I was thinking the same thing. When the river came, looking at the size of the pot relative to the bet size to call, how deep you are in bank roll, and possibility he has nothing with having a high kicker I would call to give myself a chance but not raise because it's kind of a 50/50 toss up to me. Plus he probably would have bet more if he would have had a king or jack. If I had less bank roll I would probably have folded and been more conservative.
and you obv dont know pot odds...he have odds of 2.5:1 and he needs 28% to bee good to break even... simple pot odds... you have even calc if you dont belive me
Nikola Minović with 25% it‘s circa 28% and he has to concentrate more on possible hands, the opponent has. It was a river bet, not a flop or turn bet...
More than the thought process, the underlying issue is Tan went about $500-$600 light on his bluff. $2300-$2400 folds out A-highs. If you're gonna call an under-the-gun Raiser with 2/3 off-suit, you gotta be ready to pounce when the Board runs out like that. Too many people try to shave a little off the value-bet sizing, because they ARE bluffing. Alec sniffed it out, but clearly it wasn't an "Above the Rim" play.
If you only continue with QQ+, Tan should bet any two cards to profit. Maybe he downbet because he thought you would continue way too tight to any bet. Your tight image and apparent propensity to hero folds helped you out in this spot.
your turn bet doesnt nean either kkk or bluff. you can bet qq,aj or big pocket pair. if he calls, you can check the river bc ur probly beat. many pros will bet the turn without a k bc highly unlikely he has a k. checking the turn isnt bad but it's too straight forward and predictable. betting the turn w/o a k is more creative and interesting.
This is an automatic call without much thinking. You're getting a good price and opponent shouldn't have many KingX or JackX in their range. Any pair 10s or lower gets counterfeited. Still can't believe he played 23o against Alec whos a good cash game player.
This river decision is so simple. Villain would have bet a K on the flop or the turn, and he's never value betting QQ, so Villain is only representing a J, which is statistically unlikely This is an obvious call with an A, especially given Villains small river bet
Correct, Villain would have bet a King on the flop or the turn to try and get value. Villains river bet is either a Jack or a bluff. Most likely a bluff. Simple.
This video is stupid af. This hand isn’t even interesting enough to be talked about. Had Tan not been counterfeited, then maybe I’d want to hear some commentary. You don’t even need to understand possible ranges, pot odds to be like “this dude either has a K, J, QQ, AA, or he doesn’t.”
Alec! Love your content but I’m a little confused on the equity needed in this calculation? If your getting around 3.5-1 on a call wouldn’t your need more like 30-35% equity to make it +ev?
To simplify just a bit, if you are getting 4 to 1 pot odds, if you are right 1 in 5 times you will break even...1 win gives you 4, and the other 4 losses loses you 4...4-4=0. See that? . So 3.5-1 pot odds means you have to be right 1 in 4.5 times...about 22% of the time. losses: 78*1 wins" 22*3.5 so (rounded off) 78-78 = 0.
B. Alvn I just thought the number would be closer to 30% equity Cause like for example we have 50% equity we need 2/1 odds to break even right? So in this case when getting 3.5 to 1 it would need to be anything over 28% equity to reach the break even point? I think that’s right anyways
Minor Dicrepency: you don't add your calling bet and then figure your pot odds from that figure. You compare your bet size to the current pot size by simply dividing your calling bet by the current pot size. In this situation exactly, your actually getting just under 2.5-1 on your call, but on this board, I'd say a call is still a sound play from a theory aspect.
Well Honestly, that's not what we want to hear Alec. We get plenty of that from guys like Doug Polk. What we want to hear, is how you read him for a Bluff, and had him pegged. You said at the beginning, that the flop favored "Your range", so basically you are putting him on nothing the whole way. GTO info is everywhere, EXPLOITIVE PLAY, is what we want to know about. Oh, and BTW, we are ready to see you in the Ring with better competition. We all know you can BEAST IT on LIVE AT THE BIKE
With all due respect, you’re mixing up two important concepts, Alec. Pot odds which you mentioned, versus minimum defense frequency. Directly, yes, so long as you believe you have a better hand around only (1800)/(2650+1800+1800) of the time, you should call. This style of thinking tells you NOTHING about WHAT hands in a range to call with. Technically the pot odds is how often THEY SHOULD be bluffing - pot size river bet is supposed to be a bluff 1/3 of the time to make you indifferent and half pot is supposed to be 1/4 of the time. But this is for the bettor’s strategy, not the callers. Minimum defense frequency is the % of time (more technically % of your range) you NEED to call to not be exploitable. This is ONLY useful against decent players that are capable of bluffing, which generally in a 50/100 game they are (or should be, lol), so it is generally a GOOD assumption to go ahead and take. He’s risking 1800 to win 2650, so as long as you fold more than (1800)/(1800+2650) 40.4% of the time, the better is IMMEDIATELY profiting if he were to bet any two cards - you HAVE to call/ should call 59.6% of your range. If you want to exploit and gain even more money, you adjust from this starting point. Opponent is SUPPOSED to be bluffing the river (bet)/(pot+bet+call) of the time to make your middling hands indifferent to calling or folding, but if you are inclined that it’s more than this figure, you can call a LITTLE looser, but you shouldn’t stray much. If they’re bluffing less than this figure, you can call a LITTLE tighter, but you shouldn’t stray much from calling with 59.6% of your range. Imo Asian dude should’ve double potted river to allow himself to bluff more. If you bet 10x the pot, the other guy is allowed to fold 90% of the time unexploitably is another fun game theory situation.
