 game I had ace-x suited and flopped a flush draw. I raised a 40 bet to 140 and I was re-raised to 240 with another player calling the raise. I was thinking in my head that despite great equity on the shove was getting over six to one to call. Thankfully the flush came on the turn and I stacked one opponent.
why is it wrong to call the $125. I often think to myself "I'm getting all of my money in the middle anyways so why not just call so that the other guy gets priced in". why make him fold when you're drawing to the nuts. I have the same amount of outs if the other guy stays in so why not have his money in the pot.
The call is obvious for the reason you say. Yes, call here, not re-raise. Fold would be the best choice except that a call leaves a possible 3-way pot with the nuts on the turn.
shove gives the slight possibility that we're slow playing and he folds, which is obviously good for us as there's only a 35% chance of actually making the flush.
Great Video Thanks. I've been thinking a lot lately about these types of pre-flop spots when my opponent makes a raise that is too small. I like what you said about "I'm not going to play into this game". I get it. I should make them play my game. It feels a bit similar to "punishing the limpers". I had a chronic limper on my right the other day. I ended up shifting gears on him and I raised him about ten times in a row, and he still continued to limp, so on the tenth limp when he re-raised it was an easy fold. Thanks
Please help: when you set your opponent range in equilab the author assumes that all villeins combos have the same probability. Do we have software that allows setting different weights for different combos? How do people solve this problem?
This is why I don't play big pots with AK out of position. If you reraise to $75 and he calls then you're in limbo if you don't hit the flop big. So now you are left with either a big continuation bet or a check raise. Either way at least one third of your stack is going in the middle and you don't know if he has AA, KK, QQ, etc.. If you slow down on the next street then he's betting big (I would). Now you are left guessing. I prefer playing the AK out of position a bit tighter to a 3 bet meaning I would just call that raise from the blind. By doing this you control the pot and disguise your hand. So when the flop comes and it's a big draw for you..a simple check call might slow him down on the next street if he doesn't already have a made hand. If he slows down on the next street you might be able to take it down with a big bet on the river.
This will make you extremely easy to play against as your sb 3 bet range is capped. Any experienced player will be able to exploit you. I agree with split suit, and think that 3 betting is the best play here in the long run. We are way ahead of the openers range. 3 betting also gives us the lead in the hand and the opportunity to take it down with a continuation bet.
+Whinie Thenit There is no "correct" answer to this problem because it all depends on the players involved in the pot. If I think you're a loose non-thinking player then I'm not 3-betting too much of anything out of position. If I think you are a competent thinking player then I might paint a tight table image by playing certain hands a certain way and letting you see it. This makes my 3-bet a little stronger when I use it to steal a big pot later in the game. I also avoid getting a third of my stack in the middle with just a draw. Let's examine this hand again..So let's say he raises it to $75 as suggested. If he doesn't call you risked $75 to win $14. What if he calls? At this point you have now invested close to one third of your $300 stack on a draw. You are still completely clueless to what he has and you need more information. So you have to either bet and see what he does or check and see what he does. If you bet and he re-raises all-in you are forced to fold. If you bet and he calls..you are now borderline pot committed and still clueless. If you check he may bet big and leave you with a tough decision ultimately leading to an all-in or fold. The only comfortable play is to hope a continuation bet will get him to fold if not it's hit or miss. I'd rather play larger pots in position and only utilize the 3-bet out of position when I think it's profitable.
+Ramel Prince The suggested raise size was 45$ (15 BB) not 75$ (25 BB). Hero is out of position with a hand, which is very strong preflop but does not play as well postflop against multible opponents as against a single opponent. Even out of position you just HAVE to raise it up enough, that they both fold, or that you create a heads up pot. Its correct to be less aggressive from the blinds and isolate or 3-bet with a stronger range, than you would in position. But AK is the absolute top side of your range, so if you dont even 3-bet that, you are 3-betting way to tight. Even from the blinds.
+Ramel Prince I agree that this spot is very player dependant. I also agree that flatting is fine sometimes to balance your sb range. However, I think that the "standard" and most profitable play (without any reads on opponents) would be to 3 bet and go from there. In general, players at these stakes will be making tons of calling mistakes. We want to punish these players and make them put more money in with the worst hand. The only logical reason to flat here in the sb would be if I knew the bb would be squeezing with a wide range. If so, this would allow me to successfully set a trap and come over the top with a large raise.
Assuming you have little to no fold equity on the flop, especially on a board that smacks the other players pre flop calling range, why do you recommend such a large c-bet? For value? To expand on this question I would assume that the vast majority of the time someone in this hand is flatting you when you cbet. Then you see a turn and if its a brick you're double barreling on a nasty board or your check-folding because it's not likely someone with a hand is going to give you the odds to make your flush.
it is a winning play if they both fold.... anyways the problem with calling 125 here is that if you miss you have 168 left and the pot is over 350...that means if you miss you very likely faced with all-in or fold on the next street after investing about 1/2 your stack into the hand and still having a lot of pot equity...i mean, are you going to fold on the turn getting over 3-1 (a lot more if the other guy stays in too)? maybe you will fold it if the board pairs, but otherwise i think you are compelled to stay in.....therefore you might as well just get it in on the flop with a fair chance of taking it down right then, and a boatload of outs if you don't. these stacks just are not very deep.
If you think you get a decent proportion of folds, raise it, if you think you can’t get them off the hand, then call, so long as you are getting the right odds and implied odds.
This is a texture where there is never a situation to c-bet small. If you have a draw you just induce action. If you have a made hand you give draws too good of a price to hit. There is literally no combination of hole cards I can think of, and only the weirdest of player dynamics imaginable, that make this bet make sense.
+StillTrying2Help I have to respectfully disagree. If you induce action you put yourself in a spot where you have to stack off, otherwise you end up losing your equity advantage on most turns. Overs + flush is at best stacking off as a 60% favorite. But in most situations you are actually stacking off as a slight dog or folding out hands that are behind you. It LOOKS like flopping the nuts, but that's only against your opponents complete ranges, and not the ranges that give you a ton of action most of the time.
Good point. It's also generally a bad flop for really big hands while at least one of your opponents hits really good on boards like these. This is usually nightmare for AK but because of the fd it's just too tight to fold it. In this case I would probably check-shove so money go in anyway. But the c-bet is just useless because it doesn't really do anything.
Great one!! One of my last biggest poker questions, that just happens time and time again, but in such differrent ways that I keep constantly asking myself...
I was thinking on the flop that I'd rather have AQ here, not only for the additional equity from the gutshot, but also we unblock Kx suited combos. I like a check on the flop multiway, because of how wet the board is, and we don't need to bet for protection.
I would have liked a check on the flop and let the button bet...He likely would have bet about 50-60 bucks and you can call with AK, when the turn hits and its the 10...you can lay your hand down to a shove as you really only have 15% equity at that point.
Hi Split Suit! Excellent video! Why not considering AA, KK, QQ in the hand range possibility? Even "good" live player will never fold it at these limit. maybe because you think the would have reraised pre?
You forgot the option I was thinking the entire time. Would be to Check my equity then dump the hand unless it was a small bet just call. Then reevaluate on the turn check again any resistance I fold. Instead of jamming on a big mysterious what if and losing your whole stack Playing for donk luck On a trash hand of ace king suited that only has a draw when your opponents range obviously smashed the flop and it also includes your outs which is most likely the other hearts in the deck.
If we know villain to be a tight player then might this be a fold? If he's only stacking off the nuts, sets, and QQ then our equity drops to 35% and we need 11% folds just to break.
+dennybm I look to never put myself in a spot to bet/fold this much equity - especially on the flop. That being said, if you really feel he only raises the nuts, just call since the other guy likely calls a lot too and play the turns straight forward.
+dennybm Do you mean only raising nuts, sets, and QQ? Cause I really think there's nearly 0% of hands he's folding. No one is ever raising half your stack and then folding a board pair or any draw. It'd have to be a stone cold bluff to get a fold, and few players would make a stone cold bluff in this spot. Also I don't see why they wouldn't raise AJ here, after the undersized c-bet and the 2nd player just calling. It seems pretty damn likely that it's good, and it's such a draw heavy board. I think he has to raise JT, QJ, and KJ too.
+dennybm anyway by betting so small and checkraising behind, you are fully face-up and have 0 % fold equity against any decent player that have a made hand that have a decent equity versus AKs
Completely disagree with the poster. I would be check calling here, knowing it allows the UTG player to call lighter as well. This is a spot where you don't necessarily want to isolate, but bring as many players along. This allows you to 1. have a flush over flush scenario, and 2. gives you better expected odds knowing the player behind you is likely to call the turn bet (if there is one) as well. Check calling here makes more sense.
Dude thank you so much for this video ! I literally just came back from the casino and got stacked . Villain had a made straight and shoved on the flop I had nut flush draw + gut shot straight draw . I calculated 13 outs and called my stack . Unfortunately it didn’t land and I didn’t try to kick myself to much as I calculated 52% equity after the flop . Let me know what you guys think 🤔
How would someone play if they check raised from the small blind and got check shoved from the big blind? Would that indicate the big blind is super strong?
