NLHE > Mid Stakes > Mid Stakes FRNL Hand Review (1 of 3)
Trouble playing the video? Be sure you have Flash installed.
DescriptionIn his first video for Run It Once, Adrian "Sharknebulah" Milroy reviews hands from recent $2/$4 NL sessions. He spends a lot of time going over each hand and disects every aspect that lead to his decisions on each point in the hand.
colosk1You make it 4x, becasue "thats how I roll?" WTF kind of explanation is that? If this is the quality of videos one can expect i don't think I will be upgrading to the $99.99 plan anytime soon.FlySooHighI personally really enjoyed the video and the manner in which Adrian conveys his thought process and in-depth analysis of the hands. The first 2 minutes are not enough to make fair judgement and I am sure you would've liked the video if there were any other 2 minutes in the prewiew ;)
Looking forward for more entertaining and informative videos like this one!
teamsnacks20 minutes for the first hand on how to make an awful line and get there? This was a painfully slow video
Adrian MilroyHi Everyone,
I'm going to answer all three comments here one by one.
Coloskl: There are varying opening sizes in the games today. 95% of them are between 2X and 3X. To be brutally honest, 4Xing at FR is exactly how I roll... It is my opening size at all positions since I learned how to play years ago and climbed up the ladder to where I am now. It is mostly a matter of choice and comfort on my part. I can't lie, that's a big part of it. I believe there are positives to it such as building bigger pots when you have the initiative, and on top that, in position (alot of opening will be IP and not OOP). It costs you opponents more to 3bet you, but you also lose more when you fold to a 3bet. This is discussion that cannot be fit into a chat box, and literally never ends. Even tho you seem frustrated with my lack of explanation for opening sizes, perhaps what you can take away from my comments is that opening sizes represent a small part of the game, and I standardize my opening sizes like everyone else, its just bigger. I feel that the more important parts to the game lie in dissecting intricate poker situations, especially post flop.
Adrian MilroyFlysooHigh: Thanks for your positive comments. I'm honestly a virgin at this video making thing, but I feel that these hand replayer videos can really let me showcase the deepness of thought process that is possible in a single hand. I hope you enjoy my future stuff.
Adrian MilroyTeamsnacks: I don't know what to say other than I don't think its an awful line. Its unconventional, which is the method that I play. In a hand replayer video especially, I'm going to go into extremely deep analysis. Unconventional lines require even more thought to figure out what is actually going on. Poker is a complex game, and there's an incredibly surprising amount of information that can be encapsulated into one single hand. I believe that searching for this information is important to being a good poker player, and making the best decisions in the long run. I will agree with you somewhat, that going this deep into hands can be mentally tiresome and some days I am just not up for it! But you'll get out of the game what you put into it, and I prefer to think things out as far as I can. Perhaps my videos are not for you, and you would like something more basic and concise in terms of analysis.
Phil GalfondAll, I have to take some of the "blame" for Adrian's short preflop explanation. I loved his sample videos he sent me, but I suggested he gloss over some more basic decisions and leave time for the more interesting ones. Adrian, like me, expands a great deal on his (deep) thought process, so I wanted to help him tighten up the video a bit to cover more ground.
Adrian was the first pro I hand-picked for Run it Once, and one of the ones I'm most excited about. You can find standard, cookie-cutter vids from decent 5/10nl+ regs anywhere. Adrian is one of, if not the winningest FRNL player online (and is successful at 6max too), and his thought process and play-style are different from every other reg out there.
I watch all of his videos because he brings up things I've never thought about and makes me take a deeper look into my own game. That's what a good training video should do.
halvadron1Interesting vid so far:)
@hand 1 - 87s:
I think your flopline is valid cause we do not wanna cbet here wide on, so he have to C/F a lot - hence mixing in some C/Rings w a balanced range is all right, imo.
1.) Would you C/R here also in some % not only w air (w some EQ or backdoorEQ) and nut-type.hands,
but also w solid mediocore hands, such as JJ-AA?
2.) Given the detailed estimations bout Villain`s most likely reactions with different parts of his Range vs. your
C/R, I guess the plan with your specific hand here (or also w OPs if you would like to also C/R them sometimes), would be C/R/Folds vs. a 3bet, but staying agressive vs. his callinrange on most turn-rivercards?
3.) I am not sure about your turnplay after Villain checked back.
The reason for that is that given he is checking back there most likely a pretty weak range,
you have imo no guarantee he will bet now OTT.
