Holecards up video review

ChuckTs

ChuckTs

Legend
Joined
Feb 2, 2005
Total posts
13,642
Finally got this done. It just kept slipping my mind, so I sat down yesterday after being reminded by Liam and did a video review.

[broken link~tb]

1hr37mins long, 80 sumthin MB large.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
B

bw07507

Legend
Joined
Jan 8, 2007
Total posts
2,219
Very nice Chuck, downloading now, cant wait to watch.
 
zachvac

zachvac

Legend
Joined
Sep 14, 2007
Total posts
7,832
ok one question, it's something I've been thinking about. In the video you mention raising more oop to negate the positional disadvantage (because you have a good hand and getting money committed when you know you are ahead is always good). However, I've read several pros (most notably Harrington and Ed Miller) say that basically you should raise more on the button because you want to build big pots and give you the decision on whether to get your money in when you're in position, and it's a lot easier to do with a bigger preflop raise. In his cash game book Harrington even suggests making the standard UTG raise be a min-raise (or mini-raise as he calls it). I'm inclined to think that the advantage of the extra big blind when we're ahead would be negated by the effect of having to play a much bigger pot when oop (as you know, 1 BB preflop is huge in terms of final pot size, with pot sized bets it's a difference of 15 big blinds on all 4 betting rounds), and the fact that the player in position ultimately has a lot of control over the size of the pot. So you gain the 1 big blind in equity preflop but your opponent has the option of usually controlling the pot since he has position on you or building a pot if he wants.
 
ChuckTs

ChuckTs

Legend
Joined
Feb 2, 2005
Total posts
13,642
Well that's a good point and to be honest I've seen tons of points for both sides. Most of the stox pros say that you should always 3bet more OOP for the reasons I stated, but I've also heard tons on how you don't want to play big pots OOP.

I really don't know what's ideal tbh, but 3betting >3x the raise works for me. Raising less just gives good odds to my opponent, and gives him the idea that he can call with lesser hands to try to outplay me later which of course I don't want.
 
zachvac

zachvac

Legend
Joined
Sep 14, 2007
Total posts
7,832
Well that's a good point and to be honest I've seen tons of points for both sides. Most of the stox pros say that you should always 3bet more OOP for the reasons I stated, but I've also heard tons on how you don't want to play big pots OOP.

I really don't know what's ideal tbh, but 3betting >3x the raise works for me. Raising less just gives good odds to my opponent, and gives him the idea that he can call with lesser hands to try to outplay me later which of course I don't want.

Well I can see 3-bet pots being different as well just because an in position player is not going to be able to keep the pot small. If they call a flop pot bet they're stack is now about pot size and they're going to have a tough time seeing a cheap showdown without stacking. I didn't even really post this in response to a particular hand, you just said that a few times and I've heard both and been thinking about it a lot.
 
icemonkey9

icemonkey9

Cardschat Elite
Joined
Jan 17, 2008
Total posts
3,023
It's like watching two professors talk about something you thought you had a great grasp of and are left feeling small and insignificant.

I think also you should consider the stakes. I think for you ChuckTs and Zachvac, the 3bet PF OOP theory definitely fits, since you want to take it down PF or set yourself up for the c-bet when you show such great strength OOP. However in stakes like 25nl and even 50nl, do you think the opponents are even good/bad enough. Basically I am just curious to know if the theories you're explaining here about OOP/3betting/amts apply to your levels or to us cockroaches here at 25nl.
 
ChuckTs

ChuckTs

Legend
Joined
Feb 2, 2005
Total posts
13,642
However in stakes like 25nl and even 50nl, do you think the opponents are even good/bad enough.

...to what?

The strategy we're discussing doesn't rely on your opponent's skill levels or levels of poker knowledge.

It's like looking at pot odds - do pot odds matter if your opponent doesn't understand them? Of course they do. You bet a certain amount to make draws unprofitable to call, so even if they don't know they're paying too much to see the turn card, they're still paying too much to see the turn card :)
 
dsvw56

dsvw56

I'm a Taurus
Joined
Jun 7, 2008
Total posts
1,716
From a GTO standpoint, your opening raise size should increase the closer you get to the button. If it were graphed, I'd imagine it'd either look like half of a hyperbola, or a bell curve. Whether the difference in size between UTG and the button is even large enough to make any sort of difference, I don't know.

Obviously, from a more practical view, generally you do want to play smaller pots OOP and larger ones in position. This doesnt, however, directly relate to opening raise sizes. A smaller raise may actually lead to a larger pot by getting multiple callers and/or encouraging 3-bets.

It's definitely a complex issue, with many strong and weak points on either side.
 
Jagsti

Jagsti

I'm sweet enough!
Joined
Feb 18, 2007
Total posts
5,478
Wow Chuck you were getting some hands in that vid. you must have been running at like +30VPIP. Great analysis btw, thanx for sorting this out guys!
 
zachvac

zachvac

Legend
Joined
Sep 14, 2007
Total posts
7,832
From a GTO standpoint, your opening raise size should increase the closer you get to the button. If it were graphed, I'd imagine it'd either look like half of a hyperbola, or a bell curve. Whether the difference in size between UTG and the button is even large enough to make any sort of difference, I don't know.

Care to expand on why this is? I'm just curious as to the reasoning behind it.
 
bob_tiger

bob_tiger

Legend
Joined
Jul 8, 2007
Total posts
2,735
That was one long video but it was good, got to saw some crazy hands so that was cool. Also excellent commentary chuck and it's interesting to see how you guys play. Also I think most of you guys would play differently if it wasn't for the vid and like chuck mentioned people were trying to outplay each other and stuff like that.
 
B

bw07507

Legend
Joined
Jan 8, 2007
Total posts
2,219
Just finally got some time to finish watching this. Great analysis as always Chuck. I always manage to learn something new in each of your videos. btw, any chance of another one of these happening??? If so I would love to play.
 
Top