Hi Nathan! Thx for the good quality content for micros! I wanna ask if 3b this hand pre vs this guy is +ev or just a losing money move (as they call out too much) i mean in general is it bad to 3b vs co or mp, hands like kjof, jqof, 10k of (considering that the suited version of them are good enough for calling) thx
This is such a common situation in poker. Basically here if you raise the river worse hands will fold and hands that beat you will call/raise the vast majority of the time. Remember the old adage, small hand - small pot and you have just top pair here which is a small hand.
Commendable analysis! By virtue of my experience at the micro stakes, I'd opine with strong confidence that letting them hang themselves is definitely the right move here. I've also had a great deal of success staying in with suited connectors from late position with several callers.
5:23 depends on his range tbh: If he's betting with the second pair or worse, you should call. (Thought about raising for weak pair- raise but he might reraise or smartly fold his junk) But if he's only betting top pair+, you should fold. :)
I would only raise that river as a bluff if I thought my opponent had a lot of overpairs in his range and I thought they were good enough to fold them. It's still early days on my micro stakes journey, but I've made up in my mind that I'm not going to try and make my opponent fold top pair or better until I either see the laydown (they show the hand), or i have hud stats that reveal a folding frequency issue (math says they must be folding top pair + some of the time)
@@fundiver198 Yeah, I don't do anything heroic at micros. I keep it snug and boring. I play a 15/13 at full ring, and value bet relentlessly. Once I grind my roll up to play with people who aren't terrible, I'll re-evaluate that, and get more creative. Until then, I'll keep it simple
@@camsnow9822 On a site note many people talk about 2NL or even “the micros”, like its just one game. But each stake and even more each game type actually play very different. I have recently had to withdraw most of my bankroll and have therefore moved back down to 2NL and 5NL, and the 2NL games in particular play tremendously different. Regular 6-max tables at 2NL are still full of huge fish, that basically cant fold anything and maniacs, who are just splashing their chips around, just as in Nathans 2NL mastery course. The 2NL full ring Zoom table on the other hand is full of insanely tight and unbalanced nits, which require a totally different game plan. Bluff catching or value betting light on the river is suicide against these guys, but you can easily tripple barrel or check-raise them off a lot of hands, and you can 3-bet and steal their blinds relentlessly, since they just dont defend enough.
I agree. It even varies across site. I play full ring on 888. Its a ton of stations and those tight passive guys with gap a lot of 20/7, 15/8 guys, and the odd maniac. Once in a while you get the odd nit-reg on like 2 million tables. With any luck ill get him on my left and steal is blinds all day. But the strategy above pretty much fits. Once in a while ill dub a nit or one of the tight passive guys but otherwise the shoe fits pretty well. what site do you play on?
Well, first of all, thank you for reviewing my hand. I don't really remember if I made it clear in the email, but on the river I thought of his range as mainly overplayed overpairs and turned flushes (this specific guy didn't really bluff too much, instead he could go 3 streets with TP no kicker being OOP), and the river raise was a bluff. I didn't expect him to call with any worse, but instead call with flushes (some of which I block) and maybe sets (though unlikely). I didn't take too much time for that decision because of multi-tabling, but calling large 3 barrles with TPSK seemed too spewy to be the correct play at that time. Later I reviewed the hand myself and decided that bluff-catching and bluff-raising have close EV, and decided to send you the hand. Another note - I believe at that time I was implementing some river bluff-raising into the game, started looking for spots for that (and even though at NL2 it isn't neccesary, it's cheaper to get a reasonable sample when practicing new concept), which was the reason I considered raising in the first place
Obviously reads were important in this hand, and depending on what those reads were, your line can be good or bad. Not knowing the Villain and just looking at the situation, I will say, that most players have a polarized range, when they take his line. Its either a flush, a straight or a bluff. Its never just a single pair and probably not even two pair or a set very often. That makes it not the most ideal spot for a bluff-raise, since few players at 2NL are good enough to bet-fold a straight or a small flush. Also its much better to have A of clubs in your hand and not T of clubs. T of clubs block AT, KT, QT, JT and T9, while A of clubs block AK, AQ, AJ, AT, A9, A8, A7, A5, A4 so 4 combos more. This is assuming, he have a reasonable opening range, which might or might not be true. Finally if you want to get into some more advanced play, you cant bluff with any hand, that has a club in it, because then you will be bluffing way to much. So you need to be very selective, and the best candidate for bluffing here is a hand like AJ with A of clubs. That hand cant really call, since it could be losing even to some bluffs, but it can take advantage of the fact, that it has the nut blocker.
