We discuss why this river is an easy value bet all day with AA or AK. If it's an easy value bet then it's generally not a great bluff spot. Listen to the point made at 10:00. The main concept this hand brings up is that -- Your opponent will hero call you down lighter if he himself would not bet an over pair or top pair like this. They project how they would play when the flush card comes in and therefore think you must have those hands less often.
Agreed. The caller even said he's betting AA and AK all day long...for value. Which means you want 99/TT/KQ to call. It's silly to then bluff in the same spot hoping those same hands will fold.
Personal anecdotal experience, but a live-tell I often trust as reliable that Hero says he did here is checking their cards once a flush draw comes in. It's fair easier to remember your hand and what suit each card is when they match, so I'll often see players with offsuit hands be the ones that reach down to check their hands again.
Be careful on this one, because it's also common for people to make sure they haven't misremembered or misread their hand - wanting to be sure they have two hearts, rather than a heart and a diamond. And people will also "Hollywood" by looking again at their two cards when they know damned well they have the nuts.
The live-read probably had more to do with the long tank before jamming than the looking back at the hole cards. If the hero had AA or a flush here the standard timing would be to think for 20 seconds and then jam.
I don't bluff this spot in a lot of games because the show up with TT JJ QQ so often and people get married to those hands if they don't see an ace on board. Interestingly, I think bad players they specifically put you on a hand instead of a range would be more susceptible to the bluff here because they love to put you on AK exactly. They would be mad, call you lucky, and muck middle pairs where the hero calling type will say "they could have Ax with ace of hearts" and find a call since the river size is so small. Not a fun spot, but timing and sizing probably hurt the hero here more than what kind of game he was in.
It's a fine bluff, but the issue with this hand is the betsizes used throughout. Hero should go slightly smaller on the flop and significantly smaller on the turn in order to leave a much large bet relative to the pot size for the river.
The problem in such a spot is firstly the paired board tends to lead to more stationing with the pocket pair region in general. Secondly there will be some players with close to 0 folds in this spot meaning we lose the entire bet on the river. The amount of EV we win from some players folding may not be able to compensate this.
1. It’s a 3-bet pot with a middle position open and they’re quite shallow. Villain probably should even call preflop with a hand like 87s especially with button still to act behind. 2. The 8x hands that villain does call with preflop will often raise the flop. 3. The 8x hands that villain call the flop with will probs just get it in on the turn. All in all, it’s not impossible/inconceivale that villain has 8x. It’s just not very likely.
Any thoughts on him tanking a little before jamming? Seems like if he was representing the nut flush, there shouldn’t be anything to think about. That would 100% look like a bluff to me
Man I hate AQo oop. Feels like you get these runouts every time and torch money at low stakes barreling off because nobody folds. I agree with Bart about the delayed double barrel here, it probably gets more credit on rivers like this.
Caller gave it away by double checking the cards on the river. If you have AA, KK, AK you won’t need to check, AhKh you don’t need to check. People rarely check suited cards in live. And caller mentioned villain might picked up live tell, anyway great call by the villain.
There are 15 combos of AQ that bricked (top of Hero's bluffing range), at 2:1 pot odds to call where are hero's 30 value hands? I think check turn and large (non-jam) river bet on non-heart (where you would bet your QQ, JJ, TT etc.)
It's so obvious that Bart looks at these hands prior, which is 100% fine, I would always look at hand before I do a short breakdown on camera. I just don't get why he has to pretend this is the 1st time hearing about the hand and it's all off the top of his head. He gives it away at 4:39 with " I don't know what happens" when he's talking about the front door flush coming in and the naked A of that suit in hero's hand. Of course you know what's going to happen, and you should, just don't think your smarter than all of us.
I think he legit tries to go into the hand without a solid recollection of what happens, but he's got to vet the hands before making the decision to include them in the show (if you don't curate/moderate your own content, no one else is going to do it for you). That means, whether or not he knows exactly what happened he's seen the hand before recently, and that will subconsciously skew perceptions (that's why advertising works and companies spend billions doing it).
Yeah completely fine until turn. I'd consider checking here, the sizing is just really awkward for you to bet anything that's not all-in, to have a triple barrel on the river. I think that's the main problem here, you're giving villain good pot odds anyway. But I definitely wouldn't go all-in, cuz what do you do that with? Basically nothing apart from a draw. So I would want to bet turn but idk if I can in this spot. Now when he tank calls I think it's obvious that he has a middling pair, 66-TT. There's just no way he tanks with a king & he never calls you with A-high either. Could I guess have a 4 for like 54s but that's effectively the same in your perspective as like 66. I just think I check turn, we can give up to a fold & if he checks back we can maybe overbet jam some rivers, or just straight up that we spike an ace or a queen, those should be good. Or even a king but we don't bet that card we just check it for showdown value. I think I give this up because we're in an awkward sizing ponder.
