Micro Surgery - Part 9 - Midterms - Part 2

  • Fixed-Limit
  • FL
  • $0.50/$1
  • Shorthanded
(9 Votes) 5505

JOIN NOW TO VIEW THE FULL VIDEO

Free membership

Join now
 

Description

Continuing the "Midterm" theme, boomer jumps straight back into the action in part nine, while putting up questions for the audience to answer & discuss. Watch as Boomer refines your thought process at the table!

Tags

Micro Surgery PokerStars series Session Review

Comments (12)

newest first
  • EuanM

    #1

    Enjoy the ninth part of Micro Surgery from Boomer! Let's have your comments!
  • Boomer2k10

    #2

    Hi Guys.

    Minor boo boo in the AQ hand. I obviously cannot x/r because I am in position but if I were OOP the arguement would apply there

    Also I swear that at some point in this series these thin value bets will work :-)
  • madorjan

    #3

    Hey Boomer,

    Really nice video, I love the new format. (Maybe the multiple choice could be made into just answering the questions - since then we don't have to choose, but come up with our own answer.)

    As usual, I came up with a few questions:

    03:00 - AK - What would you do to a turn raise here getting 8.5:1 (let's assume we get HU)? Isn't a c/c and c/calldown line better here HU, and maybe c/f-ing the river 3way? I can see the value in the bet, I just think it's neutralized by us having to call a bet if it gets raised and/or folding the best hand sometimes. I feel betting opens up a 'can of worms' here.:) As played I really love the valuebet on the end.

    15:02 - T8 - can't you float here with this hand? If we pair up, it's looking pretty good for us, and we have lots of backdoors that we can bluffraise on.

    20:45 - A4 - what do you think about a valuebet here on the river? He doesn't have a pair I guess, and I think his range is kind of SD bound after the turn checkbehind. So I think most of the times he has A and Q his, against which a valuebet should be profitable (also I don't think he'll bluff that frequently if he didn't on the turn). What do you think?

    29:00 - 98 - I see a rising tendency of b/3bing hands like these even HU in the last few weeks. I honestly don't get it, but now I'm accounting for these in the opponents' ranges. Pretty weird play all in all.

    35:10 - Q7 - what do you think about a turn donkbet here? I find that people are not really valuebethappy on these boards fearing a c/r, so I'd donk a lot of 7s, straights and draws here - obviously checking some for balance. Also against a much tighter betting range I don't like the c/r that much.
    Oh, and you say he should've valuebet the turn, and I really don't see the reason why. I mean if he's gonna bet/calldown, that's iffy, but bet/folding is even iffier, since there are many draws on that board, overstraight draws, flush draw, so I couldn't really bet/fold there, and bet/calldown <<< checkback-induce IMO. We'll have a lot of trash not connected to that board that we'll just fold, but maybe bluff on the river, hoping he was just giving up. I think it's an awesome spot for valuecheck there on his part. Also for the protection: he doesn't have the odds to make 6 outs fold, and you won't fold 10 outs, so protection there is very overrated.
  • Boomer2k10

    #4

    Hi madorjan thanks for your comments

    03:00 Due to the size of the pot I much prefer betting here to x/c. If 6-outs fold that's fine and I really can't give a free card in a pot this big

    How I'd react would depend on how the action went. I can't really see myself folding the turn unless it went bet/call/raise at which point the liklihood I'm drawing to 3 outs is potentially too high to fold.

    15:00 - Yeah floating is ok here too. Especially if the SB is weak or easily bluffed that's fine

    20:45 - I'm not too sure about that, I think his bluffing range is bigger than his payoff range here and we chop a bit too much if we bet EVERY A-High, maybe we could bet some A-Highs but betting all of them is probably a little much

    29:00 - Yeah, pretty sure I'm not a fan but can see some kind of reasoning even if it's a bit flawed

    35:10 - Donking is probably fine here and may be the spuerior line.

    I get your point re the value betting but the probelm with it is if he checkes back an A-High as strong as AQ that pretty much means he isn't betting the turn without a pair. It's a button vs BB situation and there are quite a few hands I may peel again for value and if he does check back I'm not just going to randomly bluff vs a SD-bound line (I obviously will bluff the bottom of my range but I certainly won't be over-bluffing to the point of exploitivity).