Agreed, there are tons of better combos (that's also something I understood after the analysis), at that time for some reason I just didn't think of them
I would have called this, i think that he would have called the raise with 2pairs or better in this spot, especially at NL2. You have position ,there‘s no need for bluffing him with a good showdown- hand. In my opinion your raise was even - EV.
I actually really like your bluff in this spot . as you described villain i actually would go fold or bluff i dont think he will find 3 bluffs on this board . if described like on the video def a call
Hey Nathan, thanks for doing all these hand reviews, I do enjoy them a lot. Maybe I misunderstood something, but I’m curious if Villains play is really so bad? And why is Villain “clearly” bluffing here? Especially when hero does the classic NL2 fish play, flat pre, call behind every street and then suddenly the massive over bet on the river. If villain is half decent he could find folds with AA, KK, QQ, JJ, AT (all with 1 club) or even lower flushes here, and he probably should. Because if we learned something from you, massive river bets and re-raises at the micros is essentially the nuts. With the line Hero took there is no reason for Villain to believe he is behind with for example AA with 1 club, so why not bet big for value against worst pairs and charge lower flushes to draw. In this case AA with a club is a good semi-bluff as you block the nut flush. But let’s say if Villain wasn't bluffing, and he had the nut flush draw on the flop, for example AQs, which Hero doesn’t block, and made the flush on the turn. Why wouldn’t he take this line, especially if Hero pays him off with TPSK and a dead flush draw. In that case the river re-raise just makes life easy for Villain. :) Obviously he didn’t have the nut flush as he would call the river, but theoretically before the river re-raise he is repping it pretty hard and essentially could very well have it, as any suited A or suited Broadway cards obviously would be in his 3 x open range from any position if he is LAG. Maybe my analysis here is wrong… I’m no expect but study the game and play a lot. :) Pre flop and flop from Hero was totally OK in my opinion, the turn call is essentially just a bluff catcher and even a river call is questionable on this board to such aggression even if the Villain is crazy LAG, but sure why not, if this player has this kind of bluff play in him and you seen it many times, go ahead, but I’m sure Villain mixes in value hands here too. I totally agree that river raise is no good. It accomplishes nothing at all. Anyway, nice hand review like always. :)
Honestly, I don’t mind turning the T to a bluff. The river is quite good to fold AT or some pairs like JJ QQ KK AA. We have more flushes and straights then him like 45s 56s 55 A5s
You are giving the most honest/precise approach. Lots of online coaches talk about "Crushing Small Stakes". They make it so complicated one would need many lessons/subsciptions to capture. Yet, it really doesn't apply.
Great review Nathan. Question; what would you do in a 5k-25kgtd tourney - on the river in this spot (or holding AcTd) if villain bets pot, overbets pot 150% or even shoves the river? I have been in this exact situation a ton of times, and I lean towards a fold, certainly facing a river shove, often to a pot sized bet and overbet. My logic is simple one pair (tptk) simply isn't beating anything other than a bluff in this spot on the river, and the majority of the field aren't overbet bluffing here. I have made some calls to overbets and shoves at time - with reads on the players, and they have been profitable roughly 65%. Its a sick spot though that seems to come up almost daily. Thanks for your input.
The One!-Solution!-Here!-Is To Hold!&Not To Fold!-That's What I Would-DO!-Until-I WIN!&I've Won!-14 Times!-So I Can't-Be Wrong!&Good Luck-Everyone!-Raymond "Mike" Hong! (Win!-With A Big Smile!)