J. Kim I actually messed up a bit and revised, basically when facing a bet, think of MDF minimum defense frequency. When making a river bet, think of the pot odds you’re giving them AND the mdf you give them. If you bet 1/2 pot you can bluff 25% of the time and they’re supposed to call 33% of the time, if you bet 1x pot, bluff 33% of the time and they’re supposed to call 50% of the time.
A Poker Life i wouldnt worry too much about random people spewing in the youtube comment section wrecking the game by tapping the fishtank. i've seen so much bad advice on here that it is probably making for more bad players, not less.
Good players play less hands than bad ones,that adds up to hours and hours sitting at the table not playing poker with nothing but a stack of chips in front of you
man, 90% of these comments are idiotic, moronic, or plain old sad. Yes the math is off, he added the bet size to the (pot+bet size) but the thought process is the main point. What can I beat and what cant I beat, If I beat enough based on his bet size then I call, if I can't I fold.
His pair of 3s got counterfeited. There is a higher 2 pair on board. Alec now wins the hand with two pair(kkjj A kicker) other guy can only play the board
I loved the river call . Most noticeable to me, is my personal opinion and I'm not saying this player, but in poker sometimes egos aren't left at the door. Sometimes people want to outplay the Alec Torelli's . My observation was if you are Alec's and you can pick out these players , and I'm sure this happens more often than you would think, then you have a certain incalculable edge in play. As the hand progressed, the other players tried to feign calmness by talking to someone else at the start of the hand, and up until the turn or river. Then comes the quick river bet, which appeared or seemed to me to be pre-planned. The talk ceasing and the hand going up over the mouth. The looking the other way, when Alec looked over his way. And quite possibly the I want to outplay Alec Torelli which in this case didn't work. Yes sometimes these plays get by, but in this case with the way the hand played out, quickly throwing out a bluff disguised as river value bet didn't work. Are there tells in poker? In case I certainly thought there were...
nice. u had basically the best kicker in this situation. Many bluffs few good hands. i mean what are the chances ? could have had quads, but then why check the turn so fast. I would have bet pot tho on the river , but then look at his body language, i believe u wouldnt have taken so long to call. he he
I have to respectfully disagree here Siva. Poker is one of the most complicated games in the world. A computer beat a human at chess in 1999 and it took nearly 20 years more for that same feat to happen in poker. One wouldn't argue chess isn't a complex game right, how could you argue that for poker?
Guys he has more money than all of you combined. Hes just building his brand. 100% he is a legit poker pro with a proven track record who has good advice.If you dont find it useful watch a video that you think will help your game and stop wasting your time posting negative comments. Talking smack just shows your not serious and more of a troll. Hurry, to doug polk u go!
Please forgive my naivete but I am puzzled. Tan had a pair of 3s but Alec had none. The 2 Ks and 2 Js on the board belong to both. So, how did Alec win with Ace high?
Alex had 2 pair, kings and jacks, ace kicker. Tan had two pair, kings and jacks with a 3 kicker. Tan's pair of 3s didnt mean anything once the river card hit as there was two higher pair on the board and there is no such hand as 3 pair.
alicwkd Thanks for the reply. I guess rules are different in different venues. I play online at 888poker and I have seen players winning with small pairs irrespective of the structure of the board. In principle, a pair made with a pocket card should be worth more than pair(s) on the board which are community cards. On the other hand, being a new player, I might not be adequately proficient with all the rules in poker.
Ashfaq Sheikh No. KKJJA >> KKJJ3, and KKJJx always >> KK33x. Tan had the board and Alec outkicked him. If your hole cards don't improve the board, you play the board. A worse two pair never beats a better two pair. 888 has the same rules.
Pretty easy call if you ask me. I think if he had a jack or king he'd have bet the turn for value, and if he had the king he probably would have bet out or check-raised on the flop too...he is aggressive and a bit wild, right? Asians love playing 23off and doing wacky shit all day long (no offense, but we all know its true as a general thing)...
