Aballinamion
Sleeping with the Dark Lady of the Sith
Loyaler
Hello there CardsChat community! I am preparing a sticky post here where I intend to post everyday 2 NLHE Zoom hands to be appreciated and analysed.
I will seek more for deep stack pots, but I will not let go marginal situations.
The objective of this post is to analyse 2 NLHE hands played in 6-Max, Fast Fold tables (pokerstars Zoom).
All the hands are from PokerStars and I will try to keep them uptaded everyday!
Be free to make your comments, critics, comments and to post your own hands to the test!
I hope to count on the community engagement.
I don't want to compromisse anybody, and I like to respect other players and their mistake, because I make them too. Because of the integrity of the players involved in the hands, I will keep their names hidden for the audience. None of these hands were played by me or colleagues/associates of mine. When I decide to comment one of my personal hands, I will put the name of the players.
Let's begin!
Hand of the day.
February, 18th of 2020
All-in preflop Deep Stacked with AKo out of position. Ideas?
https://www.cardschat.com/replayer/024v9HhNY
BB has 673.5 blinds
BTN has 257.5 blinds (after BTN 3-bets versus UTG)
Here comes the story!
Once upon a time, UTG raises first to 3x having 100 blinds deep. The player in the BTN, deep stacked, 3-bets versus UTG to 3x. There are only UTG and BTN involved in the hand and the action comes to us in the Big Blind, holding AKo.
This villain made the choice of 4-bet/Squeeze to 5.3x versus the 3x 3-bet of the BTN.
Is this the best size? Is this the best action?
A) What could ever happen if we decide to FOLD here?
B) What could ever happen if we elected to CALL here?
C) What could ever happen if we elected to 4-BET/SQUEEZE here?
Polarization: hint of weakness at the micros
Many players at 2 NLHE are just beginners who hate to study poker. (I was one of them).
They believe that a wonderful forum as CardsChat is not good for them.
Well, they simply believe in their intuition and nonsense skill level, most of times they are trying to imitate celebrity streamers, bloggers, youtubers and have no sense of what they are really doing. They are just copying and imitating and have no creativity to think every situation as unique in the universe of possibilities.
One of the greatest leak they have is the bet sizing: they make huge ammounts of mistake in this area.
The second greatest leak is the flawed playability postflop. Because what makes sense for a player who thinks the game, doesn't make any sense for a player who isn't thinking at all about the game. A player who is just imitating what some poker celebrity said and did in a very specific spot, versus a very specific opponent in a very specific stake.
For an average regular, when it comes a raise from UTG and a 3-bet from the BTN is a sign of alert! Unless UTG and BTN had demonstraded to be real weak ones, I believe we could be folding, from time to time AKo here. (Not the only option!).
I will fold here when the player in the UTG is a NIT. I will fold then, when the BTN is a NIT. If both are NITs no need to discussion, FOLD.
If we call here is bad, because we already think that UTG could possibly do after a 3-bet and a caller out of position: now UTG has many options, it can call to see a 3-handed flop in a monster pot, it could 4-bet Squeeze representing the top of its range....
Whenever UTG calls or 4-bet is not good for us, so I believe the call is out of question.
We can be calling 100% of times, if we are very sure of what UTG is going to do next. Or if we are sure that both UTG and BTN are very weak players, with very mistakes in their postflop games.
We agree that the BTN usually has a wide range. However the 3-bet range of the BTN versus UTG is very capped/restricted.
We will find many bluffs when BTN makes a 3-bet versus the CO. But both MP and UTG, the average regulars are selecting better hands, with a best playability postflop to face a capped range who opens out of position and most likely, will call most of times, giving that the range is almost always very limited.
AT 2 NLHE today (when I say today, I really mean it! The examples are fresh), the average regulars are ever 3-betting UTG with, for example JTs, 22-99, sometimes 22-JJ they are more calling versus UTG than 3-betting because they have position and because there is a great chance of finding a whale in the blinds.
The average regulars of 2 NLHE, players who are there everyday and are breakeven, composing 95% of the field.
Yes, it is sad but 95% of the players at 2 NLHE are breakeven. Only 5% of players really suceed at this business and this kind makes no such mistakes preflop or postflop.
I am not comdemning the 4-Bet Squeeze as a "bad play" or "the wrong choice".
Let's look upon the situation:
15% of hands opens from UTG.