You won't get HUD stats on partypoker from Summer 2019 on, they're banned. Is this a good thing or a bad thing? Will other sites follow suit? Shouldn't you be allowed to spend your money on a HUD to gain advantage if that's what you want to do? After all you could spend money on a maths coach to get your son/daughter's grades up, or on a sprint coach to make you run faster, or, or... Time will tell; we'll have to see the figures on how many players partypoker have lost by doing this, i suppose. Thoughts, Nathan?
Bad comparison, coaches teach you do stuff BY YOURSELF this shit makes stuff you are supposed to take truck of by yourself for you, its like saying "shouldnt you be allowed to spend money on cheats to gain advantage in games if thats what you want to do?" I for example would never play in online poker where this stuff is allowed but i play only IRL anyway
he is probably bluffing with the best hand on the river, he just get lucky that the villan range is not strong to snap call him, he is never folding 5 or a flush
To me the river raise look like tilted play, and one of the most important things when playing against loose aggressive players is to not let them tilt you. Just because they are splashing chips around does not mean, we should do the same. And as Nathan say, what does that raise really do? He is not bet-folding a better hand very often, and he is not stacking off with worse either. So keep your head cool and dont try fighting fire with fire. But yeah against a loose and aggressive player I am sticking my foot down here and getting to showdown with my top pair. Time for him to show a hand, if he has been running over the entire table for a while. But against a nit or tag I am actually folding this on the turn. Sure we picked up a one card flushdraw, but its not the greatest thing in the world, since even when we improve to a flush, we could easily end up paying off a better flush. Its different, if we have the K of clubs and not the T of clubs. Then the turn is a pretty clear call against anyone.
I agree with pretty much everything you said as usual. I see almost no benefit at all for us in raising the river. This is just an easy call versus this player type, make him show us a better hand.
I think the raise on the river was okay, villain would definitely fold pocket 5s, or 6 10s or any flush worse than jack-high. It also depends on hero's table image, if he rarely bluffs then all the more I like the raise.
The point BlackRain is making is that if he’s not getting called by worse hands it’s unnecessary risk, as he’ll either win the pot with a call or risk his stack to sometimes win the same amount.
Why whould you risk 130 bb on the river, trying to win some stupid unraised hand, bluffing the river aganst a player who is lag, and you dont know if you have any fold equity if he has a strong hand, its just doesnt make any sence, you are probably grinding like 2-3 hours to make 100bb and then just to bluff your profit on the river for no good reason!
funny part is that I was thinking between fold and call on river and all of a sudden I saw that raise ... I was like : " wtf bro ? That didn't even cross my mind "
2 things (I'm the Hero btw): 1. I never meant this to be a value raise, it doesn't take ages to understand that it's never getting called by worse. It was a bluff, though not the best one, because calling is actually better and there are better bluffs. 2. I actually make living playing NL10-20 EUR tables (in Eastern Europe it's pretty easy), considering moving up. I intentionally sent a questionable hand, because (surprise) I had a question about it. It's not like I thought "hey, look how great of a play I just made". It's not like I need a few months to understand that getting 200bb in single-raised pot in the middle with one pair for value isn't great (which I assume you think I do).
1. If you already know the answer of the question according to your playing style. "because calling is actually better and there are better bluffs." Why do you send a questionable hand? If you're making a living by playing NL10-NL20 why are you playing NL2? If you're making a living of a higher stake I dont really see how you need help with the lowest one. I think you should crush NL2 in any situation. Have a nice one. Vlad Savchenko
@@simontodorovic287 try reading other comments, there aren't too many. Sometimes I play NL2 sessions when I want to practice new concepts, because mistakes are cheaper and the volume is much higher (you don't really get the opportunity to bluff-raise the river too often, so playing tons of hands helps quite a bit). I made some analysis, sent this hand a couple months ago, then saw this video, read comments, reviewed a hand once again and now came to a clear conclusion about calling>raising. And it's not like "I need help with lower stake". There's a hand, effective stack in big blinds, and some action I was unsure about. Beating NL20 doesn't mean knowing everything, so I searched for another opinion about the specific hand. The stakes don't really matter in this case
@@SimpleOne_000 Completely agree that the same theory apply, weather we are playing for 2$, 20$ or for that matter 20.000$. The are some differences in player pool tendencies though, and as a general rule recreational players and also many bad regs are not able to make big folds at 2NL. This is partly because, they are mostly beginners, and partly because they are playing for the price of a cup of coffee.
