The small flop c-bet may be an auto bet because of the monotone flop... kind of normal for a heads up flop but a bit loose 3-way oop but imperfect players etc.
I'm confused...if it is a bluff, you're trying to get better hands to fold, right? How many better hands do they actually have here that will fold? No flushes will fold. Maybe not a straight. You already block top pair type hands so those are less likely. I would think that overpairs and sets would have been more aggressive on the flop given the flop texture.
What do you mean with more aggressive on the flop? On monotone board textures range is supposed to bet small or check in a high frequency, especially multiway. That includes overpairs, with and without according suits. Out of villains pov if you bet too big, arrival ranges on turns and rivers will be too strong, meaning you're single pair hands lose immensely in value and bluffing becomes unprofitable. So yeah after a small flop c-bet there are still enough better hands that fold turn as played when checked to (overpairs especially).
@@ThePokerBank I see that, just coming from GTO solved ranges with a 3Bet only strategy confuses me that these very strong hands like ATs-AQs and KJs-KQs have such a high call frequency. With which assumptions are these ranges solved? Very confused that calling makes more EV than playing bigger pots ip
This is low stakes Florida poker. Bluffing in general (especially with four cards of the same suit on the board) is literally lighting money on fire unlike 5/10, 10/20 and above. But then again it does work on occasion with the right configuration, players, etc. Good job, sir!
That might be in general true, but in my area there are really only 1-3 games with the occasional 2-5 due to a $300 max bet rule (Main difference in the games are how deep folks can buy in for. The 1-3 is max $500 and the 2-5 max $1000). The 1-3 are not purely full of recs since there are limited choices, you'll have thinking players quite often and bluffs work....just have to pay attention to who your opponent(s) are in a particular situation. a 33% fold break even is not that hard to achieve with both a 4 liner and 4 flush out there.
so, the fact that this bluff *did* work, proves your point that it would *never* work . . . I am guessing you didn't pay much attention to the video, as you got the stakes wrong. So you probably ignored the other factors involved in the hand as well. like the players in the hand, their actions prior to the bluff, and the BE% of the bluff. other than that, your enormous generalization about how players in a different game play was spot on.
![$1/$2 Cash Game Preflop Strategy [Mastering The Fundamentals]](/img/1.gif)
Hey Splitsuit! Good to see you again. I've learned so much from watching your videos. Thank you! Congrats on the kiddos!
You're very welcome and thank you for your kind words!
I watched split suit when he started this channel. My favorite video is his SPR video.
Thanks for hanging out for a decade 👍
@@ThePokerBank the pleasure been mine Ty for teaching
The small flop c-bet may be an auto bet because of the monotone flop... kind of normal for a heads up flop but a bit loose 3-way oop but imperfect players etc.
It's incredible how many players use their HU frequencies even in MW pots lol
doing this one in micro all the time.
I'm confused...if it is a bluff, you're trying to get better hands to fold, right? How many better hands do they actually have here that will fold? No flushes will fold. Maybe not a straight. You already block top pair type hands so those are less likely. I would think that overpairs and sets would have been more aggressive on the flop given the flop texture.
What do you mean with more aggressive on the flop?
On monotone board textures range is supposed to bet small or check in a high frequency, especially multiway. That includes overpairs, with and without according suits. Out of villains pov if you bet too big, arrival ranges on turns and rivers will be too strong, meaning you're single pair hands lose immensely in value and bluffing becomes unprofitable.
So yeah after a small flop c-bet there are still enough better hands that fold turn as played when checked to (overpairs especially).
Very surprised about the calling ranges including ATs-AQs and KJs and KQs… no 3bets here? Rather calling ip and keeping the pot small?
it looks like AQs, ATs and KJs are not fully shaded blue. the missing percentage could be in the 3Bet range.
@@ekw555 it’s like 80-90% blue, so basically no raising
There are 3bets there (they just aren't shown when call is specifically selected). FWIW, the 3bet range is 6.1% and does include KQo, KJs, AQo, etc.
@@ThePokerBank I see that, just coming from GTO solved ranges with a 3Bet only strategy confuses me that these very strong hands like ATs-AQs and KJs-KQs have such a high call frequency.
With which assumptions are these ranges solved? Very confused that calling makes more EV than playing bigger pots ip
@@toniweigl9783 The game tree parameters can be found here: redchippoker.com/gto-ranges-app-technical-faq/ 👍
Bluffs work well when your opponents don't have anything......
This is low stakes Florida poker. Bluffing in general (especially with four cards of the same suit on the board) is literally lighting money on fire unlike 5/10, 10/20 and above. But then again it does work on occasion with the right configuration, players, etc. Good job, sir!
it's 2/5
That might be in general true, but in my area there are really only 1-3 games with the occasional 2-5 due to a $300 max bet rule (Main difference in the games are how deep folks can buy in for. The 1-3 is max $500 and the 2-5 max $1000). The 1-3 are not purely full of recs since there are limited choices, you'll have thinking players quite often and bluffs work....just have to pay attention to who your opponent(s) are in a particular situation. a 33% fold break even is not that hard to achieve with both a 4 liner and 4 flush out there.
so, the fact that this bluff *did* work, proves your point that it would *never* work . . .
I am guessing you didn't pay much attention to the video, as you got the stakes wrong.
So you probably ignored the other factors involved in the hand as well.
like the players in the hand, their actions prior to the bluff, and the BE% of the bluff.
other than that, your enormous generalization about how players in a different game play was spot on.