    Given I'm out of position he may also find a x/r on the turn a bit suspicious a I'd bluff a lot of draws on the flop so in a way vs someone who waits until the turn a ton even out of position you can use AQ as a bluff-raise inducer, which is kind of going a little deep and we don't have anywhere near the hands necessary to pull a stunt like that but I think just due to the fact he's so high up in his non-pair range betting for SD is probably his best option. Checking back a hand like A8-AT here would be fine though since he may have a gutterball he doesn't want to get blown off and his hand isn't really so far up in his range he has to bet it

    Hope that answers your questions somewhat, thanks for watching and your comments
  • ZeroDegrees

    #5

    Thumbs up as usual!
    1. You mark some players as 'breakeven tag' and 'nit'. What basis do you use for those classification?

    2. Same question about 'weak player'. Generally they are lose and passive. Do you put bad tags into this class too?
  • ZeroDegrees

    #6

    You recommend BB defend any suited with 5:1. In the SB the odds are many times the same. So how do you usually play a hand there that's too weak to raise for isolation? Do you call any suited there too if you think the BB won't raise?
  • Boomer2k10

    #7

    @5

    The "Breakeven TAG" classification is a fairly old one of mine and should probably be re-named. Now it basically means, "Guy who has TAGGY traits who I haven't yet classified"

    The "Nit" classicification is usually based off preflop stats. If someone's coming in at sub 25 VPIP or seems to be way underdefedning his blinds after 30 or so hands I'll classify him as a nit until I hear otherwise. It's basically a marker to let me know that I should be loosening up my default ranges.

    I think my weak player classification is for essentially passive players. Bad Tags I have a seperate group for (Unknown - Bad) and I also have a group for Maniacs as they each have to be treated differently.
  • Boomer2k10

    #8

    @6

    It's a slightly different situation even though the odds are the same.

    When in the BB getting 5-1 everyone has already acted. The only way you could be made to pay more is if a player has isolated a limper and the limper now limp-re-raises which is quite rare

    In the Small Blind the BB hasn't acted yet so it's much more likely you're going to have to put more money into the pot.

    However if you believe the BB is a weak player and wont raise then jumping in with any 2 suited is not a bad idea at all but if he's a TAG or otherwise decent player you'll probably have to lop off the bottom of your range.

    So to answer your question, yes I do often overlimp fromt the SB, especailly if the BB is a weak player.

    On another note there's also a school of thought that vs strong BB's you should open-limp your whole range you want to play in any structure 1/2 or better. I don't employ this personally but I know a few people who do. At Micros though I'd steer clear of that as the main mistake people will make is being too passive and under-defending rather than being psychos from teh BB vs SB opens.
  • emotv

    #9

    Hi boomer, in my opinion u should continue to ask questions. Your videos are really help my winrate up btw ...
  • Yoghurt1973

    #10

    20:45 - Ac4
    I think that's a definite bet on the turn. You can let him fold hands that beat you like pp and ace with better kicker hands, beside you dont want to give some oneone with QJ a free card or any 13% freeroll.
    Beside you got good equity in the hand.
  • fortunewheel

    #11

    i don't want to suck up but i'm a big fan of your shorthanded limit videos. I was planning to switch to limit and i'v watched the whole series and i can honestly say i've learned more watching your vids than having read tons of e books on shorthanded limit. Awsome format , especially with the occasional quizzes popping up. Big up , keep em coming
  • Boomer2k10

    #12

    @10

    The turn is an interesting spot for sure. The reason I checked is that I cannot barrell 100% on this board (on any board in fact), I open myself up to getting bluff raised too much, or value raised too thin, and therefore I have to have a x/c range (as well as a x/r and x/f one) for the sake of balance.

    With holding the Ac here a free card isn't that scary to me as we hold a draw to the nuts and perceived "6-outers" are actually 4-outers making this a perfect spot to try and induce.

    I don't think A-high and pairs are going to fold here, at least they shouldn't, and QJ defienitely isn't folding and should really raise, unless a 4th club hits the river which we don't want anyway and we may be able to collect a bet from a weak hand which would have folded the turn and we avoid charging ourselves the max for our draw.