GiantBuddha Analyzes a Hand in LHE

slycbnew

slycbnew

Cardschat Elite
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 8, 2008
Total posts
2,876
Chips
0
Our friends at DragTheBar provide here a second video for CardsChat members - this time from limit holdem, courtesy of Paul Hoppe aka GiantBuddha, LHE coach with DTB.

Paul here looks at a single hand, played during his Grindathon (if you didn't see the thread about the Grindathon, here it is: GiantBuddha's Wellathon (ask me anything) ).

"Paul takes a look at playing a draw with showdown value: K4 on 532. He also cracks open Flopzilla and counts the combos in his own check/call range to see how many hands can be folded before showdown without being exploitable" (courtesy DTB).

While LHE and mixed game players will naturally be delighted to see this, I urge no limit/pot limit players to watch as well. It's well presented, it's good poker, and it involves high level thinking about ranges and why to bet/call/fold.

YouTube- Holdem Strategy: GiantBuddha's Hand of the Day Part 1

YouTube- Holdem Strategy: GiantBuddha's Hand of the Day Part 2

Paul will be replying to questions and comments in this thread.

See also the following from our friends at DTB:

BeachJustice on Overbet Bluffs

Ask Mental Game Coach Jared Tendler

Ask Me Anything (Dusty Schmidt aka Leatherass in the well)
 
slycbnew

slycbnew

Cardschat Elite
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 8, 2008
Total posts
2,876
Chips
0
I'll go ahead and kick things off with a comment rather than a question - I found this hand extremely interesting because my natural inclination on the flop w an OESD, and definitely on the turn w a combo draw, is to semi-bluff. It's such a kneejerk reaction for me that I'm not considering BTN's range effectively at all w that reaction, and not envisioning which hands I should be semibluffing w relative to BTN's range and relative to showdown value.
 
dg1267

dg1267

Cardschat Elite
Silver Level
Joined
Feb 25, 2007
Total posts
4,547
Awards
1
Chips
1
+1 to what sly said. I think I actually understood about 30% of what you were talking about, but I'm going to re-watch the videos and try to come up with some questions that might help me out. Right now, I think this is a level or two above where I'm thinking now, but I would like to get there. Thanks for all these vids again!
 
Poof

Poof

Made in the USA
Silver Level
Joined
May 21, 2008
Total posts
14,419
Chips
0
I can't wait to see this. I only play limit in the mixed tourneys but find myself getting extremely frustrated with it. I am beginning to wonder if there even is a strategy to it, it seems like it is a drawing game and I just feel like folding everything till it passes and omaha pops up.
 
rounder22

rounder22

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Jul 18, 2007
Total posts
297
Chips
0
I learned quite a bit watching this video thanks.
 
F Paulsson

F Paulsson

euro love
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 24, 2005
Total posts
5,799
Awards
1
Chips
1
Ooookay, derail (sorry, Paul):

I didn't watch the Flopzilla part of the video yet, but the core of this hand is not something NLHE players should dismiss just because it's a LHE hand. Nowadays I'm not sure how many know this, but I used to play LHE exclusively for several years before making the switch to NL. The concept highlighted by Paul here - "what can I bluff out that beats me" - is one that I brought with me and that a lot of NL players just flat out don't think about.

Like check/raising a 7-7-4 flop with AJo.

Now, the concept doesn't transfer perfectly to NL, because unlike limit games, you can't often take ace-high to showdown. Sometimes, your only real way of winning a pot (even with the best hand) may be to bluff at it. But not always. And nowhere near as often as some people seem to think. A lot of the time when you're making these plays, you're just forcing your opponent's range to contain nothing but hands that beat you. It applies especially to river raises: Have you ever heard (or thought) something like "He only needs to fold 50% of the time here for my shove to be worth it"? That assumes that his entire range beats you. If you're going to bluff-raise the river ("turning a made hand into a bluff" is a popular concept these days), please make sure that he folds 50% of the hands that beat you, not just "half the time" in general.

