Stop Playing RIVERS Like A Fish! | SplitSuit 

Want to practice your river plays? There is an entire chapter dedicated to rivers in SplitSuit's *The Postflop Workbook* which is available here: www.splitsuit.com/postflop-poker-workbook

Important to note, you CANNOT bluff a bad player. Your opponent is everything when making these moves. You CAN bluff a bad player when they miss their draws. :) Great video

I just started playing poker a few months ago and usually played too "tight", always relying on the math. Profits definitely can be made when when you grind it out this way, although it was so hard to come up really big, but when I learned to follow your "2 rules", what a difference. I can see now that poker is a skill where if you are "dialed in" to the table, there are some nights where I just felt unstoppable. My profits increased, and I continue to learn more and more. Thank you for making this video and keep up the great work!

In my local tournament games, I pretty much only raise with nuttish hands on the river. And I am constantly amazed by how wide people are calling. When I start seeing some increases in frequency of folds; i.e. people not calling down with middle pair, then i'll consider bluff raising.

Great video, James! Even though, I´m not that interested in poker anymore (since I´m not playing anymore AND they passed a law, that makes it illegal to play, where I live, too), you´re the one to find EXACTLY the right topic for a video for me to click and watch in its entirety! I just read the title and thought "Oh my god, that is SO true...." lol

At 21:29, the video says that if the button decides to shove, he will give the hijack pot odds of 2:1. The pot size after the shove is $1592, and the hijack needs to call $430, giving him odds of 1592:430 = 3.70:1. I hope that's right, I'm not too used to using fractional odds. Expressed in decimals, the hijack has to call $430 to win a $2022 pot, which gives him pot odds of 0.213. I don't think that's 2:1. That would mean, IMO, that about 80% of river raises should be for value. If you have 11 value combos, you should only add 2.75 (or 3, to round it to a whole number) bluff combos.

This video make me understand that having a 9 in my hand in this situation makes my hand a bad bluff catcher. It blocks some value hands, but it blocks more bluffs

This is a good video and why I love poker. That extra level is always there. Your opponent knows you never bluff rivers and most people don’t. He thinks your river raise is always value. So why would he call if you only raise the nuts there? Perfect spot to exploit their thinking. Then when they realize you bluff rivers you get paid off more when you bet huge with the nuts on the river

Interesting theory, but I feel like the example just doesn't make sense. Except for the J9 and 97 of spades, those 'value combos' simply shouldn't be in your range, right? QQ would have 3bet preflop. And for the others: villain raises preflop, cbets flop ánd potbets turn. Why on earth would you still be in the hand on the river with just a straight draw? Because of your first rule? I'm sorry, but it doesn't sound like a very sound rule to begin with. Here, I feel like this can never be an EV+ move... You never have the implied odds to call, unless you plan to bluff it off when you don't hit on the river, which looks like a very questionable move in this case (since the HJ looks very strong and you wouldn't have those 'nutted combos' in your range to begin with). Even if you don't agree with this, it troubles me that you don't address these glaring issues in your video. Makes me feel uneasy about all the rest, although it does all sound very insightful.

I've only just come across this vid. The problem with this in my thinking is that whether the button's bluffs have value really depends on the kind of player the HJ is and whether they have enough bluffs of their own in their opening and triple barreling range versus your hand. If they are a maniac lag that open raises every time it folds to them in the hi jack, then that changes things considerably compared to someone who has 20/16 overall stats. But then again, the button only called capping their range, but the board runs out heavily in the capped range's favour... I don't play enough cards for frequency based play to lead to an edge. If I was the button with 99, I might peel one on the flop hoping to steal the turn, I might float the brick deuce hoping to steal the river, but that river bet into me, someone who has happily come along for the ride with a hand, makes things fairly polarised. I might pause and do a Caro on the villain hoping to illicit a tell to help fudge the assessment of whether my 9's have enough equity to make another call or a jam if I think there is enough fold equity there. I struggled with the 1% book and this vid hasn't left me any less struggling. :(

I took this information down while watching it and will go over it again 2 times or so on 1.5 or 2x speed. I will experiment with the extra questions and do my own exercises as well. Im not at the limit where this is suggested for but im going learn it apply it and when im up limits later I'll already be ready! Thanks so much already bought the math workbook and I will buy the 1% course eventually. I love this even if it's 4 years old it's very useful to this day and always will be. Look forward to more videos. This is the first time I took out time to watch a training video and really use it as attended and im super pumped!! Thanks so much love it 10 fold lol

I play mostly $25NL on stars, and when a TAG triple barrels that board OOP; AQ is the bottom of his range, aside from a few rare bluffs (which you block some of). My issue on stars is that I call down too much with top pair mediocre kicker type hands, because I put all the bluffs in their range and conclude a call is correct. But they very rarely show up with the bluffs lol. Nitty regs

This is way more GTO-oriented than most videos I watched from you ;) Great content, I love it. The thought process you were talking about is indeed extremely important. Regarding the actual hand, not sure if 99 should be a flat pre-flop from the button vs a HJ raise, or maybe a 3-bet is better. And you absolutely have to 3-bet QQ, don't you?