I actually think that as long as most of the times an oppo will show up with straight, set or 2p, our overcards outs are not so clean and so we dont need to protect our pair outs against UTG limper, thus we are playing our nuts FD mostly, then it makes sense to just call to get UTG to call as well and get better implied Odds, right? We are commited anyway, if the FD completes OTT you still check and if oppo checks back, its 1/4 psb OTR or so. The second thing that comes to my mind, yea, we dont ever get to this spot because we dont bet 25 into 80 on the flop, but still most of raisers range is gonna be pretty strong and even if he does have TP+GS, or TPTK he doesnt fold. So we can take his raise as pretty pot-commiting. And look that we dont have enough equity here to call here effective AI profitably and make a nitty fold and play better next time. Or just call and if he has something like TP or 2p, on this runout to be ready to shove as a bluff on the river unimproved. Just an idea, but might increase EV of calling > shoving.
very good question...what about balance? i find it very hard to justify 3 betting 6x the 2 bet...either way you look at it, it seems bad. if you only bet like that with monsters, everyone folds and you don't get paid off. if you bet like that every time, you only get called by monsters and lose most of the time.
80 percent of my loss in poker is in this kind of situation.most of the times i flop nuts then my opponent hit the flush on turn or river and in the other hand i call or shove with nut flush draw and wont get there.im extremely unlucky when it comes to flush
I dont think your assigned range for him is reasonable. And i also dont think this is an autoallin on this flop with a bare FD+overs. The flop just hit their range way to hard and i certainly wanna know why they should turn AJ into a bluff, raise with bad/worst FDs (which arent many btw since we block a lot of them). Agree on sizing pre and postflop, thats just bad. If SPR would be smaller i agree with bet/calling or check/raising on flop
Hi. I have a question about the math you use here to calculate your EV. You assume that all the possible hands that you select are equally possible. But shouldn't we assume that, given the opponent's bet, it's much more likely that he's flopped a straight, rather than say a set, and therefore that our real EV is much less favourable ?
+Julien Lamy (JuL) the software automatically factors in the number of combos of each hand strength. That being said, you can weight combos within the software if you want to reanalyze the hand :)
Maybe I'm dumb, but I don't understand the point of raising after the flop with a nut flush draw, especially with this straight-friendly flop. Shouldn't your goals at this point be to (1) keep as many players in the hand as possible, since you will likely have the best hand if another heart comes up, and (2) see more cards so you know whether you hit your flush or not? Why would you want to potentially scare away the straight draw/weaker flush draw hands with a raise after the flop here? I guess I'm missing something
Hey, I love your videos, one question about this hand, what would you do if you c bet 70$, both people call, and the turn comes 10, or the turn completly bricks of, like 2 of clubs?
That would make Hero have $223 remaining on the turn. $293 remaining in the pot. If both players only call you can be pretty sure that they're not trying to protect anything from flushes and you can probably jam with enough fold equity, especially if you pick up the gutshot. On a dry board you're better off giving up.
He had the odds to call with QT or very close to it because the raise was way way too small and there was a call in front of the main villain. 18 dollars to win a pot of 81 so yeah I'd say he needs to call there, only conceivable reason to fold would be reverse implied odds but thats just never enough reason to fold here for main villain.
+WayManlyWay you can go to $45 with a depolarized range as well. And you could choose $25 to induce...but there are almost certainly more ideal sizes available.
+The Poker Bank look, im not talking about ICM, just wanna know if I can use that to see if a play is profitable, lets say, in the first level of blinds in a tournament, no money involved yet. that what u calling 'RAW ev'? thanks so much
45-50 ok I'm not very great but I have to admit that seems way too high. Why not 35-40? Makes way more sense, 50 just seems like you'll never get called unless your beat and AK suited is too good of a post-flop hand to just almost never extract more value from other than a little less than 5bb
The video is old, but im losing lots of stacks with people shoving flush draws on flop. Mani times i have pokect aces kings. sets. And the draw aways hit. So i began to shove my draws too. and i never hit. The deck dont like me. lol
Betting about 1/3 of the pot( ok he bets a bit smaller) is completely the correct amount. Do not follow the suggestion here and bet 3/4. I would certainly say look into your bet sizing strategy Sweeney because you're wrong
I've just rewatched the video and everything you suggest about the hand being hard to play because of Davids sizing is ridiculous. What you suggest makes it so much harder to play and puts us in much worse spots
I am a bit confused. If as you said they never fold in that spot and would typically have nuts and sets, how is that a profitable play? Don't you only hit your flush about 30% of the time, so you lose 70%.
Look at the range he assigns - the sets, the flopped straight, some combo combinations (like top/mid pair with straight draw potential) and some suited heart connectors. That range builds to villain having 55.6% equity over the AhKh. With the pot size and all-in size, it leads to a profitable shove in the long term for the hero. Sure, against villain's exact hand he's behind 37-63, but even if you're confident in your read that someone has something, generally the best you can do is put them on a range given that players would likely play those combos in the range in the same way (ie. villain could easily have played a set or top pair+straight draw in the same manner as QTo). You'll notice that even against the flopped straight hero isn't dead in the water, given that he can hit the flush, or even get runner runner QT for the higher straight.
I don't get this? If the villain has 55.6% and will never fold in this scenario, how can that possibly be a long term profitable shove? The pot size is irrelevant, because if you're going to consider genuine long term variance then it would be compared with results of similar variables, including the size of the pot. So this would only be measured against the same spot and very similar pot size, and you only win 44%, so it has to be a long term loss.. Not to mention that the range given to the villain is pretty generous, a majority of times here hitting a naked A or K will not win the hand.
I had what I thought was a bad beat on the cards, and I wanna see what you think I should have done. I had a JQ off suit and I small raises to try to get the big blind to fold after everyone else folded. The blinds in the hand was 100/200, my raise was 400, the “villain raised to 800. I shoved and made an all in for $1100. The Gillian calls and has a QA off suit. Flip comes and it’s a J94 rainbow. Turn comes around, no help for either of us, than the river comes and it’s an Ace, one of the outs I needed a dodge and got caught. Did I get a bad beat, or did I do something wrong with that particular hand?
With such a small stack you need to shove instead of raising (if its cash game you probably should refill or leave instead of playing with such a small stack). Probably does not matter much in this situation though since he should call with AQ in that spot a 100% of the time.
+pats4lifebb 1.)44% equity means hero's hand and its chance of winning , against the "villain's" range of possible hands at that point in the street. Your hand equity with good pot odds is +EV. In the case above, hero's all in is +EV, which means hero will be making money on this play in the long run. It simply didn't work out this time. 2.) Sizing tell is when your raise amount is soley based on the strength of your hand. Hero's case was different. a) hero LIMPED first (trapping I guess), then 3bet (reraise). Hero's actions shows aggression and strength. b) 3betting larger (5x), isolates and narrows the field. (3x) gives other opponents better odds to call. c) 3bet (5x) gives greater value to {AKs}, when it does hit the flop. d) 3bet (5x) hero would have won the pot right there preflop when everybody folds or get's paid when it hits the flop/turn/river. win/win. e) this is a live game, which is slower and bigger raise amounts are typical.
+pats4lifebb Preflop you want to show strength, but also all starting hands, no matter how strong, are vulnerable. So you do not want to give someone good pot odds to call for the chance to beat your strong starting hand. So when hero raises to 27 the bb has to call 24 to win 41 giving him 1.7:1 to call. The main villain now only has to call 18 to win 65 giving him 3.6:1. Now if you look at the difference when hero raises to 50 in that spot then bb has to call 47 to win 63 giving 1.3:1. If the bb still called then main villain has to call 41 to win 110 giving 2.7:1. If the bb folds the main villain now has to call 41 to win 63 giving 1.5:1. You can see how the pot odds change by the larger bet. So if someone wants to try to beat these strong starting hands then they are going to have to risk a lot more money and decide if it is worth it. This is, in a sense, how you get value by not giving people good odds to call so when they make the mistake and call you will more than likely profit from it. This particular hand is a bad beat or a cooler. The villian isn't going to flop a straight again for a long time. He had a decent starting hand for his position, however, would he have called an additional $30 to 40 on it rather than 18? Sometimes it is better to try to take a small pot preflop and avoid the variance of playing the hand. When your cards are not as good and it is cheap to get into the pot then you want to try to win the pot after some cards come.
In my live games, I would have 0 FE in this spot against the button. If UTG is a fish, I lean towards just calling OTF to keep the fish in with a worse draw. He might have a worse FD and our outs are nut-outs. Dont think our pair-outs are relevant. Why not just call to keep the fish in? he open limped and called da 3bet - pritty sure its a fish..
I agree, there is probably very little fold equity. However it does not matter, because with the pot odds, Hero is getting, he is committed to the pot with a draw as strong as this. The key thing is to not go for this cute little blocker bet but instead go for an actual bet or a check-jam, which DOES have fold equity. So if we play the hand better, this situation on the flop does not happen. And therefore its a bit irrelevant to consider, if we should just call to keep UTG involved. Also unless he is a complete whale, it should not matter, since a call and an overcall of the 125$ will make the pot so big, that everyone is going to be committed to it anyway.
There's still a third person in the pot which you didn't address *at all* so wtf? Flatting will keep medium and sometimes even small flushes in the pot which is good for you.