How do you play vs a LAG? Also, learn the simple poker strategy that has been SKYROCKETING my results lately th-cam.com/video/OJyHQLMxASY/w-d-xo.html
Hi Nathan! Thx for the good quality content for micros! I wanna ask if 3b this hand pre vs this guy is +ev or just a losing money move (as they call out too much) i mean in general is it bad to 3b vs co or mp, hands like kjof, jqof, 10k of (considering that the suited version of them are good enough for calling) thx
@@Jonnies_Plays Its reasonable to adjust your 3-betting range against players, who open to many hands, but hardly to include something as bad as KTo.
@@fundiver198 ok, seems a legit answer:) I ve mean vs this guys is always good to 3b liniar for value, i guess
This is such a common situation in poker. Basically here if you raise the river worse hands will fold and hands that beat you will call/raise the vast majority of the time. Remember the old adage, small hand - small pot and you have just top pair here which is a small hand.
Yup good advice Ian!
Commendable analysis! By virtue of my experience at the micro stakes, I'd opine with strong confidence that letting them hang themselves is definitely the right move here.
I've also had a great deal of success staying in with suited connectors from late position with several callers.
Thanks Stoic glad you enjoyed! :)
5:23 depends on his range tbh:
If he's betting with the second pair or worse, you should call. (Thought about raising for weak pair- raise but he might reraise or smartly fold his junk)
But if he's only betting top pair+, you should fold.
:)
I would only raise that river as a bluff if I thought my opponent had a lot of overpairs in his range and I thought they were good enough to fold them. It's still early days on my micro stakes journey, but I've made up in my mind that I'm not going to try and make my opponent fold top pair or better until I either see the laydown (they show the hand), or i have hud stats that reveal a folding frequency issue (math says they must be folding top pair + some of the time)
In general thats a pretty sound approach for the micros.
@@fundiver198 Yeah, I don't do anything heroic at micros. I keep it snug and boring. I play a 15/13 at full ring, and value bet relentlessly. Once I grind my roll up to play with people who aren't terrible, I'll re-evaluate that, and get more creative. Until then, I'll keep it simple
@@camsnow9822 On a site note many people talk about 2NL or even “the micros”, like its just one game. But each stake and even more each game type actually play very different. I have recently had to withdraw most of my bankroll and have therefore moved back down to 2NL and 5NL, and the 2NL games in particular play tremendously different.
Regular 6-max tables at 2NL are still full of huge fish, that basically cant fold anything and maniacs, who are just splashing their chips around, just as in Nathans 2NL mastery course. The 2NL full ring Zoom table on the other hand is full of insanely tight and unbalanced nits, which require a totally different game plan.
Bluff catching or value betting light on the river is suicide against these guys, but you can easily tripple barrel or check-raise them off a lot of hands, and you can 3-bet and steal their blinds relentlessly, since they just dont defend enough.
I agree. It even varies across site. I play full ring on 888. Its a ton of stations and those tight passive guys with gap a lot of 20/7, 15/8 guys, and the odd maniac. Once in a while you get the odd nit-reg on like 2 million tables. With any luck ill get him on my left and steal is blinds all day. But the strategy above pretty much fits. Once in a while ill dub a nit or one of the tight passive guys but otherwise the shoe fits pretty well. what site do you play on?