I would have likely preferred to bet and bet (maybe use overbetting) on most rivercards, again.Adrian MilroyI mentioned overbetting in my post below, but that was with my line, not yours. My bad. If you're gonna bet the turn, I love an overbet on the river, as to your opponent, it'll look like you're trying to bluff something that you shouldn't really have there, which will increase his frequency of calling even tho its an overbet. One thing to remember, is that if you overbet once a decade, you're never going to get called. So make sure that its something you do fairly regularly otherwise you don't wanna scare him off, just go 80-100% pot.
1 and 2)
I would C/R a large range of hands here ranging from complete air (KJo, etc.), to semi air which is really much better (KcTc, XcTc, etc...) and even TT+ like you were saying. Not to mention all sets and T8s as well. I would also C/R huge draws like 68hh and A8hh as well. We'd wanna get in 2pr + and OESFDs right there on the flop, where as the overpairs and weaker draws we don't necessarily want to all the time. It all depends on how your opponent usually reacts to these plays. I'm much less likely to C/R TT-AA, or even the 78dd I had in this hand vs an opponent that I know is capable of 4bet bluffing this flop on me. I'd like to be more polarized against this type of player (air, and less of a frequency of it, or hands that's I'm willing to get in on the flop). However, against a more solid type of player, I feel that I can fold comfortably when they 4bet the flop on me, and I want to have some quality hands by the turn.
You're correct in assuming that I'm staying aggressive vs his calling range by the turn. A 6 or a 9 are really bad cards for us to continue, but for the most part, his calling range on this flop will be relatively weak and will have trouble withstanding a turn bet which hits the leverage point first. Vs our bluffing/sticky type opponent, I would get ready to ship the river as well if it bricks as these type of players tend to make you work deeper into pots to win them, whereas the straightforward nit won't call the turn with a made hand that he's not ready to run you down with. Generally speaking. These types of lines can also heavily weight your opponents range towards draws by the time you get to the river, so with the right situation/opponents/turn+river cards can also call for a C/C Hero call sometimes.
3) After the flop went chk-chk. We're both not supposed to have much. If I bet and get called, I'm behind, and he's probably not drawing because of how the action is going down (maybe JT). If I chk to him a 2nd time on this board, I feel that the chances of him taking a stab at this board, at this point, are very high, albeit no guarantee... Once I get called by my C/R, I feel that I'm up against most probably the same range that I would've been if I just bet the turn, but with the bonus of picking up extra dead money and the downside of giving a free card. In this spot, I feel like I'm picking up the dead money, more than giving up the free card. Lets not forget the fact that our hand is completely concealed, and that our opponent can (and did) make mistakes vs. our line. As for your overbet comment, I talked about that in the video once we got to river and elected not to do it. Its at about 20min or so... Also, its hard to overbet 2pr or a set for value there and get called, which in addition would have prevented my opponent from trying to rep, what I had. If you refer to the video, I liked the idea, just didn't think it was best here.halvadron1Hey, thx for the detailed response - that is imo how high-quality answers should look like - ty:)
gargamel_fkHi Adrian really enjoyed the vid.
Couple of question.
The 87s hands,
1)in the post above you mentioned how wide is your x/r range here so what is your cbetting range here if any? Do you always continue here only by X/R or you stil have some cbetting range here (and how looks your cbetting range here)??? (and I mean vs regs cause it is always different vs fish). For the sake of an example lets pretend that we play vs TAGish fr reg (15/12 to 17/14 or so).
2) Turn decision:
(same tagish opponent for the sake of discussion) we X/R and got called. I suppose you continuing range is sth like any 7,5 and T for value and any heart. GIven that VIllian range is weak do you bet on other cards (overs etc.)?? If you get called on the Turn on heart will you bet the river to try to rep the flush when the River is blankish??
3)On the flop we checked Villian checked back. On the turn do you always check your entire range here or you bet some part of your range here?? Would you ever consider here bluffing the hand on Turn and River based on that Villian range is capped after he check back the Flop??
4) 88 hand vs tuff_shark
what do you think about making like small dbet on the river that look like blocking bet?? We get max value vs his Jx hands and we might incuce him to spazz.. I mean he isn't really bluffing there all that much on the River cause his value range is max 98,sJ9s, KJs,88,99,JJ,QTs,KK,AA and we don't look really that great vs that range (unless he turns 9T or Jt into a bluff on the River). Any thoughts? Do you always X there on the River??
5) AQ hands
What would you do if after SEFI123 bet ryytis would call?? What would be your plan there. Would you call/fold/still raise for value??