I have to comment about the lack of an option to fold here. People often forget AK suited or unsuited is a draw hand. We need to catch or have fold equity for the hand to win. UTG likely has a small pocket pair or suited connectors and isn't very good being that he limped called $27. I'm gonna guess he was set mining because he's top stack. CO is likely calling us anyway if he likes his hand being that he raised and is in position. So what are we really doing here? We are actually hoping for a flop like the one we got. It keeps over pairs around and it keeps straights and straight/flush draws around. The problem is, for true equity here we need another heart. That $125 raise is a great move by CO because after our bet of $25 we have basically 2.5/1 pot odds on a draw need to be at about 4.1:1 or have something implied. We have to act bf UTG to the raise as well. Let's say a 3rd heart drops on the turn, is CO really paying us off? He is well aware of the draw potential hence the big raise and assuming it's likely at least 1 of you has that draw. Let's say it drops on the river, isn't he folding to most seemingly value bets. Most important what if it doesn't fall, like 80% of the time, we just dropped a ton of money in the pot. I know money isn't supposed to be a reason to not make a decision but it seems basically poker math is still in play here. I absolutely understand that ranging and off table work can be very helpful here but if anyone knows the importance of planning a hand it's Split who I have learned a ton from here in these videos... and maybe the plan at the time of the $100 raise in a potentially 3 man pot, on a draw out of position is to toss the $52 bucks and play the next hand.
+David Siegel The reason, why you shove a flush draw on the flop, when the math is correct, is exactly to avoid tough and unprofitable situations later on the in hand. Turn play is always bad for a flush draw, because either you have made your flush, and its difficult to get paid. Or you have not made your flush, and then you are either folding or putting in more money as a huge equity dog. Finally if you hit the A or K, which is actually 6 of your 15 outs, are you really going to get paid of by worse hands? Most likely not, because its a scary overcard to the pair + draw hands, that might continue on the flop. For all these reasons its better to get it in on the flop, if your opponents will so kindly oblige you with that. Its even better of course, if they fold the flop, which is why, you either have to C-bet much larger than this or go for a check-raise.
+fundiver198 Thanks I agree is it important to avoid tough decisions... when you are planning a hand. I think once you have certain information early in a hand like post flop out of position facing a major raise you can't just make a decision because it could avoid having to make a tough one later. That is the one thing I see differently here than SS, who I really respect. In this video he assigns some suited connectors like KTs A10s, I think 45s and some others are in there. I don't think there is any way he's making the call of 25 against 2 players with 45s. That range skews the equity. When I see this hand I don't think we have 44% equity and I think we have zero or very close to it in folds post flop. Of course we don't wanna get sticky and have to decide what the heck we are gonna do in a situation where we don't connect on the turn. But why do we have to rip it? Because we increased the range to where it made sense? That to me is like when people at a 1/2 2/5 live game make a dumb call and then say there was implied odds. There are always implied odds but it's often used as an excuse to gamble rather than to make a sound play. Here I believe we are behind and we know it. I think we know we need to hit our draw to be good. To rip this and shove I think is a lazy move. I think it's close enough to rationalize the shove and since calling really isn't an option that is what a lot of people would do. SS even says in the video "there is really no situation I'm thrilled with so, shove it is." It's not like it's some awful decision but it is risking a ton of chips for a decision that nobody would be thrilled about and I think as played we would've been better off doing another thing we wouldn't be thrilled about, folding. But in this case and I think the majority of the time saving ourselves from walking into the nuts when we miss. I think the discussion above is the interest part of the video but the lesson is that you have to raise more preflop to see if you get q10 off to fold and if he doesn't fold either do a heavy cbet (which obviously would've cost us more here but in general is a stronger play) or consider checking. If he does have a nut range we may get a free card or one for a good price and I'm fine with having to make a decision like that. We can't avoid all tough decisions in a thinking game.
+David Siegel Because Hero put in that small 25$ flop bet, there is 158$ in the pot, and Hero has 268$ left, when he face the raise. This means, the correct decision is to commit to the pot, if Hero has more than 38,6% equity against Villains raising range. Of course Villains range is up for debate, but its really hard to construct a range, which Hero would not have 38,6 equity against. To get to that result, you need to assign Villain only the made straight, sets and two pair. But seriously. If you sit on the button with a strong pair, and the preflop agressor make a small blocker bet like this, and the other dude just call it, do you just call as well??? Both Hero and the other dude are screaming out loud, that they dont like their hand all that much right now but hope to improve on the next card. So what do you do, if you are a decent player and understand the importance of aggression? Let them see the turn card at the price, they determined? Of course not. You raise! So Villain is for sure raising QQ here, he is raising any JX hand, and probably also TT. And therefore you dont even need him to raise a single worse flush draw for the shove to be profitable as played.
+fundiver198 Fair point, appreciate the response. I'm a little torn on it still but it makes sense what you are saying. I think villain did the right thing. How do you feel about villain's raise size? If villain a) shoved or b) made it $175 here, do you still have the same opinion on hero's shove?
StillTrying2Help Little plays MTTs where smaller bet sizing is more common and correct. In cash games there is no one-life-to-live mentality and thus there is more room for creative sizing all the way around.
This is exactly how i got kicked out the Big 10 knockout tournament last night on PokerStars , with ,A3 Heart against AJ , two heart on the flop and one A , i shove After the bet of vilain in the exact same position was 58% on the turn but lost he had a better kicker 90th place out of 13.000 entry 😠 the most frutrating is that vilain shove on me the exact previous hand and i had a flush draw also but with 89 i dicided to fold !
That shove calling range seems a little odd. If we’re saying villain could have QTo (which it turns out he did)... And we’re saying villain would call with JTs and T9s for a pair plus straight draw, then why aren’t we also giving villain JTo and T9o?
Do JTo and T9o make sense in villain's preflop range? The assumption in this video was "no", which is why they weren't included. If you disagree, feel free to rebuild villain's range and then redo the math with the updated factors =)
@@ThePokerBank wow didn’t expect a reply on such an old video! Awesome that you still reply to comments on old vids! Yeah I realise it’s more the process not the exact ranges, just interesting to see different perspective. I’m shocked V shows up with QTo but I guess that’s why hero should be 3-betting larger preflop right?
Anybody miss the times inc ash games when players wre open book. Huge raise prelfop always meant ace queen ace king.. Smaller re reasies always meant aces,kings,queens... So fucking easy to read people.. I miss 5+ years ago... Now I can only make money in mtt's:(
Call was the obvious good option on the flop. You're banking mostly on a flush draw, so you want more opponents on turn and to build the pot with a small bet on the flop, which the opponent conveniently did for you. Its like a dream scenario for a call. I can't imagine any pro would say to shove here. Fold, plenty of pros would tell you that. But not shove.
I can't believe that guy opened 3x with Q10o and then called a 3 bet lol What a fish....He probably thinks he made a good play after winning the pot by a miracle.
So let's see...you wait an hour or two for a big hand like AK suited, guy in late position makes a 3bb standard open that could represent anything at all...a range of probably 1/3+ of the deck...and you recommend making it about 17bb? Very hard to understand this...what can he call you with? probably 80-90% of the time you are going to win 4.5bb with your big hand...then back to waiting another hour or two for another premium hand. Sorry but there is no way I can understand this logic. Isn't poker about trying to get maximum value from hands?
Hello SplitSuit, I have a different take on this hand, particularly since you mentioned that the hand came from a live 2/3 game. My first disagreement would be with the argument to raise even bigger preflop. I would say that playing AKs out of position has incredibly high reverse implied odds and so the goal should be to keep the pot as small as possible. Therefore, with the aggressive tendencies of your average 2/3 live player, calling preflop and planning to float most cbets I would argue is a viable strategy. If the positions were a bit different and you have many players still to act behind you, raising is the obvious play but with only the UTG limp behind you, you aren't really too afraid of getting into a multiway pot with a hand that plays poorly in those situations. Of course, you lose out on some fold equity for the 14 dollars in the middle preflop, but that's not very much money and the geometric nature of pot growth really works against you in this spot. If you only had 50bb, this would again be an obvious raise with the plan to try to get it all in with TPTK, but TPTK plays very poorly especially OOP when you have 100bb+. Adding to the fact that live 2/3 players have a strong tendency to get out of line and fire multiple bullets with very polarized ranges, if you just call AK there and hit an A or a K on the flop, you can comfortably check-call 2 or 3 streets and catch all the opponent's bluff ranges without worrying too much that the pot size becomes unmanageable and your opponent is about to stack you with 2 pair or a set etc. If they cbet then check back turn, a value bet on the river still gets paid off a decent amount of the time since they may call you with a bluffcatcher as played. As played with the flop as it is, I also disagree with your assessment on the flop bet size. I think it's a perfect blocker bet size. The 1/3rd pot size bet lets you see a turn for much cheaper than calling an opponent's bet most of the time. Check raising is very awkward here and that comes down to the 100bb starting stack issue again. Check-raising all in is way too big a bet but if you check raise a normal amount and get called and a heart doesn't come on the turn, you have a very awkward remaining chip stack and are going to be pushing it in with almost no fold equity while very behind a large number of the time. The 1/3rd pot blocker bet prevents you from having to pay 1/2 or 2/3rd pot most of the time to see a turn card. It also serves a second purpose. Due to the aggressive nature of these opponents, the small bet size actually opens up their raising range with a lot of hands you have great equity against. They may decide to raise you to steal the pot with very weak holdings and then you have amazing fold equity when you shove on them. In essence, the small bet will cause most hands like KJ or TT which you are behind to just call, and increase the number of hands which you are way ahead of to raise you. I think that it being 2016, and your average passive calling station having been replaced by aggrotards, it's probably better to take advantage of those tendencies and play this hand less aggressively yourself. Trapping with hands like these in my opinion is extremely profitable against the super aggressive but level 1/2 thinking players and protects you from getting stacked when you only have 1 pair at showdown.
+Arjun Chintaram I definitly think preflop is the main issue. AK play much better in a heads up pot than a multiway pot, and initiative is also not nearly as valuable in a multiway pot. Especially not when out of position. So a 3-bet, which only bloat the pot without reducing the number of participants, does not really serve its purpose.