Good vid, but wondering why it's not considered that a big raise could get him off a straight as we rep a flush. Comments?
Well, first of all, thank you for reviewing my hand.
I don't really remember if I made it clear in the email, but on the river I thought of his range as mainly overplayed overpairs and turned flushes (this specific guy didn't really bluff too much, instead he could go 3 streets with TP no kicker being OOP), and the river raise was a bluff. I didn't expect him to call with any worse, but instead call with flushes (some of which I block) and maybe sets (though unlikely).
I didn't take too much time for that decision because of multi-tabling, but calling large 3 barrles with TPSK seemed too spewy to be the correct play at that time. Later I reviewed the hand myself and decided that bluff-catching and bluff-raising have close EV, and decided to send you the hand.
Another note - I believe at that time I was implementing some river bluff-raising into the game, started looking for spots for that (and even though at NL2 it isn't neccesary, it's cheaper to get a reasonable sample when practicing new concept), which was the reason I considered raising in the first place
Obviously reads were important in this hand, and depending on what those reads were, your line can be good or bad. Not knowing the Villain and just looking at the situation, I will say, that most players have a polarized range, when they take his line. Its either a flush, a straight or a bluff. Its never just a single pair and probably not even two pair or a set very often.
That makes it not the most ideal spot for a bluff-raise, since few players at 2NL are good enough to bet-fold a straight or a small flush. Also its much better to have A of clubs in your hand and not T of clubs. T of clubs block AT, KT, QT, JT and T9, while A of clubs block AK, AQ, AJ, AT, A9, A8, A7, A5, A4 so 4 combos more. This is assuming, he have a reasonable opening range, which might or might not be true.
Finally if you want to get into some more advanced play, you cant bluff with any hand, that has a club in it, because then you will be bluffing way to much. So you need to be very selective, and the best candidate for bluffing here is a hand like AJ with A of clubs. That hand cant really call, since it could be losing even to some bluffs, but it can take advantage of the fact, that it has the nut blocker.
Agreed, there are tons of better combos (that's also something I understood after the analysis), at that time for some reason I just didn't think of them
I would have called this, i think that he would have called the raise with 2pairs or better in this spot, especially at NL2. You have position ,there‘s no need for bluffing him with a good showdown- hand. In my opinion your raise was even - EV.
I actually really like your bluff in this spot . as you described villain i actually would go fold or bluff i dont think he will find 3 bluffs on this board . if described like on the video def a call
No problem thanks for sending me this hand Vlad. Also, thanks for popping in the comments here and giving your analysis as well!
Hey Nathan, thanks for doing all these hand reviews, I do enjoy them a lot.
Maybe I misunderstood something, but I’m curious if Villains play is really so bad? And why is Villain “clearly” bluffing here? Especially when hero does the classic NL2 fish play, flat pre, call behind every street and then suddenly the massive over bet on the river. If villain is half decent he could find folds with AA, KK, QQ, JJ, AT (all with 1 club) or even lower flushes here, and he probably should. Because if we learned something from you, massive river bets and re-raises at the micros is essentially the nuts. With the line Hero took there is no reason for Villain to believe he is behind with for example AA with 1 club, so why not bet big for value against worst pairs and charge lower flushes to draw. In this case AA with a club is a good semi-bluff as you block the nut flush. But let’s say if Villain wasn't bluffing, and he had the nut flush draw on the flop, for example AQs, which Hero doesn’t block, and made the flush on the turn. Why wouldn’t he take this line, especially if Hero pays him off with TPSK and a dead flush draw. In that case the river re-raise just makes life easy for Villain. :)
Obviously he didn’t have the nut flush as he would call the river, but theoretically before the river re-raise he is repping it pretty hard and essentially could very well have it, as any suited A or suited Broadway cards obviously would be in his 3 x open range from any position if he is LAG.