The 1/3rd flop size at specifically low stakes…. Gets so much less credit than the same size bet in a bigger stakes game. 1/3rd pot at low stakes ppl just don’t believe it. I know it’s correct in theory for 1/3rd size in a 3 bet pot, but I’ve gone away from it myself and get more respect it seems from other sizes.
@@supersmoo7377 There may be times to bluff, but as a general rule, if you never bluff in a home game, and concentrate more on betting for value (including thin value) you will make more money. There are more calling stations, and there are also more egos...people who don't like to be bluffed out of a pot. And a lot of people just not paying attention to realize that if you're betting you don't have nothing. Sure, you'll miss out on some pots you could have stolen, but that will be far outweighed by the money you would otherwise lose when your bluffs get called by Ace high or bottom pair. These are the same guys who will call your river bet in seven-card stud when they can't even beat your four up cards.
When will people learn that blanket statements don't belong in poker. I successfully bluff my mf ass off in low stakes. There's an art that involves your image and spots that they would never take.
@@breakglass3025 There's a difference between low stakes card rooms, and low stakes home games (typically - there are always exceptions)....as well as low stakes Las Vegas/tourist/resorts/cruise ships tables. Low stakes players can indeed play scared and be bluffed, even rec players. However, in certain games, like home games or tourist games, you're going to see more people in gambling moods and more calling stations (and more drunks). There are certainly low stakes games where you're just better off putting the bluff in your back pocket. Sure, you'll lose some pots you could have otherwise stolen, but that will be far outweighed by the losses you incur when your bluffs would get called by ace-high or bottom pair. You can start value betting hands that you would consider bluffs in other games. The biggest issue with the caller in the video is bluffing in a spot where he says he would bet for thin value, while targeting the same hands, and magically hoping that when he has value they call and when he's bluffing they fold.
How could a solver possibly know when to Bluff with the ace of hearts there? How could it possibly know if your opponents would fold an eight, a small flush or if they would call with 1010??
A solver solves against another solver. It is coming up with a solution against a villain who is playing “perfectly” against you. If you learn that your opponent is way more call-happy, then you should limit the amount of bluffs the solver recommends. If the player you’re up against folds way too often, you can use more bluffing hands.
It doesn't - it's about percentages to what is the most likely outcome against a range of hands your opponent could have....and how they should theoretically react to your action. Against another theoretical player who is playing GTO. The solver is the beginning of the conversation, not the end of it - a good starting point against an unknown entity. Since humans cannot possible ever achieve GTO, you have to adjust as you learn their tendencies.
Too small on turn. Wouldn't bet that small with ak or aa. Inviting anything wirh any piece or draw to call...or 3 bet you. Also didnt leave enough to scare on river..if wanted a fold had to bet bigger on turn.
We discuss why this river is an easy value bet all day with AA or AK. If it's an easy value bet then it's generally not a great bluff spot. Listen to the point made at 10:00. The main concept this hand brings up is that -- Your opponent will hero call you down lighter if he himself would not bet an over pair or top pair like this. They project how they would play when the flush card comes in and therefore think you must have those hands less often.
Agreed. The caller even said he's betting AA and AK all day long...for value. Which means you want 99/TT/KQ to call. It's silly to then bluff in the same spot hoping those same hands will fold.
King of the bottom feeders...
Freaking 1-2 home game, the Ah is entirely irrelevant.
Personal anecdotal experience, but a live-tell I often trust as reliable that Hero says he did here is checking their cards once a flush draw comes in. It's fair easier to remember your hand and what suit each card is when they match, so I'll often see players with offsuit hands be the ones that reach down to check their hands again.
Be careful on this one, because it's also common for people to make sure they haven't misremembered or misread their hand - wanting to be sure they have two hearts, rather than a heart and a diamond. And people will also "Hollywood" by looking again at their two cards when they know damned well they have the nuts.
The live-read probably had more to do with the long tank before jamming than the looking back at the hole cards. If the hero had AA or a flush here the standard timing would be to think for 20 seconds and then jam.
So check when you have AQ hearts there too.