The maths proves that the shove is the right play. I agree with the assigned range that Split gives the opponent - the opponent doesn't necessarily have a set or straight here; they definitely potentially have some hands like JT, QJ or heart suited connectors. That range puts hero at an equity where the shove is +EV.
Another issue I have here is how he causally enters a few hands (oh, let's throw this and that in there...and a couple of those...) like a stoned teenager buying munchies at 7-11 and then bases like everything on "mathematics" based upon that....ummm......you can call it scientific if you want, but it is not. he could have nearly anything...hero bet less than 1/3 pot, a spineless bet that is just asking to be raised, and well how about that, the guy in position raises almost full pot. I'd raise there too with whatever...he could still have a very very wide range of hands and whatever you flippantly plugged into your little program there doesn't represent that....at all. even if he's not just trying to steal, there are so many hands that fit that flop it is unreal.
Thanks for the condescending comment! Have you run the math using your assumption of a super wide range? Do you suspect that makes the shove better or worse?
Reads is messy but you didn't talk about his calling range, flop raise range, flop raise fold range, flop raise call range. If you actually talked about it these ppl here can actually learn something but now they just think poker is simple all they need to do is download some program to run some calculations. By they way you should be using flopzilla instead of this.
What is with always wanting to make raises huge during these videos? There are 2 ways to look at it.. if the guy has ace queen he can just fold to a huge raise. So u lose value in tehse spots imo. If u make it too big and he goes all in... He has the better side of a flip with a pair, as nobody really just shoves now qith ace-queen at these stakes and you're praying u see no aces or kings.... U donks keep playing the way u want to and think whatever this guy is telling u is pure gold though...
I liked your reply. But I think that we have to remember this is live play. Live play plays a lot more different than online. People live don't fold very easily. Especially these stakes so you have to either check or big bet, small bet here achieves nothing when we still have an unmade hand. Also keep in mind stack sizes. There isn't enough for a proper triple.barrel so we can only reasonably.bet two streets. Small bet here leaves stack sizes kind of wonky especially out of position. That being said the more split suit videos I watch the more I feel like here's geared towards super beginners and live not online play.
certainly this guy didnt have the bankroll to play at this table or he doesnt made it by playing poker , i would definitely recommend to you to start at nl5 or nl10 and go from there or you are going to waste a lot of money playing with those basic mistakes .
Main Villain never raise to 125$ with half of the hand you used for your calculation with that wet of a board and another player in the hand. C'mon Split, very poor analysis, fishy AF. IMO best case scenario here your against 10-10 with 48% equity, so all in with a coin toss, is that profitable on the long run? (Rhetorical question). Btw you are absolutely right on the sizing preflop tho, would he raised bigger Villain never calls with Q-10o.
i just shoved twice on two different tournament with A3 suited (yes ! strangely the two exact same hand !) and the exact scenario as shown below with the same result ! :( mean raise and all .... if there is no reason to panic ,the feeling of getting busted out of two tournament while playing 4 hands is devastating after a very bad week :(
Niklas no way a low pair would call a shove on a board as wet as that. Only things that are calling are straights, sets, strong draws, and maybe TPGK, but I would imagine many people would fold TPGK in this situation anyway. This means youre getting fantastic fold equity and have a good number of outs due to the nut flush draw, and also have overcard outs if they made weak calls with hands like TPGK.
small possibility? the flush comes in ~36% of time, you have backdoor broadway, and you have two overs too...i'd say you have roughly 50% pot equity against a range of hands. No small pair is calling a shove here. The reason you shove is to get enough folds to make up for your lack of pot equity...a lot of people are going to fold.
Not sure when to play fast or slow with Ace King? Start by reading SplitSuit's book "Optimizing Ace King" and fully understand this hand once and for all: www.splitsuit.com/ace-king-poker-book
he called a raise with a queen ten honey
fucking idiot internet players!!!
fasistes mounia
Shut up Phil.....
sure he did..he's on the button and getting 2.5/1 odds...not a terrible call. just think of the number of times a "nothing" flop comes out and you get checked to on the button, make a small bet, and win...probably half the hands in no limit play out like that. the button is very powerful.
But juanda had twips..
Why wouldnt you lmao, 7s, kings a straight 3tens 3queens, 14cards for a 2pair at least 51.2per cent, flush35per cent chance dum fuck
The road to ruin is paved with flush draws.
Amen. Rarely hit
True. Never hits when you need it.
You will made the flush approximately 36% of the time in the turn and river (if you only see the turn and then had to fold cause someone raise you so you got only 18% or miss on the turn so again 18% to catch on the river), it's all calculations to say "you never get flush when you need it" is so stupid if ppl think that they should not play poker, By the way ppl always remember the times when the get unlucky but the amazing luck when they hit a set on the river with just 5% percent or something like that they will forget it after just a few hours.
Amen brother . Unless it’s your opponent when you’re playing online
@@oriboiman144 absolutely agreed. mathematically it is acceptable. past hands are independent events also that seem to trick people into thinking otherwise.
I find myself emulating you saying"it is what it is" when i lose a pot even though i was ahead when i shoved or called a shove only to get suckout on. what a calming mantra
I like the check-shove on the flop in this situation. If it checks through, thats ok, because we get a chance to improve for free. And if someone bet, the check-shove stands a better chance than a simple C-bet go get some made hands to fold. And also to get it in against some other draws, which we are ahead of. If a check induce a semi-bluff with AT or a worse flushdraw, thats just a fantastic opportunity to smack it back in their face with a check-raise.
Slightly late comment but I agree here: more importantly it protects your OOP flop checking range !
I had to pause at the flop cbet. $25 into $83 on this texture is a nightmare; this is an easy check/jam IMO.
This is a board where you'd be pot controlling with a lot of your range (or giving up with air) because it's likely your opponents hit this board. So your cbet will be low, but when you do cbet, it should be big. If you have 99, don't lay a random ten or queen a great price; charge it.
I completely agree 100% with your suggestions about the line to take, I would just love to hear one or two thoughts more from you about the remaining stacksize, when you criticise the small flop bet! Because I feel, that this may have factored into the reasoning for why it was so small....
Every video "bet higher", not that I disagree, just funny.
+NorskKiwi there is plenty of worse advice to follow :P
It is a bit funny and monotonous when you hear "bet higher" or "bet more" over and over in all of these advice videos, but that just goes to show you how terrible most live low stakes players are with bet sizes. I used to be guilty of this a lot too. I still make plenty of sizing errors, but I've become much better with sizing my bets based on the pot and making sure I'm not giving players 3-4 to 1 to call my 3bets preflop.
Most of your standard recreational live low stakes players think of bets in absolute dollar amounts instead of in correlation with the size of the pot. I'd say the single biggest across-the-board leak with low stakes live players is bet sizing. Most of the time it's atrocious, and in a lot of games if there's 1-2 players at the table that actually size their bets properly for the most part, the rest of the table thinks they're maniacs or bullies because their bets are consistently so "big".
Definitely a weakness of many low stakes players. I play in a weekly free league - so the lowest stakes you can get :-P - and it's funny how many players will min bet into a pot, regardless of pot size, draw potential or any other factors. There'll be like a 20+ BB pot on the turn, and they'll still min bet. It's just boggling. If they're doing it for value, surely they can get a similar amount of value while reducing the amount of opponents with a higher bet. If they're betting as a bluff, a min bet usually won't do it.
I think the big thing for low-stakes/newer players is that many of them don't think through enough why they're actually betting. They might get to the first layer - "it's a bluff" or "it's a value bet" - but they don't get to the next layer, of "is this size the best for maximising value" or "will this size generate enough folds".
The trends of bet sizing has changed a lot over the last few years.
It's fairly sound advice.
If I were to give a new player advice in a nutshell especially in low-micro stakes games it would be play very few hands from early position, never limp/call and make your raises bigger.
A reraise to 5xbet is not for pure value even if you say so, more like a semi-bluff if anything. 3xbet is still an over bet to me, in case villain has Aces or Kings and goes all-in or something. However, since hero got called and only flop a draw on a wet board that can hit a lot of villain's hand, I would check/call on the flop, keeping the pot smaller and easier to get away on the turn if hero misses and villain bet big to protect his hand.
AKs looks pretty, but not a made hand. Many people dread playing it because they usually lose big pots, and win small pots. One should ponder why that is and find ways to adjust those issues, else might as well throw it away.
Proving it is +EV does little to say whether it is better than calling. We must compare.
Well given stack sizes it makes sense to shove instead of call.
2 scenarios on the turn, either you make your flush or you don't:
if you don't make it you now have 147 behind if villain shoves (which he most likely would with the nuts) the pot at this point would be 605 with 147 to call which given 29% pot odds so it makes sense to call with a 20% chance of hitting the flush. So shoving would have been better since the money is going in anyway and you likely have some fold equity on top.
If you do make your flush on the turn villain might not be willing to bet the last of his stack so you just missed value.
The real question is should it be a fold, which really depends on the range you put your opponent on, if he only bets this big with a straight or set then by we aren't getting the pot odds needed to call (calling 38% of pot with 34.96% equity)
So it should be a shove or fold (probably always a shove though unless the player is only betting with the nuts)
for example if he did this with a jack you'd have 55% equity so a shove is definitely the right call.
Likely JT or AJ is raising here. It's highly likely your ace or king or both are live outs to go with the heart flush outs.