--

Anyway: I liked the video. I think it highlights an extremely important LHE concept that a lot of people don't always stop to think about, and one that, as I hopefully have made clear, actually transfers somewhat to NLHE: Think about the range you're hoping to fold out when you bluff and semibluff. (River raises should usually be polarized)
 
thepokerkid123

thepokerkid123

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Total posts
917
Chips
0
Wow.

14 minutes of this compressed into decisions made in a second or two.

A BTN normally opens 600 combos but we can adjust that to... wtf... I might be able to tell you pp's are x% of his range or he has x% A's and K's but his constant analysis of his opponent's entire range is, um, wow.


Now, the concept doesn't transfer perfectly to NL, because unlike limit games, you can't often take ace-high to showdown. Sometimes, your only real way of winning a pot (even with the best hand) may be to bluff at it. But not always. And nowhere near as often as some people seem to think. A lot of the time when you're making these plays, you're just forcing your opponent's range to contain nothing but hands that beat you. It applies especially to river raises: Have you ever heard (or thought) something like "He only needs to fold 50% of the time here for my shove to be worth it"? That assumes that his entire range beats you. If you're going to bluff-raise the river ("turning a made hand into a bluff" is a popular concept these days), please make sure that he folds 50% of the hands that beat you, not just "half the time" in general.
As far as I know, this almost never happens on the river. Check-calling is basically always superior to bluffing with what is probably the best hand.
On the flop however where we have to anticipate action on future streets, check-calling is very exploitable (easily done by the guy IP either altering bet sizing or ranges) and so we often have to bluff with the best hand simply because we can know that the bluff is +EV where taking the hand to showdown is probably -EV. In this situation, I don't care if he's folding x% of hands in his range that are better than mine, x% of any hands in his range will do.
Is this right, or am I still missing your point?
 
GiantBuddha

GiantBuddha

Poker Warrior - DTB Coach
Silver Level
Joined
Mar 18, 2010
Total posts
147
Chips
0
Thanks for the comments, guys. I don't see any specific questions, but I'll be happy to answer them if they come up. I also appreciate the thoughts about applying these concepts to NL/PLO/other limit games. The ranges and odds change, but the fundamentals of poker remain the same.
 
slycbnew

slycbnew

Cardschat Elite
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 8, 2008
Total posts
2,876
Chips
0
Paul, you mentioned one of the variables that would make this a semibluffing situation - holding Js4s rather than Ks4s, where our sd value is much worse. If Villain is a LAG rather than TAG, does that change the play of the hand, since his range is much wider (i.e., can we bet or raise for value on the turn in particular)? Or are we still just folding out hands we're way ahead of and getting called by hands we're behind?
 
S

Skaplun

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Apr 30, 2010
Total posts
269
Chips
0
god almighty, how do you do this?
not specific but I am in awe.
I am not sure how this can be applied to NL but regardless I definitely have to have a sit down and study some combinatronics.
Is this a fundamental for studying PLO or at which point did you pick approach up?
 
dg1267

dg1267

Cardschat Elite
Silver Level
Joined
Feb 25, 2007
Total posts
4,547
Awards
1
Chips
1
I don't want to anyone to think I'm unappreciative of any of these vids, and I'm super happy to see some pros on here doing what they are doing. But I think some vids mixed in that are aimed more towards lower stakes thinking would be better received. I can understand what they are talking about, but being able to take that to the table and trying to implement it is still way above my head.

I consider myself a decent player, but I'm nowhere near this type of thinking. Also, I have HEM, but that is the only real poker software that I use due to not being able to afford it. And since I suck at math, I find it hard to form a question that would sufficiently ask what I'm looking to find an answer to.

But basically, is there any way to think at this level that can be cut down in to an easier way to figure it out on the fly? Or is this something that requires a deeper skill in math? And again, please don't think I'm being unappreciative of what you are giving us. I would just like to be able to utilize it.

And another quick, off the subject, question. Is there anything in the works to where low stakes players can buy a "low stakes package" from DragTheBar.com? I'm sure I'm not only speaking for myself, but I can't quite afford the full monthly fee and still have money left for poker. But if there was a way to make it where low stakes players could only look at the lower stake information I would definitely want to join. Also, I think this would get a much bigger response from players as the low stakes player makes up most of the player base. Just a thought.
 
BeachJustice

BeachJustice

DragTheBar CEO
Silver Level
Joined
Apr 22, 2010
Total posts
35
Chips
0
I don't want to anyone to think I'm unappreciative of any of these vids, and I'm super happy to see some pros on here doing what they are doing. But I think some vids mixed in that are aimed more towards lower stakes thinking would be better received. I can understand what they are talking about, but being able to take that to the table and trying to implement it is still way above my head.

DG - I'm the CEO of DragTheBar, I just wanted to say thanks for the feedback and we'll keep your comments in mind. We'll certainly be doing more videos like this for CardsChat members, so any all and all feedback as far as what CC members would like to see is welcome.

I consider myself a decent player, but I'm nowhere near this type of thinking. Also, I have HEM, but that is the only real poker software that I use due to not being able to afford it. And since I suck at math, I find it hard to form a question that would sufficiently ask what I'm looking to find an answer to.

Just an FYI, flopzilla which is used in this video, is a free program. Just google it.

But basically, is there any way to think at this level that can be cut down in to an easier way to figure it out on the fly? Or is this something that requires a deeper skill in math? And again, please don't think I'm being unappreciative of what you are giving us. I would just like to be able to utilize it.

Counting combos definitely gets easier with just a little practice. For example, every offsuit, unpaired hold'em hand has 16 possible combos (4 x 4). If you take one card out and put it on the flop, then there are 12 possible combos of that hand left for your opponent to have (4 x 3). So if you think your opponents top pair range on on an A high flop is ATo+, then there are 48 top pair combos in his range. Likewise a 2 pair hand on the flop has 9 combos (3 x 3).

Likewise, each pair hand is made up of 6 combos preflop. That gets cut down to 3 combos if one of those cards is on the flop.

If you just pull up some hands in HEM, assign the opponent a range, and write down the hand combos he can have, you'll get used to it very quickly and it be able to count them quickly at the table. You'll develop a close approximation of how many feasible flush draws are in a typical range, how many top pair combos, etc. It just takes a little practice away from the table.

And another quick, off the subject, question. Is there anything in the works to where low stakes players can buy a "low stakes package" from DragTheBar.com? I'm sure I'm not only speaking for myself, but I can't quite afford the full monthly fee and still have money left for poker. But if there was a way to make it where low stakes players could only look at the lower stake information I would definitely want to join. Also, I think this would get a much bigger response from players as the low stakes player makes up most of the player base. Just a thought.

We unfortunately are not planning to do this. Its not a model that has worked in the past for other sites, and its very difficult to implement because it would be fairly subjective and arbitrary as to what we considered to be part of the "low stakes package." The fact is, the vast majority of our content is at stakes $2/$4 NL and below. We have a huge number of videos $1/$2 and below. Because of our focus on mid and low stakes content, and that we put out a new video every single day, we're unfortunately not able to offer a cheaper monthly plan.

However, we do have many ways to earn DTB for free. I don't want to get spammy, so you can check out the top forum over at the DTB forum.

Hope that helps, Hunter
 
Last edited by a moderator:
dg1267

dg1267

Cardschat Elite
Silver Level
Joined
Feb 25, 2007
Total posts
4,547
Awards
1
Chips
1
Thanks BeachJustice. I will take your advice and take some hands out of HEM and try doing what you suggested. My biggest problem with any math is that I just hate doing it. But I need to buckle down and get used to some of the concepts related to poker and I think I will be fine.

And I understand what you are saying concerning the "low stakes package" for your site. I was just hoping!:D
 
BeachJustice

BeachJustice

DragTheBar CEO
Silver Level
Joined
Apr 22, 2010
Total posts
35
Chips
0
Thanks BeachJustice. I will take your advice and take some hands out of HEM and try doing what you suggested. My biggest problem with any math is that I just hate doing it. But I need to buckle down and get used to some of the concepts related to poker and I think I will be fine.

And I understand what you are saying concerning the "low stakes package" for your site. I was just hoping!:D

No problem. One thing I would add is that I don't know anyone who particularly enjoys doing the math, but a little math off the table can translate into big money on the table. Its often the difference between confidently knowing what the right play is, and being left guessing, or wondering afterward.
 
dg1267

dg1267

Cardschat Elite
Silver Level
Joined
Feb 25, 2007
Total posts
4,547
Awards
1
Chips
1
No problem. One thing I would add is that I don't know anyone who particularly enjoys doing the math, but a little math off the table can translate into big money on the table. Its often the difference between confidently knowing what the right play is, and being left guessing, or wondering afterward.

Well, for the sake of humanity, I hope nobody plays poker just for the enjoyment of math. That would just be mind boggling!:D


I need to hire my younger brother to come over and help me out. He's a math whiz and is used to teaching me simpler ways to look at things mathematically.
 
thepokerkid123

thepokerkid123

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Total posts
917
Chips
0
Thanks for the comments, guys. I don't see any specific questions, but I'll be happy to answer them if they come up. I also appreciate the thoughts about applying these concepts to NL/PLO/other limit games. The ranges and odds change, but the fundamentals of poker remain the same.

Some of it might just be translating limit to NL, but your thought process is too advanced for me to have a ton of questions.
A couple of questions that come to mind regarding your thoughts on these types of hands: - Anyone else feel free to answer too :)
1) Determining what's fancy play syndrome and what's actually going to be profitable. My major difficulty with situations that are this marginal is that I screw up the maths, so much of it is based on assumption that if I'm looking for an excuse to make light call downs I'll over estimate something. Or go the other way and do things GTO when I should be employing a more exploitive strategy. In other words, do you have difficulty keeping your fancy plays in check?
2) Against complete fish. Against regs it's easier to be precise, but against a fish I'd take a more obvious line because their range and actions are less predictable. Granted you probably play against much less predictable regs than I do but they still have to follow a logic that's easier to comprehend than fishy stuff. - In other words, do you take lines like this against fish?
 
GiantBuddha

GiantBuddha

Poker Warrior - DTB Coach
Silver Level
Joined
Mar 18, 2010
Total posts
147
Chips
0
Just got back from a week in canada, and ready to catch up on these questions.

Paul, you mentioned one of the variables that would make this a semibluffing situation - holding Js4s rather than Ks4s, where our sd value is much worse. If Villain is a LAG rather than TAG, does that change the play of the hand, since his range is much wider (i.e., can we bet or raise for value on the turn in particular)? Or are we still just folding out hands we're way ahead of and getting called by hands we're behind?

Having a LAG opponent would not make semibluffing more attractive, since the extra hands in his range would not be better than our K4. I would only semibluff this hand if I expected him to fold some ace-high hands before showdown.
 
GiantBuddha

GiantBuddha

Poker Warrior - DTB Coach
Silver Level
Joined
Mar 18, 2010
Total posts
147
Chips
0
god almighty, how do you do this?
not specific but I am in awe.
I am not sure how this can be applied to NL but regardless I definitely have to have a sit down and study some combinatronics.
Is this a fundamental for studying PLO or at which point did you pick approach up?

I consider combo counting to be a fundamental of all holdem games, but there are many successful players who don't do much of it. There are 1,326 possible starting hands in LHE and NL. That's manageable. There are 270,725 possible starting hands in Omaha. That's roughly 1 heck of a lot. Estimating combos should be possible in PLO, but I haven't gotten around to that yet, and I'm not sure anyone does much of it. I do plan to take up PLO, though, and I'll do my best to work on that aspect of the game. There may be an opportunity to pick up an edge there.
 
GiantBuddha

GiantBuddha

Poker Warrior - DTB Coach
Silver Level
Joined
Mar 18, 2010
Total posts
147
Chips
0
I don't want to anyone to think I'm unappreciative of any of these vids, and I'm super happy to see some pros on here doing what they are doing. But I think some vids mixed in that are aimed more towards lower stakes thinking would be better received. I can understand what they are talking about, but being able to take that to the table and trying to implement it is still way above my head.

I consider myself a decent player, but I'm nowhere near this type of thinking. Also, I have HEM, but that is the only real poker software that I use due to not being able to afford it. And since I suck at math, I find it hard to form a question that would sufficiently ask what I'm looking to find an answer to.

But basically, is there any way to think at this level that can be cut down in to an easier way to figure it out on the fly? Or is this something that requires a deeper skill in math? And again, please don't think I'm being unappreciative of what you are giving us. I would just like to be able to utilize it.

Some of the combo analysis I do here is on the more advanced side, but learning the basics is pretty simple, and can have a significant effect on your game. The easiest hands to start with are ones where ranges are tight. Let's say the board is 83295 and you think your opponent's range consists of flopped overpairs and sets. You can determine that there are 30 combos of overpairs and only 12 combos of sets (99 was a flopped overpair, but it's a set now). There's a lot of ground between a hand like this and analyzing the combos in your c/c, c/c, c/f range. But the principles are the same.

Some easy combo counting rules:

3 combos of each set (per unpaired board card)
6 combos of each pocket pair that didn't make a set
9 combos of each two pair hand
12 combos of each one pair hand w/unmatched kicker (e.g. AK on K54)
4 suited combos of each straight or straight draw
12 unsuited combos of each straight or straight draw
16 total combos of any unpaired hand (4 suited + 12 unsuited)
45 total flush combos on monotone flop (if villain can hold any 2 suited)

You can draw some useful generalized conclusions from the above, but I suggest thinking about them more closely for each hand. Still:
  • It's hard to flop sets.
  • If a ranges are tight and a straight is possible with unsuited cards in opponent's range, then it's also quite likely.
  • Boards like JT7 have 16 possible straights.
  • Boards like JT9 have 48 possible straights. That's a lot!
  • With low cards on a monotone flop, villain can hold a good number of flushes.
  • With high cards on a monotone flop, villain is much less likely to hold a flush. (e.g. AKJ monotone flop against a tight range, only QTs, Q9s, Q8s, T9s, T8s, 98s, etc. are likely. With lower cards, there could be 9 nut flushes alone.)
 
dg1267

dg1267

Cardschat Elite
Silver Level
Joined
Feb 25, 2007
Total posts
4,547
Awards
1
Chips
1
Some of the combo analysis I do here is on the more advanced side, but learning the basics is pretty simple, and can have a significant effect on your game. The easiest hands to start with are ones where ranges are tight. Let's say the board is 83295 and you think your opponent's range consists of flopped overpairs and sets. You can determine that there are 30 combos of overpairs and only 12 combos of sets (99 was a flopped overpair, but it's a set now). There's a lot of ground between a hand like this and analyzing the combos in your c/c, c/c, c/f range. But the principles are the same.

Some easy combo counting rules:

3 combos of each set (per unpaired board card)
6 combos of each pocket pair that didn't make a set
9 combos of each two pair hand
12 combos of each one pair hand w/unmatched kicker (e.g. AK on K54)
4 suited combos of each straight or straight draw
12 unsuited combos of each straight or straight draw
16 total combos of any unpaired hand (4 suited + 12 unsuited)
45 total flush combos on monotone flop (if villain can hold any 2 suited)

You can draw some useful generalized conclusions from the above, but I suggest thinking about them more closely for each hand. Still:
  • It's hard to flop sets.
  • If a ranges are tight and a straight is possible with unsuited cards in opponent's range, then it's also quite likely.
  • Boards like JT7 have 16 possible straights.
  • Boards like JT9 have 48 possible straights. That's a lot!
  • With low cards on a monotone flop, villain can hold a good number of flushes.
  • With high cards on a monotone flop, villain is much less likely to hold a flush. (e.g. AKJ monotone flop against a tight range, only QTs, Q9s, Q8s, T9s, T8s, 98s, etc. are likely. With lower cards, there could be 9 nut flushes alone.)

HOLY JEBUS!:icon_shak:icon_shak:icon_shak My head is spinning!:p I'm going to look this over and over. I'm going to try to commit this to memory as well by copy/pasting it and opening it up during play and study time. I really appreciate you putting all this out there for us lesser thinking folk to read!:)

I'm also trying to work out a way where I can get some time in at DTB. It may only be every other month, but I can use that month in between to use some of what I'm trying to learn to see how well learned without trying to go overboard and learning too much.
 
ats777

ats777

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Feb 17, 2010
Total posts
116
Chips
0
Paul,

Thanks again for doing this for the members here. Just a couple of questions/comments..

I assume there is more detailed talk about combo analysis with your other DTB vids? I haven't read much about this topic and can see its incredibly important, so I'm interested to learn more.

Also, related to the combo analysis - how to you recommend practicing and then implementing this into my game? Basically, how do I start using it to make better decisions? I understand from your comments that if I hold say, AA on a JT9 board, I should be much more concerned and be wary than if the board is JT7...but theorizing about that here, and implementing it in real time in my bet/call/fold decisions at the tables is a whole diffrerent thing. Is there a staggered approach you recommend to this to make sure I don't completely overwhelm myself when playing?

Thanks again...I look forward to watching more of your vids at DTB.
 
GiantBuddha

GiantBuddha

Poker Warrior - DTB Coach
Silver Level
Joined
Mar 18, 2010
Total posts
147
Chips
0
Paul,

Thanks again for doing this for the members here. Just a couple of questions/comments..

I assume there is more detailed talk about combo analysis with your other DTB vids? I haven't read much about this topic and can see its incredibly important, so I'm interested to learn more.

Also, related to the combo analysis - how to you recommend practicing and then implementing this into my game? Basically, how do I start using it to make better decisions? I understand from your comments that if I hold say, AA on a JT9 board, I should be much more concerned and be wary than if the board is JT7...but theorizing about that here, and implementing it in real time in my bet/call/fold decisions at the tables is a whole diffrerent thing. Is there a staggered approach you recommend to this to make sure I don't completely overwhelm myself when playing?

Thanks again...I look forward to watching more of your vids at DTB.

I talk about combos in a lot of my other videos. I have a whole series planned around combos, in fact, but that's not due until the fall or so.

My suggestion to avoid overwhelming yourself is to do a detailed combo analysis on a hand or two per session, day, week, whatever. The more you analyze hands away from the table, the easier live analysis will become. The idea is for the combos to seep into your game.

Also, I recommend starting by analyzing river decisions and working backwards. Since river ranges are tighter, the combos are more manageable.
 
GiantBuddha

GiantBuddha

Poker Warrior - DTB Coach
Silver Level
Joined
Mar 18, 2010
Total posts
147
Chips
0
Some of it might just be translating limit to NL, but your thought process is too advanced for me to have a ton of questions.
A couple of questions that come to mind regarding your thoughts on these types of hands: - Anyone else feel free to answer too :)
1) Determining what's fancy play syndrome and what's actually going to be profitable. My major difficulty with situations that are this marginal is that I screw up the maths, so much of it is based on assumption that if I'm looking for an excuse to make light call downs I'll over estimate something. Or go the other way and do things GTO when I should be employing a more exploitive strategy. In other words, do you have difficulty keeping your fancy plays in check?
2) Against complete fish. Against regs it's easier to be precise, but against a fish I'd take a more obvious line because their range and actions are less predictable. Granted you probably play against much less predictable regs than I do but they still have to follow a logic that's easier to comprehend than fishy stuff. - In other words, do you take lines like this against fish?

1) I just try to stay honest with myself and go with my gut. I never want to look for reasons to do one thing or the other. Or rather, I don't want to want to call down, and I don't want to want to bluff. I just try to be objective.

2) Against fish, there's always going to be more crazy hands in their range. Just weird stuff. Playing more straightforward against a typical fish is the way to go.
 
Starting Hands - Poker Hand Nicknames Rankings - Poker Hands
Top