Winning poker, made simple. Pre-register for the Poker Blueprint here: upswingpoker.com/poker-blueprint-pre-registration/ This was part 2 of Uri's new strategy series. Check out part 1 here: th-cam.com/video/jbL4eF315fQ/w-d-xo.htmlsi=FrdjNYqTd6KpVugK
Here's some notes I made watching that video: The overall advice is to play individual hands according to their hand strength, but using unusual bet sizing to find where opponents weaknesses are when they are put in awkward spots. Don't give credit until proven otherwise. Put pressure on capped ranges and find spots to bluff with ideal hand candidates, such as backdoor draws. 6.50 - defending J4s in BB. I really like how this one was played, though I would've of loved to check-raise the flop with that particular hand. But lets say they call and all backdoors miss on the turn. Is this a hand that barrels or is it a hand that gives up? Because the 8 doesn't particularly help the opponents range either, I'd double barrel as if the hand was T8, 32s, or lower sets. If I get another call, I'm not sure it's a good candidate to triple off as it's hard to get hands that called the turn off the hand. Overpairs, set of tens or eights call, while only club suited overcards and 99 fold, if they haven't already on the turn. 9.03 - I really like the term "discontinued aggression" as an easier way to say the opponent has a capped range. The big bet really makes sense here to sell the story of miraculously finding the river flush, while attacking a capped range. It doesn't make sense to bet smaller as an Ace probably doesn't play it as it did. 10.56 - I would've called that spot, I wouldn't of considered a small raise there until now. I see where he's coming from where he's playing the strength of his hand whilst also making it awkward for his opponent. 12.06 - I like that analogy that deviates away from GTO balancing. Every hand for themselves! (at least until they face an opponent who understands minimum defense frequency and bluff raising.) 14.16 - This is a great example of betting 3 barrels that starts as a bluff and turns into value. What if the turn missed? The only turn card I like to continue barreling on is a queen for value or a ten as a semi bluff, or the front door flush as a pure bluff. I'd give up on pretty much all other cards, and I'm undecided about barreling on a turned ace as it the smashes UTG range.
In the QQ6 OTT our kicker did play indeed AKQQ7. Minor point though. Also you noted him slowplaying Q66 even if was QQ6 and he only had a medium strength hand. Even on the river his three-pair wasn't super strong (def worth a block though, if not a bigger bet)
Great video, simplifying poker from a GTO to a logic and exploitative based approach. Little error though, the A7o vs 86cc was a QQ6 board and not a Q66 board so V's line was rather standard and not really tricky or "capable" per se. I still agree with the check back line but I wouldn't give him any credit as an opponent for getting tricky here.
I guilty of this too but first thing is learn to read a board because missed half of boards here. If you are not focused enough to read a board then how you gonna extrapolate complex action or hand read after.
When reviewing the 87o hand that you overbet the river with, the actual board has the 9d not the 9h. I think that makes your 2.8x river overbet in game more credible as you’re more likely to have JXdd than villain that gets there.
Hi, Video Editor here... That's my bad, I tried to make things look a bit nicer there but input the wrong suit apparently... fwiw Uri is looking at the actual HH viewer on his own screen as he talks, so whatever he says is taking into account the correct board
In the QQ6 flop, when V turn fluh draw with his low pair from the flop, shouldn't he keep betting? I'm not a Texas Holdem player, but from what I know when we turn some equity we should keep betting, right?
its like travel to 2007 poker, see your hand and react, why this have to work vs people who study theory and are more range aware? Maybe for micros its ok .
To be clear - this is taking one of the course concepts and pushing it to the extreme as a pedagogical tool, the course is not 10 hours of "see your hand and react". The concept here was navigating your hand to t he appropriate potsize in the most direct way possible. This doesn't imply that's what I recommend you to do always (that depends on the opponent).
@ivan GTO people/solvers have to assume that opponents are also playing GTO. GTO people/solvers run into problems when opponents play a different, exploitative strategy because their assumptions become no good.
I'm not a fan of this approach. I think it is too easy to give off bet sizing tells. I believe consistency allows you to disguise your hand strength better and makes it easier to play multiple tables without fatigue.
This approach forgoes the "deception" aspect of poker by turning your hand faceup. It's only one dimension of what I teach in the course, but you'd be surprised how poor low-stakes players specifically are at reacting to this.