Glad u r real about showing bad results too, but 1 more option in cash game is to go twice on the turn or river and maybe catch that heart and split that pot. I know u know that but other viewers may not.
at a live 2/5 game I had ace-x suited and flopped a flush draw. I raised a 40 bet to 140 and I was re-raised to 240 with another player calling the raise. I was thinking in my head that despite great equity on the shove was getting over six to one to call. Thankfully the flush came on the turn and I stacked one opponent.
A raise on this flop is usually a 2pair+ type hand. with 0% fold equity, I prefer a tight fold as a default.
why is it wrong to call the $125. I often think to myself "I'm getting all of my money in the middle anyways so why not just call so that the other guy gets priced in". why make him fold when you're drawing to the nuts. I have the same amount of outs if the other guy stays in so why not have his money in the pot.
Mike Lawrey . yeah exactly. he said no fold equity so y not get it 3 way if drawing to nuts
The call is obvious for the reason you say. Yes, call here, not re-raise. Fold would be the best choice except that a call leaves a possible 3-way pot with the nuts on the turn.
shove gives the slight possibility that we're slow playing and he folds, which is obviously good for us as there's only a 35% chance of actually making the flush.
Great Video Thanks.
I've been thinking a lot lately about these types of pre-flop spots when my opponent makes a raise that is too small.
I like what you said about "I'm not going to play into this game".
I get it. I should make them play my game.
It feels a bit similar to "punishing the limpers".
I had a chronic limper on my right the other day.
I ended up shifting gears on him and I raised him about ten times in a row, and he still continued to limp, so on the tenth limp when he re-raised it was an easy fold.
Thanks
Please help: when you set your opponent range in equilab the author assumes that all villeins combos have the same probability. Do we have software that allows setting different weights for different combos? How do people solve this problem?
This is why I don't play big pots with AK out of position. If you reraise to $75 and he calls then you're in limbo if you don't hit the flop big. So now you are left with either a big continuation bet or a check raise. Either way at least one third of your stack is going in the middle and you don't know if he has AA, KK, QQ, etc.. If you slow down on the next street then he's betting big (I would). Now you are left guessing.
I prefer playing the AK out of position a bit tighter to a 3 bet meaning I would just call that raise from the blind. By doing this you control the pot and disguise your hand. So when the flop comes and it's a big draw for you..a simple check call might slow him down on the next street if he doesn't already have a made hand. If he slows down on the next street you might be able to take it down with a big bet on the river.
This will make you extremely easy to play against as your sb 3 bet range is capped. Any experienced player will be able to exploit you. I agree with split suit, and think that 3 betting is the best play here in the long run. We are way ahead of the openers range. 3 betting also gives us the lead in the hand and the opportunity to take it down with a continuation bet.
+Whinie Thenit There is no "correct" answer to this problem because it all depends on the players involved in the pot. If I think you're a loose non-thinking player then I'm not 3-betting too much of anything out of position. If I think you are a competent thinking player then I might paint a tight table image by playing certain hands a certain way and letting you see it. This makes my 3-bet a little stronger when I use it to steal a big pot later in the game. I also avoid getting a third of my stack in the middle with just a draw.
Let's examine this hand again..So let's say he raises it to $75 as suggested. If he doesn't call you risked $75 to win $14. What if he calls? At this point you have now invested close to one third of your $300 stack on a draw. You are still completely clueless to what he has and you need more information. So you have to either bet and see what he does or check and see what he does. If you bet and he re-raises all-in you are forced to fold. If you bet and he calls..you are now borderline pot committed and still clueless. If you check he may bet big and leave you with a tough decision ultimately leading to an all-in or fold. The only comfortable play is to hope a continuation bet will get him to fold if not it's hit or miss.
I'd rather play larger pots in position and only utilize the 3-bet out of position when I think it's profitable.
+Ramel Prince The suggested raise size was 45$ (15 BB) not 75$ (25 BB). Hero is out of position with a hand, which is very strong preflop but does not play as well postflop against multible opponents as against a single opponent. Even out of position you just HAVE to raise it up enough, that they both fold, or that you create a heads up pot. Its correct to be less aggressive from the blinds and isolate or 3-bet with a stronger range, than you would in position. But AK is the absolute top side of your range, so if you dont even 3-bet that, you are 3-betting way to tight. Even from the blinds.
+Ramel Prince I agree that this spot is very player dependant. I also agree that flatting is fine sometimes to balance your sb range. However, I think that the "standard" and most profitable play (without any reads on opponents) would be to 3 bet and go from there.
In general, players at these stakes will be making tons of calling mistakes. We want to punish these players and make them put more money in with the worst hand.
The only logical reason to flat here in the sb would be if I knew the bb would be squeezing with a wide range. If so, this would allow me to successfully set a trap and come over the top with a large raise.
Assuming you have little to no fold equity on the flop, especially on a board that smacks the other players pre flop calling range, why do you recommend such a large c-bet? For value? To expand on this question I would assume that the vast majority of the time someone in this hand is flatting you when you cbet. Then you see a turn and if its a brick you're double barreling on a nasty board or your check-folding because it's not likely someone with a hand is going to give you the odds to make your flush.
+Corey Cantu because the super small CB offers zero possible folds and creates a lot of awkward turns given the stack vs pot size.
what if you bet close to pot size on the flop then he calls, and turn misses?
Shoving is for high variance players in this position and not necessarily a winning play unless you get both callers
it is a winning play if they both fold....
anyways the problem with calling 125 here is that if you miss you have 168 left and the pot is over 350...that means if you miss you very likely faced with all-in or fold on the next street after investing about 1/2 your stack into the hand and still having a lot of pot equity...i mean, are you going to fold on the turn getting over 3-1 (a lot more if the other guy stays in too)? maybe you will fold it if the board pairs, but otherwise i think you are compelled to stay in.....therefore you might as well just get it in on the flop with a fair chance of taking it down right then, and a boatload of outs if you don't.
these stacks just are not very deep.
If you think you get a decent proportion of folds, raise it, if you think you can’t get them off the hand, then call, so long as you are getting the right odds and implied odds.
how is that software called you calculate the EV (and i don't mean the poker strategy range calculator) . Thx
This is a texture where there is never a situation to c-bet small. If you have a draw you just induce action. If you have a made hand you give draws too good of a price to hit. There is literally no combination of hole cards I can think of, and only the weirdest of player dynamics imaginable, that make this bet make sense.
+StillTrying2Help I have to respectfully disagree. If you induce action you put yourself in a spot where you have to stack off, otherwise you end up losing your equity advantage on most turns. Overs + flush is at best stacking off as a 60% favorite. But in most situations you are actually stacking off as a slight dog or folding out hands that are behind you. It LOOKS like flopping the nuts, but that's only against your opponents complete ranges, and not the ranges that give you a ton of action most of the time.
Good point. It's also generally a bad flop for really big hands while at least one of your opponents hits really good on boards like these. This is usually nightmare for AK but because of the fd it's just too tight to fold it. In this case I would probably check-shove so money go in anyway. But the c-bet is just useless because it doesn't really do anything.
Great one!! One of my last biggest poker questions, that just happens time and time again, but in such differrent ways that I keep constantly asking myself...
I was thinking on the flop that I'd rather have AQ here, not only for the additional equity from the gutshot, but also we unblock Kx suited combos. I like a check on the flop multiway, because of how wet the board is, and we don't need to bet for protection.
I would have liked a check on the flop and let the button bet...He likely would have bet about 50-60 bucks and you can call with AK, when the turn hits and its the 10...you can lay your hand down to a shove as you really only have 15% equity at that point.
Did ever consider a call on the flop to keep the 3ed player in? No fold equity from the raiser, you need to hit your draw to win.
Hi Split Suit! Excellent video! Why not considering AA, KK, QQ in the hand range possibility? Even "good" live player will never fold it at these limit. maybe because you think the would have reraised pre?
You forgot the option I was thinking the entire time. Would be to
Check my equity then dump the hand unless it was a small bet just call. Then reevaluate on the turn check again any resistance I fold. Instead of jamming on a big mysterious what if and losing your whole stack Playing for donk luck
On a trash hand of ace king suited that only has a draw when your opponents range obviously smashed the flop and it also includes your outs which is most likely the other hearts in the deck.
If we know villain to be a tight player then might this be a fold? If he's only stacking off the nuts, sets, and QQ then our equity drops to 35% and we need 11% folds just to break.
+dennybm I look to never put myself in a spot to bet/fold this much equity - especially on the flop. That being said, if you really feel he only raises the nuts, just call since the other guy likely calls a lot too and play the turns straight forward.
+dennybm Do you mean only raising nuts, sets, and QQ? Cause I really think there's nearly 0% of hands he's folding. No one is ever raising half your stack and then folding a board pair or any draw. It'd have to be a stone cold bluff to get a fold, and few players would make a stone cold bluff in this spot.
Also I don't see why they wouldn't raise AJ here, after the undersized c-bet and the 2nd player just calling. It seems pretty damn likely that it's good, and it's such a draw heavy board. I think he has to raise JT, QJ, and KJ too.
+dennybm
anyway by betting so small and checkraising behind, you are fully face-up and have 0 % fold equity against any decent player that have a made hand that have a decent equity versus AKs
+Klara906090
sorry not check raising, 3betting....
Completely disagree with the poster. I would be check calling here, knowing it allows the UTG player to call lighter as well. This is a spot where you don't necessarily want to isolate, but bring as many players along. This allows you to 1. have a flush over flush scenario, and 2. gives you better expected odds knowing the player behind you is likely to call the turn bet (if there is one) as well. Check calling here makes more sense.
