mjw006 - Beating the Midstakes Heads Up SNGs Part 2: Read Based Play
Part 2 of mjw006's "Beating the MidStakes Heads Up SNGs" begins with a 25 minute powerpoint presentation discussing read based concepts in heads up poker such as developing accurate reads, using reads to implement exploitive strategies, narrowing reads to better define ranges and the topics of perception and deception. He then demonstrates these concepts at the $30 + 1.50 buyin level on Full Tilt for over 45 minutes.
(14 votes)
Comments
I didn't think your river
I didn't think your river bluff on 38TQK w/54s (47:50 into the video) was as bad as you made it seem after he called you with QJ. To review the action, villain checked back flop, called your 3/4 pot turn bet, and then called your 3/4 pot river bluff.
From what we had seen at that point we know he doesn't like to value bet thin, so after his flop check we can reasonably place 3x/8x and possibly Ax/Kx/Qx in his range. If we assume he doesn't bet Q9/QJ/J9 on the flop then we can probably assume he doesn't bet a lot of flush draws as well. From this range he's probably calling on the turn all 8x, some 3x, all Qx, most flush draws, and sometimes Ax, maybe some K high + straightdraws. Further he's probably raising his 2pair and straights on the turn. With that range a river bluff is likely good often enough to make your bet profitable.
Thoughts?
Also at 55:44 villain
Also at 55:44 villain minleads into you on 6JJdd, you have T9hh. You raise to 60 and he calls, turn comes Tc with 200 chips in the pot. Villain checks to you and you bet. Obviously you hit and are happy to valuebet but you also note that you're barreling every card over a 6.
So assuming you had missed the turn:
1. If he calls turn, are you barreling river as well? On any card or on further scare cards?
2. Would your river barreling frequency change if turn were an ace (the classic fish scare card) and villain had called? What about a diamond turn?
I find this is a fairly common spot vs fish and I hope you don't mind giving away too much of your fish-killing game by asking these questions...
p.s. thanks for the vid, enjoyed it quite a bit.
I rated this video 4 Stars. I
I rated this video 4 Stars.
I think I expected a "better" powerpoint section. It was very general, which doesn't seem to lend itself well to a powerpoint. I think this portion of the video could have been whittled down to under ten minutes.
The live play part was OK. It was very interesting to hear your thoughts as they relate to developing reads early on and as the matches progress. While instructors tend to do this naturally to some extent, it would be nice to have more videos that constantly talk about how reads are progressing in this manner.
The video did end up being a bit long. As I said, the length of the powerpoint could probably have been reduced. The two sample games were pretty good, especially considering that you just made a video of two or three matches and used them without game selection. It shows that these thought processes can be used well with most any game.
Overall, very good video, though not neraly as good as the first. I think this was because you could provide more specifics about topics in the first video, whereas this one is getting into territory that is more nebulous.
I didn't think your river
I didn't think your river bluff on 38TQK w/54s (47:50 into the video) was as bad as you made it seem after he called you with QJ. To review the action, villain checked back flop, called your 3/4 pot turn bet, and then called your 3/4 pot river bluff.
While I think the turn bet is perfectly fine, I think that river card is really bad to be firing. His flop check back range also includes a lot of air so the turn bet itself will fold out all missed unders, however, once he calls turn his range is weighted to hands tat have a pair or a draw at the very minimum. The only hands that will likely fold this river will be 8x and missed FD's (though I do expect that some of these will cbet because in general FD's are more appealing to the average villain thatn SD's). Given that almost none of the SD's have legitimately missed the board (they will have at least a pair T+), I don't think he is folding enough of his range on thsi river.
Follow me on twitter --- Check out my Blog
Also at 55:44 villain
Also at 55:44 villain minleads into you on 6JJdd, you have T9hh. You raise to 60 and he calls, turn comes Tc with 200 chips in the pot. Villain checks to you and you bet. Obviously you hit and are happy to valuebet but you also note that you're barreling every card over a 6.
1. If he calls turn, are you barreling river as well? On any card or on further scare cards?
I think I forgot to metion that diamonds are pretty bad. 2 Overcards to the 6 on turn and river I will def barrel, as a mentioned I pick up turn equity on a lot. The exception if turn comes like 7c and the river a diamond. I think his range can have a reasonable amount of FD's with the other part being a lot of 6x. WE're often going to need to fire 2 more barrels vs 6x to get folds so if your going to bluff you need to recognise this. The only other real part of his range is FD's, obviously making diamonds not that good.
2. Would your river barreling frequency change if turn were an ace (the classic fish scare card) and villain had called? What about a diamond turn?
Even though there are some random Ax and naked overcard floats in his range we would be guessing completely to be more worried about an A than a T. I like barrelling an A turn even though it's one of the few cards we don't pick up equity on, but the same conditions will apply to what I said in #1.
