Running like Bolt

  • NL BSS
  • NL BSS
  • $1000
  • Shorthanded
(21 Votes) 7321

JOIN NOW TO VIEW THE FULL VIDEO

Free membership

Join now
 

Description

Mbolt1´s first video for Pokerstrategy.com. In this video he analysizes hands in a sessionreview which are played in a unconventional way.

Tags

high stake Session Review

Comments (26)

newest first
  • EuanM

    #1

    Enjoy the video and please keep the comments in English!
  • anjik775

    #2

    Nice vid!!So many bluffers at this limit
  • volanthn

    #3

    i hate the 1st hand
  • OAndiAceO

    #4

    me 2
  • EuanM

    #5

    #3 & #4, Do you have anything specific to say regarding the way the hand was played?

    What don't you like about it?

    What about the rest of the video, how did you find the spots?

    Any constructive feedback is welcomed, as this is mbolt's first video at PokerStrategy.com!

    Many Thanks & Enjoy the video!
  • MagnumLemon

    #6

    The first hand is really sick although I don't know the outcome :D

    But since I'm a NL25 noob, I won't comment on this any further...
  • z1pz0r

    #7

    I also don't like 1. hand.
    You actually only want to see a 7, a queen will give you awkward spots and any diamond will give you awkward spots too, just like the one in this video.
  • z1pz0r

    #8

    I'm talking about calling the cbet
  • Najs2009

    #9

    min 38: what about leading the turn? if your perceived callingrange is strong you should lead imo. c/r is way more expensive too.

    I think you talk a little bit too much with little deep analysis.

    Overall I`d say the video was ok-good
  • pennyyy

    #10

    +1 to the Q7s hand, it´s just like :/
    preflop is too marginal imo, if u know the isolator and coldcaller are reasonably wide in this spot I would much rather squeeze, which will automatically be so big, they cant 4betbluff u without just shipping their whole stack.

    Flop is :/ also. You dont have big implieds because the stacks are rather shallow on the turn. You cant consider a Q as a good out. And even if you pick up one of your backdoors on the turn, the initial raiser is (well, should be) pretty strong, cbetting into 3 people. And u gotta assume that he´s just shoving the Turn for protection with like KQ+ and his monsterdraws.

    dont see your point in the 2nd hand to why he wouldnt flat a 4bet with KQ.

    J8s hand, dont hate the flat, think its much more profitable to just squeeze it, though.
    Love the part to call the minraise, looks so extremely strong. Very interesting hand altogether.


    You did have some spots where you could have made good use of an equilator.

    liked the rest of the video. You sometimes go too much into detail pretty basic/standard parts of an hand. would like something themespecific, for example: playing 4bet pots /w or /wo initiative ip/oop.
  • feanor1980

    #11

    Q7s = :/ totally agree with #10
  • Mbolt1

    #12

    I'd like to thank everyone for the feedback. I am always trying to improve and your input makes that process much easier.

    @z1pz0r - excellent point, after watching the video and reading everyone's comments i tend to agree that hand #1 isn't great and my explanation was weak at best.

    my preflop and flop calls are very loose. instead of saying things like "no brainer call" it should have been "very marginal call that can be ok because we have a huge fish sitting with what is probably his entire account balance". i definitely believe that you should be willing to loosen up a lot when a fish is in the pot so that you give yourself every opportunity to bust him before he dumps everything to one of the other regs. however, you do have to draw the line somewhere and this hand is very close to crossing it.

    @Najs2009 - i think leading the turn is a good option for the reasons you mentioned. the c/r is more expensive, but it should work more often than the lead. the c/r forces him to decide if he wants to play for stacks, peeling with something marginal to see what we do on the river isn't much of an option. also when the turn checks around we can still lead the river and get the same result.


    @ pennyyy - awesome analysis, i agree 100%.

    in the 2nd hand i discount KQ because it would be one of the most difficult hands for him to play postflop, especially deep and oop. most of the boards he hits should hit my range even harder. he has to expect for his outs to be tainted far too frequently to call profitably imo.
  • Torchman

    #13

    Seen first 10-15 mins: this is kind of basic stuff + hand 1+2 seem to be missplayed in my eyes.

    #1 I think u get a fold here like one in a thousand times so why not realize the big equity u got and make the fish come along with worse? U can get extra value from him if u improve + u can safe money if u dont + u may even on the river take the pott away.