If you call you miss the turn and get shoved on way too often
Dude thank you so much for this video ! I literally just came back from the casino and got stacked . Villain had a made straight and shoved on the flop I had nut flush draw + gut shot straight draw . I calculated 13 outs and called my stack . Unfortunately it didn’t land and I didn’t try to kick myself to much as I calculated 52% equity after the flop . Let me know what you guys think 🤔
How would someone play if they check raised from the small blind and got check shoved from the big blind? Would that indicate the big blind is super strong?
Really gr8 channel so glad i've run into it. :) ! Keep it up!
+Leedwon Leedwon thanks Leedwon!
I actually think that as long as most of the times an oppo will show up with straight, set or 2p, our overcards outs are not so clean and so we dont need to protect our pair outs against UTG limper, thus we are playing our nuts FD mostly, then it makes sense to just call to get UTG to call as well and get better implied Odds, right? We are commited anyway, if the FD completes OTT you still check and if oppo checks back, its 1/4 psb OTR or so. The second thing that comes to my mind, yea, we dont ever get to this spot because we dont bet 25 into 80 on the flop, but still most of raisers range is gonna be pretty strong and even if he does have TP+GS, or TPTK he doesnt fold. So we can take his raise as pretty pot-commiting. And look that we dont have enough equity here to call here effective AI profitably and make a nitty fold and play better next time. Or just call and if he has something like TP or 2p, on this runout to be ready to shove as a bluff on the river unimproved. Just an idea, but might increase EV of calling > shoving.
Hi, I want to ask how can I create this kind of calculation?
should be checking our range on this board?
Yeah that could be good.
So you are saying we should 3bet our bluffs 45-50 as well?
very good question...what about balance? i find it very hard to justify 3 betting 6x the 2 bet...either way you look at it, it seems bad. if you only bet like that with monsters, everyone folds and you don't get paid off. if you bet like that every time, you only get called by monsters and lose most of the time.
80 percent of my loss in poker is in this kind of situation.most of the times i flop nuts then my opponent hit the flush on turn or river and in the other hand i call or shove with nut flush draw and wont get there.im extremely unlucky when it comes to flush
Bet sizing
Ran into this exact situation. I had top pair, he had ace high flush draw. He shoved, I called and I got his whole stack. Yum yum
I dont think your assigned range for him is reasonable. And i also dont think this is an autoallin on this flop with a bare FD+overs. The flop just hit their range way to hard and i certainly wanna know why they should turn AJ into a bluff, raise with bad/worst FDs (which arent many btw since we block a lot of them). Agree on sizing pre and postflop, thats just bad. If SPR would be smaller i agree with bet/calling or check/raising on flop
If main villain shoved(on flop) instead of 125, do you call?
Great analysis as always!
+Θεοδωρος Σπυριδης thanks!
Hi. I have a question about the math you use here to calculate your EV. You assume that all the possible hands that you select are equally possible. But shouldn't we assume that, given the opponent's bet, it's much more likely that he's flopped a straight, rather than say a set, and therefore that our real EV is much less favourable ?
+Julien Lamy (JuL) the software automatically factors in the number of combos of each hand strength. That being said, you can weight combos within the software if you want to reanalyze the hand :)
+The Poker Bank Ok thanks, I'm not familiar with this software, I should try it.
+Julien Lamy (JuL) check out this video we made about it: ruclips.net/video/7hyHhC9OGpA/видео.html
Maybe I'm dumb, but I don't understand the point of raising after the flop with a nut flush draw, especially with this straight-friendly flop. Shouldn't your goals at this point be to (1) keep as many players in the hand as possible, since you will likely have the best hand if another heart comes up, and (2) see more cards so you know whether you hit your flush or not? Why would you want to potentially scare away the straight draw/weaker flush draw hands with a raise after the flop here? I guess I'm missing something
Hey, I love your videos, one question about this hand, what would you do if you c bet 70$, both people call, and the turn comes 10, or the turn completly bricks of, like 2 of clubs?
That would make Hero have $223 remaining on the turn. $293 remaining in the pot. If both players only call you can be pretty sure that they're not trying to protect anything from flushes and you can probably jam with enough fold equity, especially if you pick up the gutshot. On a dry board you're better off giving up.
He had the odds to call with QT or very close to it because the raise was way way too small and there was a call in front of the main villain. 18 dollars to win a pot of 81 so yeah I'd say he needs to call there, only conceivable reason to fold would be reverse implied odds but thats just never enough reason to fold here for main villain.
Aren't you severely polarizing your range when 3betting to $45-$50 preflop?
Would it ever be profitable to go to $25 on the flop to induce a raise?
+WayManlyWay you can go to $45 with a depolarized range as well. And you could choose $25 to induce...but there are almost certainly more ideal sizes available.
Why didn’t you put aces kings or queens in his range ?
Does that excel file suit for chip EV in tournaments?
Thanks !
+Antero Goulart it does not. It's just for raw EV.
+The Poker Bank look, im not talking about ICM, just wanna know if I can use that to see if a play is profitable, lets say, in the first level of blinds in a tournament, no money involved yet. that what u calling 'RAW ev'? thanks so much
+Antero Goulart yes, it would work for that :)
The Poker Bank appreciate ur patience.
45-50 ok I'm not very great but I have to admit that seems way too high. Why not 35-40? Makes way more sense, 50 just seems like you'll never get called unless your beat and AK suited is too good of a post-flop hand to just almost never extract more value from other than a little less than 5bb
I don't even cbet boards in this spot, I just go for c/r or c/c all the way to draw more cash into pot where I'm drawing to nuts.
I have a question WGAF
The video is old, but im losing lots of stacks with people shoving flush draws on flop.
Mani times i have pokect aces kings. sets. And the draw aways hit.
So i began to shove my draws too.
and i never hit.
The deck dont like me.
lol
My problem also
Grass always seems greener on other side.
Bad regs
Betting about 1/3 of the pot( ok he bets a bit smaller) is completely the correct amount. Do not follow the suggestion here and bet 3/4. I would certainly say look into your bet sizing strategy Sweeney because you're wrong
I've just rewatched the video and everything you suggest about the hand being hard to play because of Davids sizing is ridiculous. What you suggest makes it so much harder to play and puts us in much worse spots
I am a bit confused. If as you said they never fold in that spot and would typically have nuts and sets, how is that a profitable play? Don't you only hit your flush about 30% of the time, so you lose 70%.
Look at the range he assigns - the sets, the flopped straight, some combo combinations (like top/mid pair with straight draw potential) and some suited heart connectors. That range builds to villain having 55.6% equity over the AhKh. With the pot size and all-in size, it leads to a profitable shove in the long term for the hero.
Sure, against villain's exact hand he's behind 37-63, but even if you're confident in your read that someone has something, generally the best you can do is put them on a range given that players would likely play those combos in the range in the same way (ie. villain could easily have played a set or top pair+straight draw in the same manner as QTo). You'll notice that even against the flopped straight hero isn't dead in the water, given that he can hit the flush, or even get runner runner QT for the higher straight.
I don't get this? If the villain has 55.6% and will never fold in this scenario, how can that possibly be a long term profitable shove? The pot size is irrelevant, because if you're going to consider genuine long term variance then it would be compared with results of similar variables, including the size of the pot. So this would only be measured against the same spot and very similar pot size, and you only win 44%, so it has to be a long term loss.. Not to mention that the range given to the villain is pretty generous, a majority of times here hitting a naked A or K will not win the hand.
Ignore this shit video
Jake Cooper-- because there is the money already in the pot as well as the money from other players.
@@jakecooper5855 because the amount of money risked vs reward is not 50/50
I had what I thought was a bad beat on the cards, and I wanna see what you think I should have done.
I had a JQ off suit and I small raises to try to get the big blind to fold after everyone else folded. The blinds in the hand was 100/200, my raise was 400, the “villain raised to 800. I shoved and made an all in for $1100. The Gillian calls and has a QA off suit. Flip comes and it’s a J94 rainbow. Turn comes around, no help for either of us, than the river comes and it’s an Ace, one of the outs I needed a dodge and got caught. Did I get a bad beat, or did I do something wrong with that particular hand?
With such a small stack you need to shove instead of raising (if its cash game you probably should refill or leave instead of playing with such a small stack). Probably does not matter much in this situation though since he should call with AQ in that spot a 100% of the time.
Nice guy, love your channel. And good question from viewer.
+Happyface615 thanks Happy!
So 44% equity means you have the best hand 44% of the time?
also if you want hero to do more than 3X it PF isn't that just giving away a sizing tell?
+pats4lifebb
1.)44% equity means hero's hand and its chance of winning , against the "villain's" range of possible hands at that point in the street. Your hand equity with good pot odds is +EV. In the case above, hero's all in is +EV, which means hero will be making money on this play in the long run. It simply didn't work out this time.
