Thank you another great class. Working on all pre-flop positions and what todo is great and a a great way to build your skills starting at the start. I find quite a few people with big cards don't hit the board and bet like machines ike they are going to hit no matter what but if you don't connect you don't.
I know you probably won't reply to this but I wanted to thank you for all your help with my poker game it has helped me win a lot of money in my poker video game thank you for all the lessons I appreciate that I know you probably won't answer paying members and stuff but I just wanted to say thank you cuz you're helping me win at my poker video game
Hi Jonathan love the content and thanks for all the help you give us. My question to you would be, "how would you define a range advantage and what are ways to identify it"
The player that is likelier to connect with a given board has range advantage. Let's say it folds around to BTN, who raises preflop, and BB calls. If the flop is AK4, BTN has range advantage because BTN's range includes top set, middle set, and top 2pair, whereas BB's range does not (because BB would've probably raised preflop with AA, KK, and AK).
Amazing content as always. I have heard before to sometimes check with hands like AA to get tricky, but now I know it's to balance out hands where you give up.
I also continue to be surprised by how some breakdowns seem to overvalue suitedness. I don't see why K9s is a better hand than KJo. I'd go for the latter every time. You only improve to a flush like 2.5-3 percent of the time. Meanwhile, flopping a pair of jacks is vastly superior to flopping a pair of 9s. I've been perplexed by this issue for a while. I get that it also depends on the perceived range of one's opponents. 76s is a much better hand against AK than KQ. But in my experience as a winning low stakes player I vastly prefer big cards to speculative hands that need very precise flops to continue. Please give me a response JLittle! I'm not saying this because I assume I know better than you, but I do think some of these combos play differently in my games than your games.
Equity realization is higher, more implied odds in case you do hit; easier to let go of in a bloated pot when behind. If your opponents always pay off to top pair and/or let you get to showdown cheaply/for free, KJo is a better 3bet than K9s. In my games however the winrate with (2nd)nut flushes is significantly higher than with TPGK or 2nd pair. Don't forget we're bluffing with K9s btw.
@@consumer61 Again tight opponents yes, but if you can get called by a worse jack or a second or third pair, it is a very strong hand. Once again, I play in different hands than JLittle. One of his charts says K9s is a call while KJo is a 3 bet bluff. The 3 bet bluffs are supposedly weaker hands than the calls. I do think the 2.5 percent extra when you do improve to a flush that flush is very valuable. But 2.5 percent extra is not that much of the time. I also get that when you flop a flush draw it presents barreling opportunities. Hence "Suited cards tend to over realize their equity." But I'd still go for the higher ranked hands any day. I don't find that extra 2.5 percent equity to be that valuable long term. "Easier to let go of in a bloated pot when you are behind." Why?
@@noahg2755 easier to let go of because if you're behind you have very few outs (like 3-5) and you might still be behind. Whereas with a flushdraw you have more outs and when you improve you're almost always ahead. So it's easier to play.
I talk to someone I consider a competent low stakes player who says that it is a squeeze if you open against a bunch of limpers. That attacking the limps is also squeezing. Is this correct?
He may be competent, but in this case he's wrong. By definition a squeeze requires a raise and at least one call. When there are limpers, you're just attacking limpers, often trying to isolate a weaker player. I believe the reason they call it a squeeze, is that you are squeezing the caller or callers that called the raised.
![When To FLOAT [Poker STRATEGY]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/KxHMudA2DCM/mqdefault.jpg)
Thank you another great class. Working on all pre-flop positions and what todo is great and a a great way to build your skills starting at the start. I find quite a few people with big cards don't hit the board and bet like machines ike they are going to hit no matter what but if you don't connect you don't.
I know you probably won't reply to this but I wanted to thank you for all your help with my poker game it has helped me win a lot of money in my poker video game thank you for all the lessons I appreciate that I know you probably won't answer paying members and stuff but I just wanted to say thank you cuz you're helping me win at my poker video game
JL=The Man.
Thanks for the tips
Hi Jonathan love the content and thanks for all the help you give us. My question to you would be, "how would you define a range advantage and what are ways to identify it"
The player that is likelier to connect with a given board has range advantage. Let's say it folds around to BTN, who raises preflop, and BB calls. If the flop is AK4, BTN has range advantage because BTN's range includes top set, middle set, and top 2pair, whereas BB's range does not (because BB would've probably raised preflop with AA, KK, and AK).
Amazing content as always.
I have heard before to sometimes check with hands like AA to get tricky, but now I know it's to balance out hands where you give up.
yes, i voted for you. ;) good thing you sent out the mail.
Thanks!
I also continue to be surprised by how some breakdowns seem to overvalue suitedness. I don't see why K9s is a better hand than KJo. I'd go for the latter every time.
You only improve to a flush like 2.5-3 percent of the time. Meanwhile, flopping a pair of jacks is vastly superior to flopping a pair of 9s. I've been perplexed by this issue for a while.
I get that it also depends on the perceived range of one's opponents. 76s is a much better hand against AK than KQ. But in my experience as a winning low stakes player I vastly prefer big cards to speculative hands that need very precise flops to continue.
Please give me a response JLittle! I'm not saying this because I assume I know better than you, but I do think some of these combos play differently in my games than your games.
Equity realization is higher, more implied odds in case you do hit; easier to let go of in a bloated pot when behind.
If your opponents always pay off to top pair and/or let you get to showdown cheaply/for free, KJo is a better 3bet than K9s. In my games however the winrate with (2nd)nut flushes is significantly higher than with TPGK or 2nd pair.
Don't forget we're bluffing with K9s btw.
Bad implied odds when you flop weakish top pairs (you're behind AJ, KQ, AK, AA-QQ)
@@consumer61 Again tight opponents yes, but if you can get called by a worse jack or a second or third pair, it is a very strong hand. Once again, I play in different hands than JLittle.
One of his charts says K9s is a call while KJo is a 3 bet bluff. The 3 bet bluffs are supposedly weaker hands than the calls.
I do think the 2.5 percent extra when you do improve to a flush that flush is very valuable. But 2.5 percent extra is not that much of the time. I also get that when you flop a flush draw it presents barreling opportunities. Hence "Suited cards tend to over realize their equity." But I'd still go for the higher ranked hands any day. I don't find that extra 2.5 percent equity to be that valuable long term.
"Easier to let go of in a bloated pot when you are behind." Why?
@@noahg2755 easier to let go of because if you're behind you have very few outs (like 3-5) and you might still be behind. Whereas with a flushdraw you have more outs and when you improve you're almost always ahead. So it's easier to play.
@@consumer61 No he was saying the suited combos are easier to let go of.
sending video to my friend
I talk to someone I consider a competent low stakes player who says that it is a squeeze if you open against a bunch of limpers. That attacking the limps is also squeezing. Is this correct?
He may be competent, but in this case he's wrong. By definition a squeeze requires a raise and at least one call. When there are limpers, you're just attacking limpers, often trying to isolate a weaker player. I believe the reason they call it a squeeze, is that you are squeezing the caller or callers that called the raised.
@@SFreedberg1 Yeah I agree with this.
Hopefully the weak tight regs I play with regularly don't see this
AA,kK,QQ end of story 30 second video 😂