@@TeslasMoustache419 By GTO I mean pseudo gto style. If you'll go for extreme exploits on z200 online you'll get eaten by regs. But vs fish sure - go ahead
@@Thomas-sb2fg if im not mistaken... there's still lots of regs in 100-200z that have massive bs=hs tells. You can see many of uri's play and explains where he talks about this. For example in IP vs BB, majority of people's BB turn probe will have BS = HS. There's many cmmon spots where u can have clear BS = HS tells imho.
@@Thomas-sb2fg So continuing on my previous point. When you hv opponents playing in clear BS=HS ways, you can simply play your hand based on what their hand strength is.
Do you think this would work in live $2-$100 spread limit? the rake is 2-3BB every hand so raising to 4BB seems ridiculous if you want to beat the rake... from an exploitative standpoint often times these players call 5BB opens like it was a limp. The max buy-in is $300 with $1 - $2 blinds.
Good content but you’re selling it for $500.00 USD dollars. The common player who wants to learn basic strategy to compete in low stakes should not have to pay this much to play a basic, straight forward way. Way too expensive.
@@HasNoName69 would be surprised if that's the case even though I am not involved at all within the cash games , can you please enter the link ? That being said, I am personally an mtt player and Uri is pretty much the only cash player I follow for his educational material. I find his way of explaining stuff very constructive and it is super clear that he has an incredible deep understanding of the game.
@@HasNoName69 how do they know if he does not play those stakes? Non sense my dude. Most of HS players cant beat micro/low stakes games. Nothing unusual.
Winning poker, made simple. Pre-register for the Poker Blueprint here: upswingpoker.com/poker-blueprint-pre-registration/
This was part 2 of Uri's new strategy series. Check out part 1 here: th-cam.com/video/jbL4eF315fQ/w-d-xo.htmlsi=FrdjNYqTd6KpVugK
Here's some notes I made watching that video:
The overall advice is to play individual hands according to their hand strength, but using unusual bet sizing to find where opponents weaknesses are when they are put in awkward spots. Don't give credit until proven otherwise. Put pressure on capped ranges and find spots to bluff with ideal hand candidates, such as backdoor draws.
6.50 - defending J4s in BB. I really like how this one was played, though I would've of loved to check-raise the flop with that particular hand. But lets say they call and all backdoors miss on the turn. Is this a hand that barrels or is it a hand that gives up? Because the 8 doesn't particularly help the opponents range either, I'd double barrel as if the hand was T8, 32s, or lower sets. If I get another call, I'm not sure it's a good candidate to triple off as it's hard to get hands that called the turn off the hand. Overpairs, set of tens or eights call, while only club suited overcards and 99 fold, if they haven't already on the turn.
9.03 - I really like the term "discontinued aggression" as an easier way to say the opponent has a capped range. The big bet really makes sense here to sell the story of miraculously finding the river flush, while attacking a capped range. It doesn't make sense to bet smaller as an Ace probably doesn't play it as it did.
10.56 - I would've called that spot, I wouldn't of considered a small raise there until now. I see where he's coming from where he's playing the strength of his hand whilst also making it awkward for his opponent.
12.06 - I like that analogy that deviates away from GTO balancing. Every hand for themselves! (at least until they face an opponent who understands minimum defense frequency and bluff raising.)
14.16 - This is a great example of betting 3 barrels that starts as a bluff and turns into value. What if the turn missed? The only turn card I like to continue barreling on is a queen for value or a ten as a semi bluff, or the front door flush as a pure bluff. I'd give up on pretty much all other cards, and I'm undecided about barreling on a turned ace as it the smashes UTG range.
"Thinking about the narrative and betting strategies" is fantastic!
In the QQ6 OTT our kicker did play indeed AKQQ7. Minor point though. Also you noted him slowplaying Q66 even if was QQ6 and he only had a medium strength hand. Even on the river his three-pair wasn't super strong (def worth a block though, if not a bigger bet)
Great video. Love Uri Peleg.
Great video. Easy to understand and logical thinking. New subscriber 👍
Great video, simplifying poker from a GTO to a logic and exploitative based approach. Little error though, the A7o vs 86cc was a QQ6 board and not a Q66 board so V's line was rather standard and not really tricky or "capable" per se. I still agree with the check back line but I wouldn't give him any credit as an opponent for getting tricky here.
I guilty of this too but first thing is learn to read a board because missed half of boards here. If you are not focused enough to read a board then how you gonna extrapolate complex action or hand read after.
9:44 replayer has wrong suit for the 9d. Weird.