Follow me on twitter --- Check out my Blog
@ Qattack. Appreciate the
@ Qattack.
Appreciate the feedback. I apologise for the length of the video, certainly not something I wanted to do as you could probably tell by my impatiance later in the video. I agree it's too long and will try to avoid this more in the future.
I perhaps ramble a little too much (esp in the pp), and this is mostly because I did this aftre midnight I think. I will also try to not be doing videos at this time so I can be more concise. In saying all that I feel like a lot of the stuff in the PP was relevant to someone who is learning to build on their fundamentals. It is aimed at people who haven't really thought a lot about this stuff so although it seems basic to you, it's a very important topic for someone developing these skills.
I would be more interested in exactly what you felt I could cut out of this section of the video given who I am trageting it at. Please don't take this as me being defensive or anything like that, it's not the case. I appreciate your feedback and would be interested to hear your thoughts on what I should be cutting out so I can consider it for future videos.
Follow me on twitter --- Check out my Blog
No worries...I will need to
No worries...I will need to watch the video again and take better note of what I thought went a bit long.
One thing about my ratings and subsequent comments: they are a bit more "critical" than most member's ratings...This isn't because I don't like the videos as much as others, but 5 Stars is "AWESOME" and awesome should be very hard to get.
Oftentimes, a video could not be improved enough to earn an "Awesome" rating in my mind. This may be hard to understand...but an example is live play videos. As an extreme example, if you get AA every hand in a video, this just pure chance and ruins the video. I may give that video 5 Stars anyway because of all the AA hands, but for content, it would be 1 Star and not worth watching.
Any of the instructors playing live have a chance to get as low as 3 Stars ("Good"), just by random chance of how the cards fall and their opponent's types.
I will try to watch this video again, and PM you with more specific reasons why I gave the above comments.
And I do realize that many players need the information you lay out. I need that information; even if I have heard this information a lot in other videos, no one has laid it out step-by-step in powerpoint form, which is more valuable to me than a scattering of comments throughout videos.
I voted the video 5 stars
I voted the video 5 stars :-)
There's absolutely no need to apologize for anything - your videos are not boring at all, and the powerpoint presentations also weren't too long.
Though I usually prefer 45-55 minute videos, I think it was important to include these two sessions here since these opponents were so extremely different from each other. IMO having two very different opponents explained the concept of getting reads much better than just having one single session.
And you also picked the right types of opponents - one where we see a lot of showdown hands - and one where we don't.
Just want you to know that I
Just want you to know that I really enjoyed this video. For me it was educational, not boring at all. The format is excellent.
Paul
IB_Fishing
Voted 5 stars as
Voted 5 stars as well.
Personally, I enjoyed this video more than the first:
1) because the content related more to where I am at in my poker development
2) I liked the different structure you chose in regards to the play section of the vid (for these types I videos It's nice to have the coach pause and comment indepth on spots and how they relate to the pp concepts).
As for you comments about the time factor and possibly boring your viewers - I had no problem whatsoever watching this vid and in no way thought it was borring. The content provided was so good, I wish the video was longer (or perhaps a second part) so you could go into more detail in the concepts. I mean, throughth the power point section you read what you had written and then added a few comments to expand on those points (I think this was party due to time restrictions and partly due to the large number of variables and different tendencies that affect these concepts - which you mention). So generally, agree with others comments - content this good is never boring.
k- onto more specific comments:
1) At the beginnig of the In Position PP segment (9:00) you make a comment that 1 adjusment may negatively affect another adjustment you plan to make(if you don't use your descretion as villains you classify to a type (ie LP) have different tendencies). I was wondering if you could expand on this?
2) This next question is kind of a "chicken or the egg" or active vs reactive in regards to developing reads. What I mean is how far do we go out of the box from a fundamental strategy to develop reads, or do we play a more reactionary style and look to develop a possibe read before taking a line. This could be a bs question but I am trying to balance what Merssaneary wrote in his article http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/58/heads-up-nl/22-flawed-reasonings-husng-poker-2-2-mag-article-discussion-866126/ (which sums up as not deviating from the most ev+ line) to a Cog style of play (which seems to be a more probing/experimental style). Like should I try limping (or donk betting) for the sake of seeing how villain responds, or should i only make an adjustment as a response to villains play?
3) @ 1:05:00 villain has 25bb's (about 750 chips) and limps ip. Flop comes A67r and you c/r his pot bet 60/60 to 170 with 82o. Villainn had been limping about 30ish % and raising a tight range - 3betting a lot, seemed to rudamentary adjust. I really liked this hand and how you related the concepts of the video. My question: you stated that villain that though villain had been limping lots prior, recently he had started opening more so he most likely doesn't have a stron hand here as most villains won't suddenly limp strong hands. However, you had been attacking villains limps a lot, so could we assume that villain shouldnt put you on a strong range as well?
Thanks again for the excellent video.