1. My C/Ring range, cbetting ranges and C/Fing ranges here don't just compliment each other to add up to 100% of the instances that this flop hits the board. I don't compartmentalize say 87s in a C/Ring range, and TT into a cbetting range. I can use them for both. The idea here is that the cbetting line, and C/Ring line are two different approaches to playing the hand. So to answer your question, I'd say my cbetting range could be exactly the same as my C/Ring range except I think I would rarely cbet naked overs (KQo/AJo, etc...). I choose these lines based on the knowledge I have of my opponents post flop tendencies. Two 15/12 or 17/14 regs pre, don't necessarily play the same way post flop. If we take two generalized post flop tendencies, maybe that will help you pick different lines to attack difference opponents.
So if we take the very aggressive, very sticky, often betting opponent, I would chose a C/R line. For one, he's more likely to bet the flop with air, and give you the chance to C/R and take down a bigger pot. Secondly, he's more likely to bluff 3bet the flop, or 3bet ligher and get it in (TPTK/overpair), so jamming over his flop 3bet would be ok in the long run as you won't be up against sets and 2prs all day. Also, if we cbet, this type of player can raise us on this board and put in a really disadvantaged position. Sure you can 3bet his raise, but if he jams at that point, you're more likely to be up against the monster range of sets, 2 pairs and huge draws, and very often, if you look at the math when you're calling off that shove, its a bad call mathematically vs his range. If we take the solid, pot-controlling nittier reg, I would definitely cbet. We are not going to get bluff raised very often, and if we do, we can call knowing that we'll probably get one more bet out of him if we hit on the next card (not more than that tho) because we are looking at a range heavily weighted towards sets/2prs. Secondly, this player is very liable to check back TP and weak overpairs on the flop, specifically to avoid the tremendous amount of pressure a C/R puts on his hand.
2. Depending on the player, I am either bombing the turn, or C/Cing it. Most of the time, unless the board pairs (not my 7) I'm just bombing any card that hits. I want to put tons of pressure on my opponents percievably weak range, on this extremely wet board. From a balance point of view this is key because in this spot (not that your opponents will know this but after 4 years of playing these odd lines, some of the regulars do catch on to what I do, forcing me to adjust things vs them) you are going to be coming at your opponents with your monsters as well (sets, T8s, 2pairs, 68hh or A8hh that you're calling off to a jam on the turn anyways). Versus a regular that has been in this spot before vs you, its nice to have your nut range (set, 2prs), you're semi-nut range (68hh, K8hh/A8hh, and this range is important because they can't get you to fold, they have to dodge your outs, and if they are ever making a play with air, or jamming a worse draw on turn, they are gonna double you up most of the time). And finally, you're semi-bluff range (78dd, or KTs) that when jammed over on the turn, you're probably gonna have to fold most of the time. Yes, its possible to have AK, or JK in that range, but even if you do, it represents a smaller amount of hands that all the others which have a bunch of equity in this spot. Since your turn bet is going to be the leverage point, it's usually going to get you more FE because when you're opponents realize that the pot has bloated very quickly, and that dont have a ton of air in this spot, they have to fold or go AI because there's a decent % of the time when the board because unfavourable for them to call on the river.
In terms of the turn heart, I would def bet that, but your hand turns into a complete bluff with a draw that can be possibly chkd down to win on the river. I most probably give up on the river and (C/F if I hit my draw) as there's not many hands that continue to the river that are not a flush. (Its hard for him to have overpair+heart, or Pair+heart).
3. After the flop went check check, we redraw up our plan of attack on our opponent. We have the option to bet, C/C, or C/R and C/Fing is obv out the question. This depends very much on the tendencies of your opponent and how you think they'll react to each line. I think I'd probably be betting out in this spot way more than C/Cing or C/Ring. An over card to the board combined with 2 checks to our opponents give him a good opportunity to bluff, the downside being that we now could be beat vs a Q. If a T, 5 come, C/Cing and letting him go could be a good line. As its hard for him to put you on an 8. You might think if its hard for him to put you on an 8, why not bet and get value? Because by his flop check back, its unlikely has has much to call you with, and more likely he'd try to take advantage of chance to bluff an 8 with his air. If a 2, 3, 4 come, all of the sudden we probably have the best hand and best draw, but are still vulnerable to overcards coming so C/Cing might not be best, yet C/Ring would be a little overkill so betting out would be best, and most probably for value at this point. This is best I can do for now in explaining this spot. i will say that its up to you think more about this spot (this board, these positions, what type of opponent you're playing against, after the flop goes chk-chk, what turn card hits) because there is so much information that can be parsed to make the correct the decision at the time. As a starting point, flip the roles and ask yourself, would would you be doing in the btn's place? and work to match up your lines to exploit that.