Maybe my analysis here is wrong… I’m no expect but study the game and play a lot. :)
Pre flop and flop from Hero was totally OK in my opinion, the turn call is essentially just a bluff catcher and even a river call is questionable on this board to such aggression even if the Villain is crazy LAG, but sure why not, if this player has this kind of bluff play in him and you seen it many times, go ahead, but I’m sure Villain mixes in value hands here too.
I totally agree that river raise is no good. It accomplishes nothing at all.
Anyway, nice hand review like always. :)
Thank you Carl I am glad my poker videos help you!
Honestly, I don’t mind turning the T to a bluff. The river is quite good to fold AT or some pairs like JJ QQ KK AA. We have more flushes and straights then him like 45s 56s 55 A5s
You are giving the most honest/precise approach. Lots of online coaches talk about "Crushing Small Stakes". They make it so complicated one would need many lessons/subsciptions to capture. Yet, it really doesn't apply.
I appreciate that!
Is it because of villain's image as a LAG that we don't consider AT in his range here? How might villain have played it differently if he did have AT?
Yes! I agree people that play in 1/2 2/5 don’t fold too much and if you raisin and they fold you are ahead anyway honest
Great review Nathan.
Question; what would you do in a 5k-25kgtd tourney - on the river in this spot (or holding AcTd) if villain bets pot, overbets pot 150% or even shoves the river?
I have been in this exact situation a ton of times, and I lean towards a fold, certainly facing a river shove, often to a pot sized bet and overbet. My logic is simple one pair (tptk) simply isn't beating anything other than a bluff in this spot on the river, and the majority of the field aren't overbet bluffing here. I have made some calls to overbets and shoves at time - with reads on the players, and they have been profitable roughly 65%. Its a sick spot though that seems to come up almost daily.
Thanks for your input.
Thanks Dwight! Difficult to say without more info. Highly dependant on the stack sizes and the opponent.
dude that was such a good solid breakdown.
The One!-Solution!-Here!-Is To Hold!&Not To Fold!-That's What I Would-DO!-Until-I WIN!&I've Won!-14 Times!-So I Can't-Be Wrong!&Good Luck-Everyone!-Raymond "Mike" Hong! (Win!-With A Big Smile!)
Plot twist: He had AT and folded because shove made him think hero got 5 xd
and if he is bluffin to win A10, JJ, QQ or KK?
Do people really bet hands like that on the river?
You won't get HUD stats on partypoker from Summer 2019 on, they're banned. Is this a good thing or a bad thing? Will other sites follow suit?
Shouldn't you be allowed to spend your money on a HUD to gain advantage if that's what you want to do? After all you could spend money on a maths coach to get your son/daughter's grades up, or on a sprint coach to make you run faster, or, or...
Time will tell; we'll have to see the figures on how many players partypoker have lost by doing this, i suppose.
Thoughts, Nathan?
Bad comparison, coaches teach you do stuff BY YOURSELF this shit makes stuff you are supposed to take truck of by yourself for you, its like saying "shouldnt you be allowed to spend money on cheats to gain advantage in games if thats what you want to do?" I for example would never play in online poker where this stuff is allowed but i play only IRL anyway
Why can't you fold turn?
Does this advise apply to $1-2 to $2-5?
Yes, everything I teach is for low stakes live and online poker games.
How do we submit hands?
Sorry, I have too many now, people waiting months. So not I am accepting any new hands right now.
he is probably bluffing with the best hand on the river, he just get lucky that the villan range is not strong to snap call him, he is never folding 5 or a flush
Or AA, KK, QQ, JJ or some donkey two pair hand.
To me the river raise look like tilted play, and one of the most important things when playing against loose aggressive players is to not let them tilt you. Just because they are splashing chips around does not mean, we should do the same. And as Nathan say, what does that raise really do? He is not bet-folding a better hand very often, and he is not stacking off with worse either. So keep your head cool and dont try fighting fire with fire.
But yeah against a loose and aggressive player I am sticking my foot down here and getting to showdown with my top pair. Time for him to show a hand, if he has been running over the entire table for a while. But against a nit or tag I am actually folding this on the turn.