I don't bluff this spot in a lot of games because the show up with TT JJ QQ so often and people get married to those hands if they don't see an ace on board. Interestingly, I think bad players they specifically put you on a hand instead of a range would be more susceptible to the bluff here because they love to put you on AK exactly. They would be mad, call you lucky, and muck middle pairs where the hero calling type will say "they could have Ax with ace of hearts" and find a call since the river size is so small. Not a fun spot, but timing and sizing probably hurt the hero here more than what kind of game he was in.
Nahhhh lots do a double check to see if flush. Especially if drinking
It's a fine bluff, but the issue with this hand is the betsizes used throughout. Hero should go slightly smaller on the flop and significantly smaller on the turn in order to leave a much large bet relative to the pot size for the river.
What is ultimate ultimate?
The live read was you looking at your hand to see if you had the A of hearts. If you had the flush, you wouldn’t double check before shipping it.
The problem in such a spot is firstly the paired board tends to lead to more stationing with the pocket pair region in general. Secondly there will be some players with close to 0 folds in this spot meaning we lose the entire bet on the river. The amount of EV we win from some players folding may not be able to compensate this.
Throughout the hand.....How do ignore possibility of villain having trip eights? Please teach me.
1. It’s a 3-bet pot with a middle position open and they’re quite shallow. Villain probably should even call preflop with a hand like 87s especially with button still to act behind.
2. The 8x hands that villain does call with preflop will often raise the flop.
3. The 8x hands that villain call the flop with will probs just get it in on the turn.
All in all, it’s not impossible/inconceivale that villain has 8x. It’s just not very likely.
Any thoughts on him tanking a little before jamming? Seems like if he was representing the nut flush, there shouldn’t be anything to think about. That would 100% look like a bluff to me
Check flop & barrel turn & river.
Yes it’s okay to sometimes check the flop after 3-betting from out-of-position.
@supersmoo7377 I tend to get credit for AK in situations like that 1.
@@supersmoo7377 Not on a low paired board with a backdoor nut flush draw. That's a stupidly obvious cbet.
Man I hate AQo oop. Feels like you get these runouts every time and torch money at low stakes barreling off because nobody folds. I agree with Bart about the delayed double barrel here, it probably gets more credit on rivers like this.
The same thing could happen with AK? Sometimes you miss.
Caller gave it away by double checking the cards on the river. If you have AA, KK, AK you won’t need to check, AhKh you don’t need to check. People rarely check suited cards in live. And caller mentioned villain might picked up live tell, anyway great call by the villain.
Good call in.
9:16 He sounds so devious... "This is exactly what I'm talking about"
Never make the spr less then pot when planning an all in bluff. This was horribly executed
standard " home game" call where they say " show me" unbluffable
Personally I'd rather have the flush
There are 15 combos of AQ that bricked (top of Hero's bluffing range), at 2:1 pot odds to call where are hero's 30 value hands? I think check turn and large (non-jam) river bet on non-heart (where you would bet your QQ, JJ, TT etc.)
There are only 4 combos with the Ah though. Hero probably not bluffing without the heart so he doesn't have as many bluff combos as you are claiming
Is AQo in SB always a 3b! Hand vs LJ Raise? GTO had it as 80% call / 20% fold.
With the button calling in between? I doubt that
It's so obvious that Bart looks at these hands prior, which is 100% fine, I would always look at hand before I do a short breakdown on camera. I just don't get why he has to pretend this is the 1st time hearing about the hand and it's all off the top of his head. He gives it away at 4:39 with " I don't know what happens" when he's talking about the front door flush coming in and the naked A of that suit in hero's hand. Of course you know what's going to happen, and you should, just don't think your smarter than all of us.
I think he legit tries to go into the hand without a solid recollection of what happens, but he's got to vet the hands before making the decision to include them in the show (if you don't curate/moderate your own content, no one else is going to do it for you). That means, whether or not he knows exactly what happened he's seen the hand before recently, and that will subconsciously skew perceptions (that's why advertising works and companies spend billions doing it).
I think he gets the summary of the hands, some hands are selected days maybe weeks before. Either way great contents for the poker community.
The fact that the opponent called with 99 highlights why this is a good play.
I'm in the Columbus area too. I think I know this caller. His voice sounds familiar. Lol
Yeah completely fine until turn. I'd consider checking here, the sizing is just really awkward for you to bet anything that's not all-in, to have a triple barrel on the river. I think that's the main problem here, you're giving villain good pot odds anyway. But I definitely wouldn't go all-in, cuz what do you do that with? Basically nothing apart from a draw. So I would want to bet turn but idk if I can in this spot.