    #2 This situation he is light on the button and the SB will 3bet light is just a everyday thinking of every poker player who plays nl 25+ so why talk about that? Waste of time imo. To the hand: Why not bet even smaller on the flop? It has a double benefit of being able a bigger reraise all in on the flop to a check-raise + being able to size a good turn bet that leaves a good amount for a river bet. And i dont really see a disadvantage.
  • Najs2009

    #14

    ty for your feedback bolt.
    c/r the turn feels counterintuitive though. If he perceives you to be strong he should c/b and if he bets he should be strong. I wonder if you had c/r if he had cbettet the turn a higher amount.
    I stil think a lead makes more sense. But I am not a NL specialist!
  • Heinz021

    #15

    1st hand:
    You said that timothe is often weak there because of not raising the flop with so many players behind. so you can't really rep a strong range at the turn shove too, can you? so timothe, as he is a good player, could call you very light.
  • Mbolt1

    #16

    @Najs2009 - i think your thought process is perfect vs a solid tag that isn't getting out of line very often. in this hand our opponent is fairly loose and crazy. you are exactly right that he should perceive me to be strong and check back, but he will only do that if he has a hand with decent showdown value. when he has something like 78 or 22 (he has stuff like this a lot), he won't be able to help himself and will stab again with a high frequency. i think leading the turn makes the most sense if our goal is to get value from worse hands, but since our hand is terrible i like c/r because it should get more folds.
  • Mbolt1

    #17

    @Heinz021 - you're exactly right. he shouldn't expect me to have a monster very often so he could definitely call light, but that isn't a very big deal because there is a ton of dead money in the pot and we have pretty good equity vs a hero call.
  • Heinz021

    #18

    ok, i understand, and thanks for the insta reply.

    all in all i liked the vid, since i know you were one of the regs i didn't wanna see at my tables ;-)
  • Grossmeiseter

    #19

    hand3:
    why dont you expect him to bet Qx on the turn and take free showdown on river? there are so many draws and he should protect his hand imo!i think for him it should be a good result if you fold your lifequity, isn'T it?
  • mbml

    #20

    88 on 954sQs board - Why would he not barrel turn with QX and overpairs? isn't it pretty standard for aggro barrelers to bet the turn for balance?
  • IronPumper

    #21

    @19+20: this have been exactly my thoughts:
    I mean, your assumptions could be true for a bad-aggro fish who is bluffing way too wide and not balancing that by valuebetting thin enough...
    But imo any decent REG should keep val.betting pretty thin on the turn b/ that is a card where he wanna bluff many parts of his range in a very high frequency...
  • Leatherass9

    #22

    I think in the first hand what hasn't been talked about enough is that Bolt can ship the turn over Timothee and get called by worse. Why can't Timothee have AJc, AQc or 89C here?
  • Mbolt1

    #23

    @19,20,21 - you're right if our opponent is playing perfectly, but he isn't. he isn't even close to having a balanced range on that turn. he is the type to keep pounding the pot anytime it looks scary unless he picks up showdown value. if he knew exactly how i perceive him, he absolutely should be betting QX+ on the turn, but after playing thousands of hands with him i am positive that he is checking back those hands most of the time.
  • Fox128

    #24

    haven't read all the comments yet (i will though), but I don't want to get infuenced by them..

    These are my own thoughts:

    1st hand: Sick hand! I don't like preflop, I don't see me making money ever there, but maybe I'm just too tight?
    About the flop call, I'm unsure but I don't think I'd do it. The backdoors improve as, but they basically only give us a draw with only 1 card left against ranges that certainly have us beat even then. And as you said, if someone jams the turn (or even if just the PFA cbets a good amount) things would get ugly for us.
    Also contraversaly to your statement: I certainly wouldn't want to see a Q, because KQ is a huge part of their range, which dominates us (they might also have QQ,QT,AJ,J9 obv..). The reversed implieds are pretty huge there.
    The only card I really wanna see is a 7..

    AS PLAYED though, I LOVE the turn jam.
    -PFA checks, so certainly doesn't have a set.
    -The bettor is very likely to be just x/Fing a Q. I don't think he is betting this size with a draw or a set.
    -And finally the fish is likely to be intimidated facing a bet+raise allin and should also be folding his 1pairs. And if we somehow happen to get called, we still have very decent equity (and might even be ahead if the fish calls with a draw).

    The only downside is that this is ABSOLUTELY impossible to balance.
    If we (or they) think about it, we NEVER have a set or two pair here (after flop play), the only thing that we could probably balance this with and jam for value here is an AQ or K5s... (!)
    However, I don't think that in a multiway pot as huge as this many opponents would be able to think in a complex way like this and might just get very afraid and make a no-brainer fold.

    so I'd say NH... on the turn? :D
  • Fox128

    #25

    2nd hand:
    preflop: meh.. I think there are better hands to balance your (2%?) cold-4bet value range here... but I guess it's ok because of the deepness, especially if you're running like bolt -_-
    postflop: standard. I disagree with your argumentations though, especially the part where you say that he calls because he wants to take away the pot (oop!)away from us later (in a cold4bet pot!). To think of it, it's just ridiculous, unless you had some very specific reads. I'm pretty sure he had AQ/QQ/KK/AX there (in that order) all of which he's likely going for pot control with.
  • Fox128

    #26

    3rd hand: i like your plan. However, I disagree that an AQ would check behind on the turn. I mean I'd bet AQ there, so I doubt a very aggressive opponent wouldn't ^^
    same thing for 9X.

    However, just because I disagree with your argumentation on this, I still think calling down against an opponent as aggressive as this one is
    +EV. I mean he can easily barrel 76,87,86,A3,A2+random bluffs here (additionally to his value range, which I think isn't AS narrow as you state, but I still think it's nonetheless narrow enough to justify a call here...)