Sure we picked up a one card flushdraw, but its not the greatest thing in the world, since even when we improve to a flush, we could easily end up paying off a better flush. Its different, if we have the K of clubs and not the T of clubs. Then the turn is a pretty clear call against anyone.
I agree with pretty much everything you said as usual. I see almost no benefit at all for us in raising the river. This is just an easy call versus this player type, make him show us a better hand.
@@PersonalStash420 Just someone playing online poker and liking this channel.
If hero was intending to turn his hand into a bluff then its not a bad play, he might of just made villain fold an overpair by accident lol
Haha that is true. Although I think a lot of micro players still make the call with their AA or KK here.
Well, it wasn't an accident, it was an intentional bluff (I believe i wrote that in email btw)
Ok thanks for clearing that up Vlad.
@@BlackRain79Poker You really think they even bet overpars or even straight here? Look polarized to me. Flush or nothing.
Seems simple enough…but good luck actually hitting a flop vs the LAG
AAh!
Idono.
I think the raise on the river was okay, villain would definitely fold pocket 5s, or 6 10s or any flush worse than jack-high.
It also depends on hero's table image, if he rarely bluffs then all the more I like the raise.
The point BlackRain is making is that if he’s not getting called by worse hands it’s unnecessary risk, as he’ll either win the pot with a call or risk his stack to sometimes win the same amount.
i never was a fan of k10 os
Ya it's not the greatest hand TBH haha!
Not really interesting spot to analyze. Last reraise on river was so obviously bad as he killed himself TPGK turned it into complete bluff.
Why whould you risk 130 bb on the river, trying to win some stupid unraised hand, bluffing the river aganst a player who is lag, and you dont know if you have any fold equity if he has a strong hand, its just doesnt make any sence, you are probably grinding like 2-3 hours to make 100bb and then just to bluff your profit on the river for no good reason!
He explained already his reasoning, if you read the other posts.
That raise is crazy on the river. Im sure hero will agree after a few months of playing more.
funny part is that I was thinking between fold and call on river and all of a sudden I saw that raise ... I was like : " wtf bro ? That didn't even cross my mind "
2 things (I'm the Hero btw):
1. I never meant this to be a value raise, it doesn't take ages to understand that it's never getting called by worse. It was a bluff, though not the best one, because calling is actually better and there are better bluffs.
2. I actually make living playing NL10-20 EUR tables (in Eastern Europe it's pretty easy), considering moving up. I intentionally sent a questionable hand, because (surprise) I had a question about it. It's not like I thought "hey, look how great of a play I just made". It's not like I need a few months to understand that getting 200bb in single-raised pot in the middle with one pair for value isn't great (which I assume you think I do).
1. If you already know the answer of the question according to your playing style.
"because calling is actually better and there are better bluffs." Why do you send a questionable hand?
If you're making a living by playing NL10-NL20 why are you playing NL2? If you're making a living of a higher stake I dont really see how you need help with the lowest one. I think you should crush NL2 in any situation.
Have a nice one. Vlad Savchenko
@@simontodorovic287 try reading other comments, there aren't too many. Sometimes I play NL2 sessions when I want to practice new concepts, because mistakes are cheaper and the volume is much higher (you don't really get the opportunity to bluff-raise the river too often, so playing tons of hands helps quite a bit).
I made some analysis, sent this hand a couple months ago, then saw this video, read comments, reviewed a hand once again and now came to a clear conclusion about calling>raising.
And it's not like "I need help with lower stake". There's a hand, effective stack in big blinds, and some action I was unsure about. Beating NL20 doesn't mean knowing everything, so I searched for another opinion about the specific hand.
The stakes don't really matter in this case
@@SimpleOne_000 Completely agree that the same theory apply, weather we are playing for 2$, 20$ or for that matter 20.000$. The are some differences in player pool tendencies though, and as a general rule recreational players and also many bad regs are not able to make big folds at 2NL. This is partly because, they are mostly beginners, and partly because they are playing for the price of a cup of coffee.