In terms of bluffing turn and river to take advantage of his percieved capped range - I wouldn't recommend it. Even though since your opponent is IP, and his range should seem more capped that yours, from his perspective, your range looks pretty weak. When he calls with a value hand on the turn, say a 7, 9 or Q. I don't expect him to fold on many rivers because your hand looks weak, and bluffy (which is what it is). If you want to take that line (i.e. you feel that this is the best way to attack your opponent). I think overbetting the river would win you the pot alot more even though you still may be called and the tradeoff is when you do, you lose a lot more.
4. I think Dbetting is the spot is impossible to balance in any way. This spot is rare, it take tons of played out hands to get to river spots like that (i.e. You have to make it to the river, you have to make it by C/Cing twice, the board has to run out this way, etc...its all of requirements that diminish the frequency of this spot to rare). In saying that, you must realize the my shark counterpart is one of the toppest tier players in the game today. Against a weaker player, we might because to bet out and get AJ to call us, but not vs. the tuff_shark. He'd realize that its hard for me to be bluffing here and that'd I'd probably have between KJ and 89s here for value. I think by doing this, I'd have much more chance of inducing him to spazz, than getting value from anything other than J9. I think he'd jam J9+ for value, and turn JT or worse into bluff ship, if not fold. This puts us into a murky spot to B/F or B/C this river. Also, this new river move/thought process goes against everything that I was trying to do in this hand which was - Let the other shark continue with a wide range and trap him into value betting worse because I feel that his hand reading abilities and disciplined skills will prevent me from making much money by playing this board aggressively vs. him. And there's the bonus of saving some $ vs. coolers which is balanced by letting some draws get there on me. So with this line, no matter what river card comes, I'm checking 100% of the time.
5. If ryytis calls, I'd probably jam at that point. Its very unlikely that he has AK, more likely that he has TT, and I would say 80-90% of his value range is 44 and ATs (only AThh here). If you combine that with the fact that he would probably raise those 2 hands, I think him C/Cing would be weighted more towards AXs, TXs or something like 87s for the fd, but he still might jam the fd. Against this range, with the pot bloating so big, I would probably just jam it in for value. If I had a note that the regular would flat a big hand there, I'd fold, but in a vacuum (which is what it was in this spot, I know nothing about ryytis), I'm jamming this for value all day and not worrying about it in the long run, if someone has a set. And I'm obviously not giving the recreational player's range too much respect. If he's got TT or AK here, I will pay him because of all the rest of his range - he is either folding and leaving dead $ out there for me for me to pick up, or he will call and double me up.
DirtyDSeeing as Adrian's not into the whole brevity thing, I thought I'd take a stab at summing up the lesson here:
1. Smash the flop
Just kidding, enjoyed the video.
-Is it worth considering check-shoving the river with 88 when he bets on the smaller side? Too thin, perhaps, but when he bets that size I think he'll often have a thin value hand, like he did, and be hard-pressed to fold with those pot odds.
-After seeing that guy turn KQ into a bluff shove on the river, do you reconsider your assessment of him as a solid player? I just can't see any merit to that shove. Does he expect you to pot-fold a set?
gargamel_fkAppreciate great and detailed explanation. Thanks a lot
I think there's some merit to C/Shoving the river, but not enough. I think that he could bet the same amount with the nuts there as AA. The K overcard is probably bringing his bet size down a bit. In this situation, I don't think the odds he'll be getting after my shove will make a big difference in his decision making process. In fact, since he is getting great odds to call, it almost makes my move look nuttier because he's invested so much its hard for him to fold. He's going to view it as a either me turning my hand into a bluff or slowplaying QT the whole way. He's probably not going to see the merge value range like 88 or 99 here. Although unlikely for me to have, I think he'll put me on more of a monster than a bluff because he's barrelled the entire time on a credible board and has a perceivably uncapped range, meaning I'd be bluffing into the dark hoping he's doesn't have a monster. I think that in this situation, you're going to be called by QT, JJ, 99 and even 67s too often to have KTs, KJ, K9s and J9s (AA is such a miniscule part of his medium value range here) tank down and crying call you. It's even possible he could fold 99 sometimes actually believing that I waited him out with the nuts. This is a telltale sign that we are overplaying our hand (we are just not turn btm set into a bluff here). When people talk about being at the top of their range in spots, this is a perfect example of how I wanted to setup this hand.