5% of hands 3-bets from BTN
1% of hands 4-bet Squeezes BB versus UTG+BTN
1% of hands 5-bet Squeezes BTN x BB
Logically looking at this situation, we observe that the player in the BB exposed its game, by using polarization as a weapon which turns against itself. Okay that we are deep stacked, but when we make a 5.3x 4-bet, out of position, versus capped ranges we must be ready for weird stuff.
What do we say about the player in the BTN? Is there any difference between making a HUGE 5-bet size like it did or going all-in once and for all?
BTN puts a 3.64x 5-bet, also using polarization.
We cannot polarize our range in situations where we have no bluffs to balance our values to make our reading more complicated and consequently, we can cause more damage.
If both the player in the BTN and of the BB are going all in PF, deep stacked, not only with AA and AK (value hands) but with some bluffs I believe it is profitable.
BB could be bluffing here (it was in fact, AK is the best semi bluff, because of the removal), so when the player in the BTN gives such an absurd price to my bluffs, I have to fold. This move only worked, because we believe the player in the BB is a whale, who really believed it wasn't bluffing at all! We also believe that the player in the BTN is the Average Regular of 2 NLHE, who knows that the player in the BB is a recreational and took advantage of it by using exploitation.
Now, if BB uses a more linear range, and okay, 4-bets AKo, because it is really a good hand and terrrible for calling preflop out of position in a 3-handed pot. However, let's use a size that will be good for our values and our bluffs.
Polarized 4-bet range will put us in situations like this where we have no bluffs and we are forced to go because we already made the pot grows too much. But, in deep with ourselves we know that we are never winning in a scenario like this.
They tend to be weak players who are always trying to explore to the maximum (one consider the other a fish) with preposterous large sizings in situations where it is very clear and obvious that the player is only raising large (polarizing) with VALUES.
IT has no bluffs to balance its values! In a situation with raises like this we will find nothing but AA, KK and AK! Where are the bluffs? The Bluff here is AKo, lol.
IMO, if we decide to polarize our preflop range with AA, KK and AK, we also should be doing it with 3 bluffs, for example we are going to polarize for bluff ATs AJs, AQs.
But we know that when an average regular of 2 NLHE polarizes this much versus another polarization in a scenario like this, it will always have AA and if you are lucky KK.
Regards;
Carlos 'Aballinamion' Barbosa
I will seek more for deep stack pots, but I will not let go marginal situations.
The objective of this post is to analyse 2 NLHE hands played in 6-Max, Fast Fold tables (pokerstars Zoom).
All the hands are from PokerStars and I will try to keep them uptaded everyday!
Be free to make your comments, critics, comments and to post your own hands to the test!
I hope to count on the community engagement.
I don't want to compromisse anybody, and I like to respect other players and their mistake, because I make them too. Because of the integrity of the players involved in the hands, I will keep their names hidden for the audience. None of these hands were played by me or colleagues/associates of mine. When I decide to comment one of my personal hands, I will put the name of the players.
Let's begin!
Hand of the day.
February, 18th of 2020
All-in preflop Deep Stacked with AKo out of position. Ideas?
https://www.cardschat.com/replayer/024v9HhNY
BB has 673.5 blinds
BTN has 257.5 blinds (after BTN 3-bets versus UTG)
Here comes the story!
Once upon a time, UTG raises first to 3x having 100 blinds deep. The player in the BTN, deep stacked, 3-bets versus UTG to 3x. There are only UTG and BTN involved in the hand and the action comes to us in the Big Blind, holding AKo.
This villain made the choice of 4-bet/Squeeze to 5.3x versus the 3x 3-bet of the BTN.
Is this the best size? Is this the best action?
A) What could ever happen if we decide to FOLD here?
B) What could ever happen if we elected to CALL here?
C) What could ever happen if we elected to 4-BET/SQUEEZE here?
Polarization: hint of weakness at the micros
Many players at 2 NLHE are just beginners who hate to study poker. (I was one of them).
They believe that a wonderful forum as CardsChat is not good for them.
Well, they simply believe in their intuition and nonsense skill level, most of times they are trying to imitate celebrity streamers, bloggers, youtubers and have no sense of what they are really doing. They are just copying and imitating and have no creativity to think every situation as unique in the universe of possibilities.
One of the greatest leak they have is the bet sizing: they make huge ammounts of mistake in this area.