Now when he tank calls I think it's obvious that he has a middling pair, 66-TT. There's just no way he tanks with a king & he never calls you with A-high either. Could I guess have a 4 for like 54s but that's effectively the same in your perspective as like 66.
I just think I check turn, we can give up to a fold & if he checks back we can maybe overbet jam some rivers, or just straight up that we spike an ace or a queen, those should be good. Or even a king but we don't bet that card we just check it for showdown value. I think I give this up because we're in an awkward sizing ponder.
Hey Bart, where can we watch you ACTUALLY play live poker???
Hero didn’t leave a good spr that’s on him
Would be good if he had value
Is that Andrew Luck calling in?😂😂😂
The 1/3rd flop size at specifically low stakes…. Gets so much less credit than the same size bet in a bigger stakes game. 1/3rd pot at low stakes ppl just don’t believe it. I know it’s correct in theory for 1/3rd size in a 3 bet pot, but I’ve gone away from it myself and get more respect it seems from other sizes.
when will people learn that bluffing at small stakes home games is not a winning strategy
Hard disagree. There a plenty of times to bluff in home games. It all depends on the type of players in the pot, and the cards in your hand.
Completely false. You bluff scare cards and people can't fold fast enough.
@@supersmoo7377 There may be times to bluff, but as a general rule, if you never bluff in a home game, and concentrate more on betting for value (including thin value) you will make more money. There are more calling stations, and there are also more egos...people who don't like to be bluffed out of a pot. And a lot of people just not paying attention to realize that if you're betting you don't have nothing. Sure, you'll miss out on some pots you could have stolen, but that will be far outweighed by the money you would otherwise lose when your bluffs get called by Ace high or bottom pair. These are the same guys who will call your river bet in seven-card stud when they can't even beat your four up cards.
When will people learn that blanket statements don't belong in poker. I successfully bluff my mf ass off in low stakes. There's an art that involves your image and spots that they would never take.
@@breakglass3025 There's a difference between low stakes card rooms, and low stakes home games (typically - there are always exceptions)....as well as low stakes Las Vegas/tourist/resorts/cruise ships tables. Low stakes players can indeed play scared and be bluffed, even rec players. However, in certain games, like home games or tourist games, you're going to see more people in gambling moods and more calling stations (and more drunks). There are certainly low stakes games where you're just better off putting the bluff in your back pocket. Sure, you'll lose some pots you could have otherwise stolen, but that will be far outweighed by the losses you incur when your bluffs would get called by ace-high or bottom pair. You can start value betting hands that you would consider bluffs in other games. The biggest issue with the caller in the video is bluffing in a spot where he says he would bet for thin value, while targeting the same hands, and magically hoping that when he has value they call and when he's bluffing they fold.
The shove on river was suspect IMO...a value looking bet is more believable
You think villain folds for $200 lol
It is 60% pot, it is a value bet, they are relatively short with the straddle on.
How could a solver possibly know when to Bluff with the ace of hearts there? How could it possibly know if your opponents would fold an eight, a small flush or if they would call with 1010??
Or 99 in this case
A solver solves against another solver. It is coming up with a solution against a villain who is playing “perfectly” against you. If you learn that your opponent is way more call-happy, then you should limit the amount of bluffs the solver recommends.
If the player you’re up against folds way too often, you can use more bluffing hands.
It doesn't - it's about percentages to what is the most likely outcome against a range of hands your opponent could have....and how they should theoretically react to your action. Against another theoretical player who is playing GTO. The solver is the beginning of the conversation, not the end of it - a good starting point against an unknown entity. Since humans cannot possible ever achieve GTO, you have to adjust as you learn their tendencies.
Though worth noting that a truly GTO solver strategy would still win (ignoring the rake) or at worst break even against any other strategy.
I want to know more of his logic as to why he thinks split pot games are best for bomb pots!
The bluff was good for your table image, play off the image
Guys tanking for 7 minutes 🤣 seems like a really fun “ home game”
Who does that?!
@ villain in this hand apparently
A 7 minute tank for a $440 bet with a pot of almost $1200?! Is this the "broke as a joke" crew playing?
Very bad bluff if dude is that sticky.
I think you get more folds by betting 200 to 250.
Is this Andrew roble 😂😂
Too small on turn.
Wouldn't bet that small with ak or aa. Inviting anything wirh any piece or draw to call...or 3 bet you.
Also didnt leave enough to scare on river..if wanted a fold had to bet bigger on turn.
What does he think I think he's thinking...
callcallcallcallcallcallcallcall. Time to go home .!$-2$ game.