When reviewing the 87o hand that you overbet the river with, the actual board has the 9d not the 9h. I think that makes your 2.8x river overbet in game more credible as you’re more likely to have JXdd than villain that gets there.
Hi, Video Editor here...
That's my bad, I tried to make things look a bit nicer there but input the wrong suit apparently... fwiw Uri is looking at the actual HH viewer on his own screen as he talks, so whatever he says is taking into account the correct board
In the QQ6 flop, when V turn fluh draw with his low pair from the flop, shouldn't he keep betting? I'm not a Texas Holdem player, but from what I know when we turn some equity we should keep betting, right?
I think thats why Uri called him tricky... he didnt - thus protecting his checking range there... €: at least thats what I understood!
Uri,do you think this approach will work for low-mid mtts?
Very likely yes, but you have to pair it with good preflop play.
its like travel to 2007 poker, see your hand and react, why this have to work vs people who study theory and are more range aware? Maybe for micros its ok .
To be clear - this is taking one of the course concepts and pushing it to the extreme as a pedagogical tool, the course is not 10 hours of "see your hand and react". The concept here was navigating your hand to t he appropriate potsize in the most direct way possible. This doesn't imply that's what I recommend you to do always (that depends on the opponent).
@ivan GTO people/solvers have to assume that opponents are also playing GTO. GTO people/solvers run into problems when opponents play a different, exploitative strategy because their assumptions become no good.
It's all about finding equilibrium bro
Awesome!
I'm not a fan of this approach. I think it is too easy to give off bet sizing tells. I believe consistency allows you to disguise your hand strength better and makes it easier to play multiple tables without fatigue.
This approach forgoes the "deception" aspect of poker by turning your hand faceup. It's only one dimension of what I teach in the course, but you'd be surprised how poor low-stakes players specifically are at reacting to this.
for real? 2:28 expecting to make JT fold on 788 in a pot of 4.5bb with 1bb bet?
Can it beat rush 200?
To beat rush 200 you need to play GTO. Here he presents bet size = hand strength type of plays which are suitable to beat NL2-NL10 online and 1/2 live
@@Thomas-sb2fg No one plays even close to GTO.
@@TeslasMoustache419 By GTO I mean pseudo gto style. If you'll go for extreme exploits on z200 online you'll get eaten by regs. But vs fish sure - go ahead
@@Thomas-sb2fg if im not mistaken... there's still lots of regs in 100-200z that have massive bs=hs tells. You can see many of uri's play and explains where he talks about this. For example in IP vs BB, majority of people's BB turn probe will have BS = HS. There's many cmmon spots where u can have clear BS = HS tells imho.
@@Thomas-sb2fg So continuing on my previous point. When you hv opponents playing in clear BS=HS ways, you can simply play your hand based on what their hand strength is.
Playing with solvers can ruin your game. If most of the boards that you play that day do not favor high cards.
Do you think this would work in live $2-$100 spread limit? the rake is 2-3BB every hand so raising to 4BB seems ridiculous if you want to beat the rake... from an exploitative standpoint often times these players call 5BB opens like it was a limp. The max buy-in is $300 with $1 - $2 blinds.
Can and should go bigger with a tighter range of hands if you're in a game like that! But the postflop strategy still applies.
@@UpswingPoker Thanks!
A real couch would play 5k nl for profits
24.12.24
Nice, but you flop broadway on a rainbow board then end the video!!!! AARRRGGGH!!!
Here's how that hand ended th-cam.com/video/nXgjMP2gaZ0/w-d-xo.html
Good content but you’re selling it for $500.00 USD dollars. The common player who wants to learn basic strategy to compete in low stakes should not have to pay this much to play a basic, straight forward way. Way too expensive.
We got it for cheaper price, do you have telegram?
Don't try this at home
we all go bankrupt soon if play like this
Where is his graph showing how much he wins?
XD are u a novice right?
@@Mvdd1 no, i read 2+2 threads and many people say that he can't beat the NL100+ stakes
@@HasNoName69 would be surprised if that's the case even though I am not involved at all within the cash games , can you please enter the link ? That being said, I am personally an mtt player and Uri is pretty much the only cash player I follow for his educational material. I find his way of explaining stuff very constructive and it is super clear that he has an incredible deep understanding of the game.
@@HasNoName69 how do they know if he does not play those stakes? Non sense my dude. Most of HS players cant beat micro/low stakes games. Nothing unusual.
@@Mvdd1 I just want a proof that hes a winning player. Just like I don't attend English language courses with people who can't speak English