The second greatest leak is the flawed playability postflop. Because what makes sense for a player who thinks the game, doesn't make any sense for a player who isn't thinking at all about the game. A player who is just imitating what some poker celebrity said and did in a very specific spot, versus a very specific opponent in a very specific stake.
For an average regular, when it comes a raise from UTG and a 3-bet from the BTN is a sign of alert! Unless UTG and BTN had demonstraded to be real weak ones, I believe we could be folding, from time to time AKo here. (Not the only option!).
I will fold here when the player in the UTG is a NIT. I will fold then, when the BTN is a NIT. If both are NITs no need to discussion, FOLD.
If we call here is bad, because we already think that UTG could possibly do after a 3-bet and a caller out of position: now UTG has many options, it can call to see a 3-handed flop in a monster pot, it could 4-bet Squeeze representing the top of its range....
Whenever UTG calls or 4-bet is not good for us, so I believe the call is out of question.
We can be calling 100% of times, if we are very sure of what UTG is going to do next. Or if we are sure that both UTG and BTN are very weak players, with very mistakes in their postflop games.
We agree that the BTN usually has a wide range. However the 3-bet range of the BTN versus UTG is very capped/restricted.
We will find many bluffs when BTN makes a 3-bet versus the CO. But both MP and UTG, the average regulars are selecting better hands, with a best playability postflop to face a capped range who opens out of position and most likely, will call most of times, giving that the range is almost always very limited.
AT 2 NLHE today (when I say today, I really mean it! The examples are fresh), the average regulars are ever 3-betting UTG with, for example JTs, 22-99, sometimes 22-JJ they are more calling versus UTG than 3-betting because they have position and because there is a great chance of finding a whale in the blinds.
The average regulars of 2 NLHE, players who are there everyday and are breakeven, composing 95% of the field.
Yes, it is sad but 95% of the players at 2 NLHE are breakeven. Only 5% of players really suceed at this business and this kind makes no such mistakes preflop or postflop.
I am not comdemning the 4-Bet Squeeze as a "bad play" or "the wrong choice".
Let's look upon the situation:
15% of hands opens from UTG.
5% of hands 3-bets from BTN
1% of hands 4-bet Squeezes BB versus UTG+BTN
1% of hands 5-bet Squeezes BTN x BB
Logically looking at this situation, we observe that the player in the BB exposed its game, by using polarization as a weapon which turns against itself. Okay that we are deep stacked, but when we make a 5.3x 4-bet, out of position, versus capped ranges we must be ready for weird stuff.
What do we say about the player in the BTN? Is there any difference between making a HUGE 5-bet size like it did or going all-in once and for all?
BTN puts a 3.64x 5-bet, also using polarization.
We cannot polarize our range in situations where we have no bluffs to balance our values to make our reading more complicated and consequently, we can cause more damage.
If both the player in the BTN and of the BB are going all in PF, deep stacked, not only with AA and AK (value hands) but with some bluffs I believe it is profitable.
BB could be bluffing here (it was in fact, AK is the best semi bluff, because of the removal), so when the player in the BTN gives such an absurd price to my bluffs, I have to fold. This move only worked, because we believe the player in the BB is a whale, who really believed it wasn't bluffing at all!
We also believe that the player in the BTN is the Average Regular of 2 NLHE, who knows that the player in the BB is a recreational and took advantage of it by using exploitation.Now, if BB uses a more linear range, and okay, 4-bets AKo, because it is really a good hand and terrrible for calling preflop out of position in a 3-handed pot. However, let's use a size that will be good for our values and our bluffs.
Polarized 4-bet range will put us in situations like this where we have no bluffs and we are forced to go because we already made the pot grows too much. But, in deep with ourselves we know that we are never winning in a scenario like this.
They tend to be weak players who are always trying to explore to the maximum (one consider the other a fish) with preposterous large sizings in situations where it is very clear and obvious that the player is only raising large (polarizing) with VALUES.
IT has no bluffs to balance its values! In a situation with raises like this we will find nothing but AA, KK and AK! Where are the bluffs? The Bluff here is AKo, lol.
IMO, if we decide to polarize our preflop range with AA, KK and AK, we also should be doing it with 3 bluffs, for example we are going to polarize for bluff ATs AJs, AQs.
But we know that when an average regular of 2 NLHE polarizes this much versus another polarization in a scenario like this, it will always have AA and if you are lucky KK.
Regards;
Carlos 'Aballinamion' Barbosa
Last edited:
