Lex Veldhuis

OzExorcist

OzExorcist

Broomcorn's uncle
Bronze Level
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Total posts
8,586
Awards
1
Chips
1
I bet Gus doesnt call all ins with trash after there has been raises except for metagame purposes... This guy thought he was ahead, lmao.

The only reason people like him is because people love players who show bluffs..that doesnt mean hes good.

*sigh*

OK, you've done it. You've made me go back and watch the actual hand. I didn't realise we were talking about calling a shove rather than just a three-bet. The same points stand though.

Have a look at Lex's face when he makes the call. He doesn't think he's ahead - he just thinks he's getting a reasonable price on a call (14.8K with 25.2K already in the pot).

The villain is on mega-tilt after being bluffed by Veldhuis so many times and given that genuine monsters make up such a small part of his range Veldhuis is probably no worse than about 40-60 and that's about right for calling. There's nobody to act after him to get in the way. And that's before we even get into metagame stuff. It says one thing about you if you show some bluffs - it says another thing altogether if you show you're willing to call shoves with K4, and that can be a hell of an image if you know how to manage it right.

Based on all that, I think the call was reasonable. Moreover, I think he's not the only player that would make it - metagame or otherwise. Sure, Phil Hellmuth and Allen Cunningham aren't among them, but that doesn't mean it was a completely stupid play.
 
Dwilius

Dwilius

CardsChat Regular
Silver Level
Joined
May 5, 2008
Total posts
7,584
Awards
34
Chips
0
...
Have a look at Lex's face when he makes the call. He doesn't think he's ahead - he just thinks he's getting a reasonable price on a call (14.8K with 25.2K already in the pot).

The villain is on mega-tilt after being bluffed by Veldhuis so many times and given that genuine monsters make up such a small part of his range Veldhuis is probably no worse than about 40-60 and that's about right for calling. There's nobody to act after him to get in the way. And that's before we even get into metagame stuff. It says one thing about you if you show some bluffs - it says another thing altogether if you show you're willing to call shoves with K4
 
Last edited:
PoKeRFoRNiA

PoKeRFoRNiA

Legend
Bronze Level
Joined
Feb 21, 2009
Total posts
1,321
Awards
1
Chips
48
Are you saying he knew what the other guy had...?
I think you are being results orientated. Most players would fold that because thats the right play.

Yes, right play was to muck it long time ago and not deal with the pot instead of reraising with K4. But why else would he call with K4 besides the odds? He read the guy with 67 and said to himself "aaw, poor kid is trying to steal the pot after I crushed him 3 times. kid's trying to outplay me just because I'm better than him. I bet my King high is probably better hand than his. My King high is good enough." and probably called. You think he would call someone else's allin bet? If somebody went all-in, he would fold. Since it was tiltboy's all-in, he called with King 4.

You have to admit. That guy with 67 got murdered. But let me ask a question. Is it ok for 67 to shove all-in 60 blinds to two reraises and expect people to fold but not ok for King 4 to call? Is shoving all-in with 67 a right play when there are two reraises in front of him?
We're both on same page that reraising with King 4 and calling with King 4 is not a right play. At the same time, shoving all-in to two reraises with 67 is not a right play also.
 
G

Grindit9

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
May 12, 2009
Total posts
179
Chips
0
Yes, right play was to muck it long time ago and not deal with the pot instead of reraising with K4. But why else would he call with K4 besides the odds? He read the guy with 67 and said to himself "aaw, poor kid is trying to steal the pot after I crushed him 3 times. kid's trying to outplay me just because I'm better than him. I bet my King high is probably better hand than his. My King high is good enough." and probably called. You think he would call someone else's allin bet? If somebody went all-in, he would fold. Since it was tiltboy's all-in, he called with King 4.

You have to admit. That guy with 67 got murdered. But let me ask a question. Is it ok for 67 to shove all-in 60 blinds to two reraises and expect people to fold but not ok for King 4 to call? Is shoving all-in with 67 a right play when there are two reraises in front of him?
We're both on same page that reraising with King 4 and calling with King 4 is not a right play. At the same time, shoving all-in to two reraises with 67 is not a right play also.

I agree shoving with 67 is not a good play in this situation. He was also not chip dead or anything. Bad play as well.
 
OzExorcist

OzExorcist

Broomcorn's uncle
Bronze Level
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Total posts
8,586
Awards
1
Chips
1
Cliff notes: focus on the situation rather than getting hung up on the specific cards, think of it as a squeeze and a re-steal shove (not a three-bet with K4 and a four-bet shove with 76) and remember that not everyone wants to limp meekly into the money.

Yes, right play was to muck it long time ago and not deal with the pot instead of reraising with K4. But why else would he call with K4 besides the odds? He read the guy with 67 and said to himself "aaw, poor kid is trying to steal the pot after I crushed him 3 times. kid's trying to outplay me just because I'm better than him. I bet my King high is probably better hand than his. My King high is good enough." and probably called. You think he would call someone else's allin bet? If somebody went all-in, he would fold. Since it was tiltboy's all-in, he called with King 4.

You have to admit. That guy with 67 got murdered. But let me ask a question. Is it ok for 67 to shove all-in 60 blinds to two reraises and expect people to fold but not ok for King 4 to call? Is shoving all-in with 67 a right play when there are two reraises in front of him?
We're both on same page that reraising with King 4 and calling with King 4 is not a right play. At the same time, shoving all-in to two reraises with 67 is not a right play also.

I should really stop reading this thread...

There's an awful lot of the word "right" being bandied about here which is... interesting, for want of a better word.

You're focussing pretty much all of your attention on the cards these players were holding, not their reads and the table dynamics which are much MUCH more important in this situation. When you consider the whole picture, I don't think there's necessarily anything wrong with the way either of these two played the hand.

It's a pretty standard squeeze play when Veldhuis three-bets and the cards he's holding are largely irrelevant. Sure, he could have just mucked the hand but he's got plenty of chips, he's in a zone where he's running over the table, there are image benefits in it for him and Elezra has given him a perfect opportunity by just calling.

Muenz has got to recognise that Veldhuis can be raising with anything in this spot and that the other two players in the hand won't be taking any further part unless they're holding legitimate monsters. So there's a big pot with dead money out there for the taking. Four-bet shoving with a stack that size almost certainly folds the first two players and since Veldhuis doesn't have to have a good hand either, chances are he picks up the pot. Shoving here is a pretty standard way of putting a bully back in his box.

Of course, it's complicated by the fact that he's maybe got a tilty image at the moment. I say maybe because thanks to TV editing we don't actually know how long it's been since Veldhuis beat him in those other big pots - it's possible significant amounts of time have passed and Muenz has rebuilt a tighter image. But regardless, it's a big bet and I think it was fair to assume that he was forcing Veldhuis to have some sort of reasonable hand in order to call - Muenz wasn't the only one at the table who was surprised when Veldhuis called that light.

Veldhuis making the call we've discussed above - at that point the cards he's holding do start to matter because he's got to assess them against Muenz's range. But note that until that point, all the plays are perfectly justifiable and it really doesn't matter what the players are holding.

One last thought: some players are perfectly happy to take risks like this early in order to either chip up big or get out and get back to their cash games and with that in mind I really don't think there's anything wrong with the way either Veldhuis or Muenz played this hand. They could have played super-snug and just folded these hands but they're not "wrong" just because they did something different to that.
 
PoKeRFoRNiA

PoKeRFoRNiA

Legend
Bronze Level
Joined
Feb 21, 2009
Total posts
1,321
Awards
1
Chips
48
Don't criticize me for using the word "right" when it's Implied Odds who used that term to describe "long-term profiting decision". Long-term profiting decision was to muck K4 and 67 during pre-flop. Muenz made horrible play. I would never shove 60 blinds to 2 reraises in front of me with 67suited and risk my whole tournament of getting knocked out. You're right. Lex can be reraising with nothing. But what he didn't see was the initial raiser. If initial raiser has pocket Aces, Muenz is done for. "long-term profiting decision" was to muck 67 and lose 1 big blind than to risk your whole tournament over 67.

What I don't get is why some people call Lex a donkey for calling with K4 when he called with better hand. His decision before calling was "i have odds. this guy's on tilt. i owned this guy. im better than him. i proved it. i crushed him 3 times. poor kid is trying to outplay me to get back at me. i bet my King high is a better hand." and called. Like you told me, don't focus on the cards and focus on situation. Why else would he call with K4? He read the tiltboy like a book. People are calling him donkey because they focus on cards and say King 4 is garbage hand. But it won the pot without sucking out, right? I don't know why some people criticize the caller instead of real idiot who shoved all in for 60 blinds with 67 to two reraises in the front from being on tilt.

I really like this guy's style of playing.
 
OzExorcist

OzExorcist

Broomcorn's uncle
Bronze Level
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Total posts
8,586
Awards
1
Chips
1
...

......

I give up.
 
PoKeRFoRNiA

PoKeRFoRNiA

Legend
Bronze Level
Joined
Feb 21, 2009
Total posts
1,321
Awards
1
Chips
48
This guy rocks. Ever since I watch this guy cold call with King 4, I started to add those hands to my ranges. On SNG, During bubble play, if I can sense that my opponent is attempting to steal my blind, I would even cold call it down with Queen 5 offsuit or King 2. Quite funny how I cold call it down with Queen 5 offsuit while my opponent was holding 9 2 offsuit. Back then, I would've folded Queen 5 because of the fact that they're rags even when I clearly knew that my opponent is bluffing. Before watching Lex, I would muck those hands because of the fact that they're "rags" regardless of if my opponent is attempting to shove my stealing. But now, if my read is proper that my opponent is bluffing, I would cold call it down with any high card. So far, it's been working well when I call based on my reads. Only thing I'm missing is this guy's aggression and this guy's ability to read.
 
PoKeRFoRNiA

PoKeRFoRNiA

Legend
Bronze Level
Joined
Feb 21, 2009
Total posts
1,321
Awards
1
Chips
48
No joke. Watching this guy's style improved my game. I call down all-in bets with King high and Queen high sometimes. Few sngs where small blind attempts to steal my blind, I cold called an all-in bet with Queen 5 offsuit. What does my opponent roll over? 9 2 offsuit. It's hilarious how people think I'm a donkey for calling with Queen 5 when the real donkey is short-stacker who shoved all-in with 9 2 offsuit. Chatbox was filled with my call. Before watching Lex Veldhuis, I would fold in this situation since Queen 5 is a rag regardless of if short-stacker moved all-in against me. But now, if my reads are proper and I believe I probably have better hand and my opponent is trying to steal my blind, I have guts to call down all-in bets with Queen high.

This lex guy is such a genius. K4 call was sick. he's gonna be in high stakes poker soon. negreanu got him in. this guy is gonna take away everybody's money.

Sorry for writing this post after like two months or so. But ever since i saw this guy, my calling ranges became wider when I put them together with my reads. Queen high isn't a bad hand afterall.
 
Last edited:
ukaliks

ukaliks

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Nov 22, 2007
Total posts
1,292
Awards
1
Chips
0
No joke. Watching this guy's style improved my game. I call down all-in bets with King high and Queen high sometimes. Few sngs where small blind attempts to steal my blind, I cold called an all-in bet with Queen 5 offsuit. What does my opponent roll over? 9 2 offsuit. It's hilarious how people think I'm a donkey for calling with Queen 5 when the real donkey is short-stacker who shoved all-in with 9 2 offsuit. Chatbox was filled with my call. Before watching Lex Veldhuis, I would fold in this situation since Queen 5 is a rag regardless of if short-stacker moved all-in against me. But now, if my reads are proper and I believe I probably have better hand and my opponent is trying to steal my blind, I have guts to call down all-in bets with Queen high.

This lex guy is such a genius. K4 call was sick. he's gonna be in high stakes poker soon. negreanu got him in. this guy is gonna take away everybody's money.

Sorry for writing this post after like two months or so. But ever since i saw this guy, my calling ranges became wider when I put them together with my reads. Queen high isn't a bad hand afterall.

very intresting. What stakes are u playin at in ur SnG's? Think i mite have to start using this tatic when ppl are trying to steal. Cos its blantant that when the CO/BTN/SB is shoving they dont want a call...unless there short-stacked.
I think Lex is a great player with alot of guts to make moves like this. Instead of playin ABC tight/nitty poker. He's juicing it up. To make u think: Is he playin K4 or does he have KK?
He down on the cash games tho bro. He's busted most of his roll on Stars (-$130,000) lol. Have a check on PokerTableRatings.com (RaSZi)
 
PoKeRFoRNiA

PoKeRFoRNiA

Legend
Bronze Level
Joined
Feb 21, 2009
Total posts
1,321
Awards
1
Chips
48
very intresting. What stakes are u playin at in ur SnG's? Think i mite have to start using this tatic when ppl are trying to steal. Cos its blantant that when the CO/BTN/SB is shoving they dont want a call...unless there short-stacked.
I think Lex is a great player with alot of guts to make moves like this. Instead of playin ABC tight/nitty poker. He's juicing it up. To make u think: Is he playin K4 or does he have KK?
He down on the cash games tho bro. He's busted most of his roll on Stars (-$130,000) lol. Have a check on PokerTableRatings.com (RaSZi)

I usually play $2 regularly but I play $5, $6, and $10 too. Lex was applying jackass strategy I mentioned on this site long time ago and he was killing everybody. He got two pairs and overpairs to fold. He was running over everybody. When you said "is he playing K4 or does he have KK?", that's what Allen Cunningham was saying to himself when Lex reraised him all-in. Allen thought his Q8 might be live cards against Lex but Lex had Kings. If Lex was playing nitty, Allen would fold. Since it's lex, Allen called and got outplayed. Lex made me open my mind and become unpredictable. Lex also knows how to fold too. I saw him fold two pairs.

I love the way he juices it up. about being down on pokerstars, eh, I think he got lazy after main event. I mean, he's getting paid as we speak by pokerstars. He got sponsored, became celebrity in poker. He doesn't care if he loses. I just checked it out. He donked hard against Eastgate. LOL. Eastgate had Aces and Lex had 7s. Lex was bluffing and made a full house on the turn. Eastgate's slow-play didn't work.
 
sammyfive

sammyfive

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Oct 4, 2009
Total posts
128
Chips
0
^^^^
This is disturbing, calling a bunch all-ins with queen high doesn't seem like a very profitable way to play!
 
nc_royals

nc_royals

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Sep 20, 2007
Total posts
701
Chips
0
...makes moves that makes since. Lex was just trying to get some TV face time IMO. Lex was putting it in peoples faces. Sure I show a bluff at times. But I think what Lex did was disrespectful. He was just bluffing for the sake of bluffing. GL on the felts guys.

Totally agree that he was looking for TV time. Some of his bluffs were good and his calls even better. But you cant expect to play at that pace for 9 days and expect to be there in November.
 
PoKeRFoRNiA

PoKeRFoRNiA

Legend
Bronze Level
Joined
Feb 21, 2009
Total posts
1,321
Awards
1
Chips
48
^^^^
This is disturbing, calling a bunch all-ins with queen high doesn't seem like a very profitable way to play!

Playing cards is not a profitable way to play. Playing your opponent is a profitable way to play. During bubble, when a small blind constantly shoves all-in on your blind, majority of the time, your queen high, king high is a better hand. Folding is not a profitable way to play. Playing ABC/nit strategy will make you go broke when you are card dead and not get premium hands. I've been calling lot of button/sb's all-in bets based on their previous plays and amazingly I found myself ahead most of the time. Hands like Q5, K2, and sometimes J5 are good hands too. Before watching Lex Veldhuis, I was a donkey playing ABC/nit poker just like almost every online players. When I'm shoved all-in and I'm holding Queen 5, I would fold just because of the fact that Q5 is a bad hand. But now, I stepped out of that rat race and play my opponents. And I thank Lex Veldhuis everytime I make these calls. When I make these calls, I happen to be ahead most of the time and win, everyone at the table are afraid of me and will think twice before playing back at me. They'll be afraid to shove against me. I love reading chatboxes filled with barks about my call when they've shoved with much inferior hands.

Of course there are times when I'm ahead but lose, or when I'm behind but happen to suck out, but loosening up is profitable because you give a very strong image to everyone in the table, implying "dun f--k with me". Once I make these calls and win without sucking out, so many people fold to my blind because they're afraid. If you keep folding, they're just gonna keep shoving against you and you become the reall donkey who can get bullied around easily. If you stand up with any face card rag and it holds up, whole table becomes afraid to play back at you second time.
 
retrogamer

retrogamer

Enthusiast
Silver Level
Joined
Nov 7, 2009
Total posts
48
Chips
0
This guy just thought he was invincible.. there is no way that kinda play can get you to the end of a major tourney like the wsop main event..
 
C

CardDeath101

Enthusiast
Silver Level
Joined
Nov 18, 2009
Total posts
77
Chips
0
I agree pokerluvs me He is a very good player but still sometimes he is too loose K 4? that was insane! but he has taught me a little something about calling little short stacks with a high card weak kicker :)
 
Top