2.) Sizing tell is when your raise amount is soley based on the strength of your hand. Hero's case was different.
a) hero LIMPED first (trapping I guess), then 3bet (reraise). Hero's actions shows aggression and strength.
b) 3betting larger (5x), isolates and narrows the field. (3x) gives other opponents better odds to call.
c) 3bet (5x) gives greater value to {AKs}, when it does hit the flop.
d) 3bet (5x) hero would have won the pot right there preflop when everybody folds or get's paid when it hits the flop/turn/river. win/win.
e) this is a live game, which is slower and bigger raise amounts are typical.
but don't you want action with hands like AKs, if you're just trying to win PF there it seems like you're just trying to win hands, not get max value
+pats4lifebb Preflop you want to show strength, but also all starting hands, no matter how strong, are vulnerable. So you do not want to give someone good pot odds to call for the chance to beat your strong starting hand. So when hero raises to 27 the bb has to call 24 to win 41 giving him 1.7:1 to call. The main villain now only has to call 18 to win 65 giving him 3.6:1. Now if you look at the difference when hero raises to 50 in that spot then bb has to call 47 to win 63 giving 1.3:1. If the bb still called then main villain has to call 41 to win 110 giving 2.7:1. If the bb folds the main villain now has to call 41 to win 63 giving 1.5:1. You can see how the pot odds change by the larger bet. So if someone wants to try to beat these strong starting hands then they are going to have to risk a lot more money and decide if it is worth it. This is, in a sense, how you get value by not giving people good odds to call so when they make the mistake and call you will more than likely profit from it.
This particular hand is a bad beat or a cooler. The villian isn't going to flop a straight again for a long time. He had a decent starting hand for his position, however, would he have called an additional $30 to 40 on it rather than 18? Sometimes it is better to try to take a small pot preflop and avoid the variance of playing the hand. When your cards are not as good and it is cheap to get into the pot then you want to try to win the pot after some cards come.
+Zeppelinlv2007 No, the Hero didn't limp in this hand. The Hero was in the BB. UTG was the limper.
+Cheyenne Souza You made a mistake recapping the action. The Hero is the BB in this hand.
In my live games, I would have 0 FE in this spot against the button.
If UTG is a fish, I lean towards just calling OTF to keep the fish in with a worse draw.
He might have a worse FD and our outs are nut-outs. Dont think our pair-outs are relevant.
Why not just call to keep the fish in?
he open limped and called da 3bet - pritty sure its a fish..
I agree, there is probably very little fold equity. However it does not matter, because with the pot odds, Hero is getting, he is committed to the pot with a draw as strong as this. The key thing is to not go for this cute little blocker bet but instead go for an actual bet or a check-jam, which DOES have fold equity.
So if we play the hand better, this situation on the flop does not happen. And therefore its a bit irrelevant to consider, if we should just call to keep UTG involved. Also unless he is a complete whale, it should not matter, since a call and an overcall of the 125$ will make the pot so big, that everyone is going to be committed to it anyway.
There's still a third person in the pot which you didn't address *at all* so wtf? Flatting will keep medium and sometimes even small flushes in the pot which is good for you.
I have to comment about the lack of an option to fold here. People often forget AK suited or unsuited is a draw hand. We need to catch or have fold equity for the hand to win. UTG likely has a small pocket pair or suited connectors and isn't very good being that he limped called $27. I'm gonna guess he was set mining because he's top stack. CO is likely calling us anyway if he likes his hand being that he raised and is in position. So what are we really doing here? We are actually hoping for a flop like the one we got. It keeps over pairs around and it keeps straights and straight/flush draws around. The problem is, for true equity here we need another heart. That $125 raise is a great move by CO because after our bet of $25 we have basically 2.5/1 pot odds on a draw need to be at about 4.1:1 or have something implied. We have to act bf UTG to the raise as well.
Let's say a 3rd heart drops on the turn, is CO really paying us off? He is well aware of the draw potential hence the big raise and assuming it's likely at least 1 of you has that draw. Let's say it drops on the river, isn't he folding to most seemingly value bets. Most important what if it doesn't fall, like 80% of the time, we just dropped a ton of money in the pot. I know money isn't supposed to be a reason to not make a decision but it seems basically poker math is still in play here.
I absolutely understand that ranging and off table work can be very helpful here but if anyone knows the importance of planning a hand it's Split who I have learned a ton from here in these videos... and maybe the plan at the time of the $100 raise in a potentially 3 man pot, on a draw out of position is to toss the $52 bucks and play the next hand.
+David Siegel The reason, why you shove a flush draw on the flop, when the math is correct, is exactly to avoid tough and unprofitable situations later on the in hand. Turn play is always bad for a flush draw, because either you have made your flush, and its difficult to get paid. Or you have not made your flush, and then you are either folding or putting in more money as a huge equity dog. Finally if you hit the A or K, which is actually 6 of your 15 outs, are you really going to get paid of by worse hands? Most likely not, because its a scary overcard to the pair + draw hands, that might continue on the flop. For all these reasons its better to get it in on the flop, if your opponents will so kindly oblige you with that. Its even better of course, if they fold the flop, which is why, you either have to C-bet much larger than this or go for a check-raise.
+StillTrying2Help I'll explain my position more in my other reply to fundiver but is the math really correct here for a shove?
+fundiver198 Thanks I agree is it important to avoid tough decisions... when you are planning a hand. I think once you have certain information early in a hand like post flop out of position facing a major raise you can't just make a decision because it could avoid having to make a tough one later.
That is the one thing I see differently here than SS, who I really respect. In this video he assigns some suited connectors like KTs A10s, I think 45s and some others are in there. I don't think there is any way he's making the call of 25 against 2 players with 45s. That range skews the equity. When I see this hand I don't think we have 44% equity and I think we have zero or very close to it in folds post flop.
Of course we don't wanna get sticky and have to decide what the heck we are gonna do in a situation where we don't connect on the turn. But why do we have to rip it? Because we increased the range to where it made sense? That to me is like when people at a 1/2 2/5 live game make a dumb call and then say there was implied odds. There are always implied odds but it's often used as an excuse to gamble rather than to make a sound play.
Here I believe we are behind and we know it. I think we know we need to hit our draw to be good. To rip this and shove I think is a lazy move. I think it's close enough to rationalize the shove and since calling really isn't an option that is what a lot of people would do.
SS even says in the video "there is really no situation I'm thrilled with so, shove it is." It's not like it's some awful decision but it is risking a ton of chips for a decision that nobody would be thrilled about and I think as played we would've been better off doing another thing we wouldn't be thrilled about, folding. But in this case and I think the majority of the time saving ourselves from walking into the nuts when we miss.
I think the discussion above is the interest part of the video but the lesson is that you have to raise more preflop to see if you get q10 off to fold and if he doesn't fold either do a heavy cbet (which obviously would've cost us more here but in general is a stronger play) or consider checking. If he does have a nut range we may get a free card or one for a good price and I'm fine with having to make a decision like that. We can't avoid all tough decisions in a thinking game.
+David Siegel Because Hero put in that small 25$ flop bet, there is 158$ in the pot, and Hero has 268$ left, when he face the raise. This means, the correct decision is to commit to the pot, if Hero has more than 38,6% equity against Villains raising range. Of course Villains range is up for debate, but its really hard to construct a range, which Hero would not have 38,6 equity against. To get to that result, you need to assign Villain only the made straight, sets and two pair. But seriously. If you sit on the button with a strong pair, and the preflop agressor make a small blocker bet like this, and the other dude just call it, do you just call as well??? Both Hero and the other dude are screaming out loud, that they dont like their hand all that much right now but hope to improve on the next card. So what do you do, if you are a decent player and understand the importance of aggression? Let them see the turn card at the price, they determined? Of course not. You raise! So Villain is for sure raising QQ here, he is raising any JX hand, and probably also TT. And therefore you dont even need him to raise a single worse flush draw for the shove to be profitable as played.
+fundiver198 Fair point, appreciate the response. I'm a little torn on it still but it makes sense what you are saying. I think villain did the right thing. How do you feel about villain's raise size? If villain a) shoved or b) made it $175 here, do you still have the same opinion on hero's shove?
Pre Flop - Bet larger Since OOP 4-5X to $40-50
Flop C-Bet 40-50% Pot, Can't really Represent J98 Flop
If Raised Flop Call the All-In
Thanks for the bet sizing information. Have had problems in that area in the past. But I have improved as of late.
+Ark Yoder You're very welcome Ark =)
StillTrying2Help Little plays MTTs where smaller bet sizing is more common and correct. In cash games there is no one-life-to-live mentality and thus there is more room for creative sizing all the way around.
I like a call and shove the turn. U know your behind and only gonna win if you hit so might as well have both people call you
Easily charge him more pre flop? He would have likely folded a big reraise which would have been preferable as the hand played out.
Would he raise with Q 10, then call the re-raise, then over top the nuts?
Probably has a set oh 9's.
He has Q 10.
Either way, fold is right?
This is exactly how i got kicked out the Big 10 knockout tournament last night on PokerStars , with ,A3 Heart against AJ , two heart on the flop and one A , i shove After the bet of vilain in the exact same position was 58% on the turn but lost he had a better kicker 90th place out of 13.000 entry 😠 the most frutrating is that vilain shove on me the exact previous hand and i had a flush draw also but with 89 i dicided to fold !
Me: raises to 45 pre. Misses flop. Checks to face pot-sized bet. Folds. Cries again.
That shove calling range seems a little odd.
If we’re saying villain could have QTo (which it turns out he did)...
And we’re saying villain would call with JTs and T9s for a pair plus straight draw, then why aren’t we also giving villain JTo and T9o?
Do JTo and T9o make sense in villain's preflop range? The assumption in this video was "no", which is why they weren't included. If you disagree, feel free to rebuild villain's range and then redo the math with the updated factors =)
@@ThePokerBank wow didn’t expect a reply on such an old video! Awesome that you still reply to comments on old vids!
Yeah I realise it’s more the process not the exact ranges, just interesting to see different perspective.