When KQ gets turned into a river bluff, it definitely shows me that this player is capable or making plays that aren't just ABC. I called him a "solid" player, and when I did, I was really referring to the fact that he's on the tag-nitty side in a global sense of his game. One thing about players that keep their VPIP down and 24 table looking for alot of rakeback, is that they don't necessarily get alot of practice with different spots. This is generalization for sure, but one I think people should take into account. I think you're correct in that he's gotta be trying to get me to fold a set/2pr. It could make sense because I could easily be making a blocking bet for value because I look like I can't have a str8, and neither does he, so there's value in me betting big there. Because of that I don't think his play is really that terrible. This is a good example of having a mixed range of big/medium draws and nut hands in this spots can prevent your opponents from reading exactly what you have which can, on both sides of the coin, A) prevent them from making your life harder and B) make more mistakes to dump stacks to you.
DirtyDThanks for the response, after reading it and thinking some more, I agree, 88 isn't good enough to check-raise. The KQ hand also reminded me of something I always manage to forget: nitty pre-flop stats DOES NOT EQUAL straightforward post-flop. Making that assumption has definitely cost me a lot of money.
Mathieu AlbanoAfter listening to the 2+2 pokercast and the great sale pitch of Gandolf ;) , i decided that your vids would be the first i would watch when joining, and frankly it s exatly what i expected and it got my mind to go soo many directions to the point of mental exhaustion lol, which is good, so thank you.
On a side note and this is a matter of opinions but on the 88 hand, i think his river bet sizing is kind of telling and that he willl be pretty unbalance in this spot and weighted toward hands that you beat, and as good of a player as you can be it s always incredibly hard to fold river spot like this ingame when you get a mirrion to one even tought in insight you supose to always fold .
fitzroyAdrian, your delivery of this video was awesome! You sound exactly like Seth Rogan...personality too. I was entertained the whole time. Thanks for adding the personality into your videos. Most instructors are very monotone and boring.
Whats even more impressive, is that your knowledge and insight blew me away. After the first two minutes of the video, I was a little skeptical about how much I'd like it, but I would give this video a 10 out of 10 if we had a rating system on here.
Please keep up the "what if" scenarios in future videos (despite what other people say). Many instructors don't do this and that's exactly the stuff I'm trying to absorb.
fitzroyHow much game theory optimal stuff do you incorporate in your game? It seems like you take more of an exploitation approach based on villain tendancies. Can you get away with not knowing the game theory optimal stuff at the mid and highers stakes (I hope so because I'm not very good with that)?Adrian MilroyI think you can get away with overlooking some game theory at most stakes. But not forever, and not over the long run with regulars. Sean Lefort mentioned something this in his game theory video (somewhat paraphrasing) - Its a good starting point, foundation if you will, to build your game off. I think that If you can take care of the "macro" part of your game, i.e. Calling the right amount, raising the right hands in certain positions, defending your blinds the approriate amount, etc... You can focus more on micromanagement (individual hands) which will take you farther in the game of poker. You need both for sure. If you don't have a good foundation to start with, its only a matter of time before those holes in your game become exposed.
I try to exploit my opponents tendencies for sure, I mean, that's what we are supposed to do in this game...But I definitely need my game to be solid, and not "super-leaky" to begin with.
SerdecAs feedback I rlly recommend a shorter video or more hands in the video, sometimes its painfull to see :(
Serdecmin46 u c/c flop, lets imagine the turn is a diamond, will u do the same plan c/c? or donk/push to protect your hand and get value from FD ?
Adrian MilroyIf the turn is a diamond I'm still C/Cing. I want to continue with my trapping play vs. this recreational player.
If we examine the ranges that I'm up against, AJ- is probably just as likely to call a donk jam, as to jam itself when checked to. So no difference there. Hands that have a diamond plus equity, but no pair, lets say all those gutshots, QK/QJ/KJ, I think are more likely to jam when checked to, then call a donk jam when its mathematically a bad call (they still may call, because they have their gutshot to bring them closer to the proper math they need to call, or in their head, somehow justify the call even tho they don't know/can't figure out the math.) And I think that he's going to ship more than Check back those hands. I feel that lone diamonds with no help, and complete air, will obv ship more than call, but its debatable whether they would check back more than call.
In the end, I'm willing to give a possible 1/5 shot to my opponent to win the pot in exchange to possibly win the rest of his stack. The rest of stack is alot more $ than he's already put in, so that turn bet/ship would represent a big chunk of my profit. The downside to this play is that the size of the pot is very bloated and its disastrous when 5d5c draws out on you somehow when the turn and river go diamond diamond...
mikegood stuff and thanks for taking the time to answer questions in so much detail :)