I’m shocked V shows up with QTo but I guess that’s why hero should be 3-betting larger preflop right?
Anybody miss the times inc ash games when players wre open book. Huge raise prelfop always meant ace queen ace king.. Smaller re reasies always meant aces,kings,queens... So fucking easy to read people.. I miss 5+ years ago... Now I can only make money in mtt's:(
Call was the obvious good option on the flop. You're banking mostly on a flush draw, so you want more opponents on turn and to build the pot with a small bet on the flop, which the opponent conveniently did for you. Its like a dream scenario for a call. I can't imagine any pro would say to shove here. Fold, plenty of pros would tell you that. But not shove.
I can't believe that guy opened 3x with Q10o and then called a 3 bet lol What a fish....He probably thinks he made a good play after winning the pot by a miracle.
He was on the button, I open any 2 card for 3x or more if only limpers are ahead of me. Why wouldn't he have opened?
i dont understand how players can do that if all odds are against you in long term, even if you win you loose more because against odds
Equity aside, I would only chase that draw if it was better than 3 to.1 to call.
+NagualElias but you do realize that equity is directly associated with that 3:1, right? =P
you forgot to mark pocket tens
So let's see...you wait an hour or two for a big hand like AK suited, guy in late position makes a 3bb standard open that could represent anything at all...a range of probably 1/3+ of the deck...and you recommend making it about 17bb? Very hard to understand this...what can he call you with? probably 80-90% of the time you are going to win 4.5bb with your big hand...then back to waiting another hour or two for another premium hand.
Sorry but there is no way I can understand this logic. Isn't poker about trying to get maximum value from hands?
So, in summary, we should assign the opponent a wide enough range to generate the idea that it's +EV to go broke two out of every three attempts?
I thought you're not supposed to gamble on flush draws. You go home in buses or something like that..
Thanks...I got pocket Jacks +1 haha!!!
I wonder if this guy got better at simple poker math yet...
Over simplification of the range
2-3?!?!?
Hello SplitSuit, I have a different take on this hand, particularly since you mentioned that the hand came from a live 2/3 game. My first disagreement would be with the argument to raise even bigger preflop. I would say that playing AKs out of position has incredibly high reverse implied odds and so the goal should be to keep the pot as small as possible. Therefore, with the aggressive tendencies of your average 2/3 live player, calling preflop and planning to float most cbets I would argue is a viable strategy. If the positions were a bit different and you have many players still to act behind you, raising is the obvious play but with only the UTG limp behind you, you aren't really too afraid of getting into a multiway pot with a hand that plays poorly in those situations. Of course, you lose out on some fold equity for the 14 dollars in the middle preflop, but that's not very much money and the geometric nature of pot growth really works against you in this spot. If you only had 50bb, this would again be an obvious raise with the plan to try to get it all in with TPTK, but TPTK plays very poorly especially OOP when you have 100bb+. Adding to the fact that live 2/3 players have a strong tendency to get out of line and fire multiple bullets with very polarized ranges, if you just call AK there and hit an A or a K on the flop, you can comfortably check-call 2 or 3 streets and catch all the opponent's bluff ranges without worrying too much that the pot size becomes unmanageable and your opponent is about to stack you with 2 pair or a set etc. If they cbet then check back turn, a value bet on the river still gets paid off a decent amount of the time since they may call you with a bluffcatcher as played.
As played with the flop as it is, I also disagree with your assessment on the flop bet size. I think it's a perfect blocker bet size. The 1/3rd pot size bet lets you see a turn for much cheaper than calling an opponent's bet most of the time. Check raising is very awkward here and that comes down to the 100bb starting stack issue again. Check-raising all in is way too big a bet but if you check raise a normal amount and get called and a heart doesn't come on the turn, you have a very awkward remaining chip stack and are going to be pushing it in with almost no fold equity while very behind a large number of the time. The 1/3rd pot blocker bet prevents you from having to pay 1/2 or 2/3rd pot most of the time to see a turn card. It also serves a second purpose. Due to the aggressive nature of these opponents, the small bet size actually opens up their raising range with a lot of hands you have great equity against. They may decide to raise you to steal the pot with very weak holdings and then you have amazing fold equity when you shove on them. In essence, the small bet will cause most hands like KJ or TT which you are behind to just call, and increase the number of hands which you are way ahead of to raise you.
I think that it being 2016, and your average passive calling station having been replaced by aggrotards, it's probably better to take advantage of those tendencies and play this hand less aggressively yourself. Trapping with hands like these in my opinion is extremely profitable against the super aggressive but level 1/2 thinking players and protects you from getting stacked when you only have 1 pair at showdown.
"This is not a situation to freak out about, I assure you."
LMAO
A $350+ loss is a lot to some people.
+Shred Head but if you can't afford and mentally handle a $350+ loss, you shouldn't be playing in that game. Just move down and rebuild =)
If the player is properly rolled, then yes 1 buy in is not a big deal
do you guys think he lost this hand pre? however shoving the flop is right play I think
+Arjun Chintaram I definitly think preflop is the main issue. AK play much better in a heads up pot than a multiway pot, and initiative is also not nearly as valuable in a multiway pot. Especially not when out of position. So a 3-bet, which only bloat the pot without reducing the number of participants, does not really serve its purpose.
+fundiver198 especially when your opponents have 300 and 200 ish big blind shallow 3bet will get u in trouble
How is this ever the right play when we are crushed with all his value hands and only win with a heart and almost never have any fold equity?
The maths proves that the shove is the right play. I agree with the assigned range that Split gives the opponent - the opponent doesn't necessarily have a set or straight here; they definitely potentially have some hands like JT, QJ or heart suited connectors. That range puts hero at an equity where the shove is +EV.
Another issue I have here is how he causally enters a few hands (oh, let's throw this and that in there...and a couple of those...) like a stoned teenager buying munchies at 7-11 and then bases like everything on "mathematics" based upon that....ummm......you can call it scientific if you want, but it is not. he could have nearly anything...hero bet less than 1/3 pot, a spineless bet that is just asking to be raised, and well how about that, the guy in position raises almost full pot. I'd raise there too with whatever...he could still have a very very wide range of hands and whatever you flippantly plugged into your little program there doesn't represent that....at all. even if he's not just trying to steal, there are so many hands that fit that flop it is unreal.
Thanks for the condescending comment!
Have you run the math using your assumption of a super wide range? Do you suspect that makes the shove better or worse?
Will you shove if you are $1000 deep?
Reads is messy but you didn't talk about his calling range, flop raise range, flop raise fold range, flop raise call range. If you actually talked about it these ppl here can actually learn something but now they just think poker is simple all they need to do is download some program to run some calculations. By they way you should be using flopzilla instead of this.
What is with always wanting to make raises huge during these videos? There are 2 ways to look at it.. if the guy has ace queen he can just fold to a huge raise. So u lose value in tehse spots imo. If u make it too big and he goes all in... He has the better side of a flip with a pair, as nobody really just shoves now qith ace-queen at these stakes and you're praying u see no aces or kings....
U donks keep playing the way u want to and think whatever this guy is telling u is pure gold though...
I liked your reply. But I think that we have to remember this is live play. Live play plays a lot more different than online. People live don't fold very easily. Especially these stakes so you have to either check or big bet, small bet here achieves nothing when we still have an unmade hand. Also keep in mind stack sizes. There isn't enough for a proper triple.barrel so we can only reasonably.bet two streets. Small bet here leaves stack sizes kind of wonky especially out of position. That being said the more split suit videos I watch the more I feel like here's geared towards super beginners and live not online play.
certainly this guy didnt have the bankroll to play at this table or he doesnt made it by playing poker , i would definitely recommend to you to start at nl5 or nl10 and go from there or you are going to waste a lot of money playing with those basic mistakes .
This hand's cost is like 320$ xD
Poor brah.
Main Villain never raise to 125$ with half of the hand you used for your calculation with that wet of a board and another player in the hand. C'mon Split, very poor analysis, fishy AF. IMO best case scenario here your against 10-10 with 48% equity, so all in with a coin toss, is that profitable on the long run? (Rhetorical question). Btw you are absolutely right on the sizing preflop tho, would he raised bigger Villain never calls with Q-10o.
In live play, all you have to do is whip out the gun.
It equalizes any nut draw someone could have on you.
Jus' sayin.
i just shoved twice on two different tournament with A3 suited (yes ! strangely the two exact same hand !) and the exact scenario as shown below with the same result ! :( mean raise and all .... if there is no reason to panic ,the feeling of getting busted out of two tournament while playing 4 hands is devastating after a very bad week :(
A3 is not AK.....
Always shove infinite equity ónly 1 way to win
AK has ruined more players than others
ALL IN FUCK IT
not good info. imo. why on earth to shove with a small possibility draw and an ace high. any low pair will beat you in case of drawing dead.
But will the small pair call your shove? If you only ever shove with the best-hand it becomes very easy for your opponents to react when you shove...
Niklas no way a low pair would call a shove on a board as wet as that. Only things that are calling are straights, sets, strong draws, and maybe TPGK, but I would imagine many people would fold TPGK in this situation anyway. This means youre getting fantastic fold equity and have a good number of outs due to the nut flush draw, and also have overcard outs if they made weak calls with hands like TPGK.
small possibility? the flush comes in ~36% of time, you have backdoor broadway, and you have two overs too...i'd say you have roughly 50% pot equity against a range of hands. No small pair is calling a shove here. The reason you shove is to get enough folds to make up for your lack of pot equity...a lot of people are going to fold.