I let out an audible victory yell when I came up with all the same bluffs as Split when he told me to pause and find our bluff raises

Player leaving the game sees a fellow player and announces ' I bluffed six times this morning and never got caught! " To which the fellow player replied, " you didn't bluff enough!! "

So good.. learning so much. A lot is new to me, but I like exposing myself to these concepts, and then revisiting the info again and again.

For the first reviewed hand, wouldn't the BTN 3bet PF with QQ, thus we can exclude QQ from the value combo pool?

I followed your advice and continued more, especially on the river. Played a couple of hands online and had my opponents fold a majority of the time. Keen to do this more! Thanks

Good video. I think this applies to pretty high level polls though. Bad players (both nits and whales) aren’t folding top pair often enough spot to make the 99 bluff raise profitable. IMHO.

When I make a pot-sized bet on the river my opponent has to call 67% of the time to prevent me from showing a profit by betting any two "blank cards". Thus the ratio of 2:1 value-to-bluff combinations. This makes sense to me...eventually your opponent will "guess" wrong and you'll show a profit. In reality not all bets are pot-sized. If I bet less than the pot, say half the pot, now my opponent has to call 75% of the time to deny my "automatic" profit. Should I then be using a ratio of 1:1 value-to-bluff combinations if betting half the pot on the river? "Poker's 1%"/this material is an eye-opening, one things with these ratios that give me pause is that assumes your value bets always win. However you could be betting second nuts for value and walk into the nuts. I'm a little wary of the term "nut-ish" is all I'm saying. Seems like most big pots are when players both have good hands. Mike

James, your "pie" chart looks more like a "sheet cake". ;-)

the poker lingo too strong my man, i no understand

I started studying and playing seriously a month ago. Every week I come back to this video, and taking something more important than last week. This is the most important information to my growth at this point in time.

How did you come up with 2-1 river pot odds on villains call? On the river hero has $780 left in his stack. (1000 Stack - 20 Pre-Flop - 50 Flop - 150 Turn) If hero jams his $780 stack Villain has to call $330 ($780 - $350) to win a pot of ~$1600. That gives him almost 5:1 on a call if my math is correct. This matters because it changes how you should balance your river raise range. The better price you give your opponents the more value heavy your range should be. In this case a completely balanced range would have 1/6 bluffs and 5/6 value (Villain, with a 5:1 price, must be right 1/6 of the time to breakeven), making villain completely indifferent to calling or folding. I also think we need to reconstruct your value river range as well as your bluffs. If you aren't raising 79s or J9s on the flop then how are you balancing your flop raising range (I'm assuming you're raising 88 and 66 for value because you didn't put them in your river raising range.) My river raising range would probably consist of TT (3bet QQ pre-flop) and J9s for 7 combos and arguably no bluffs depending on the player type. Generally pot pot pot lines in 2/5 are pretty exploitable and balancing a raising range isn't at the top of our priorities. Please comment if screwed up any math or my logic isn't sound I appreciate feedback!

Honestly, If I was playing against a "poker machine" that was paying enough attention to my tendencies or if I was always playing against a lot of the same people every session then including bluffs like 99 here would be a solid strategy and needed in order to balance out my hands. But it has been my experience playing against live players that most of them are too busy listening to music, watching TV, or generally not paying enough attention to pick up on enough of what I am doing to make bluffing with 99 or T9 on the river a needed part of my game. I find that showing down a bluff on a hand cheaply is enough to ensure I get action when I have nut hands, or even showing a pre flop raise with K9 off will plant that seed in the tables head that I am a LAG. Against really good players this would be needed but playing 1-3 at the casino does not require this type of advanced range building. Bluff raising the river with 99 for all my chips is not a move I need to make. And in this example the villain has already put 600 of his 1000 chips in the pot...the only hands he is folding are hands that lose to 99 and pretty much calling with all hands that beat you. He is only folding a bluff to you and if you hero call here instead of bluff raising then you save yourself $400 when you are wrong and if you are right you take down a good pot and show the table you aren't going to fold up like a tent to aggression. Also, like you said since you block the nut hands with 99 that makes it more likely that he is bluffing because he probably doesn't have J9 and I doubt he has 79 the way the hand was played. I would be more likely to call his 350 bet with 99 than I would be to raise with 99. Other than J9 that we block and 79 that he doesn't have what else could he confidently bet 350 on the river after the T hits? QQ 88 66 or maybe TT. He has a lot more bluffs like AK,AJ,77, maybe 55 combos that he would fire the 3rd barrel with. The math in this example prohibits you from raising here because he is only folding pure bluffs, he is not folding AQ or better to another $400. This example would work better if the previous bets were smaller and you still had enough of a stack that he could realistically fold...he is getting wayyyy too good a price to call down lightly with too many hands that beat you. All that being said...YES, everyone should understand the concept of balancing ranges...I think this example maybe wasn't the best to drive this idea home.

I actually went to the casino last week and called and raised more than I usually do. I feel like I should have made more money because a lot of my bluffs got called. I also think I might not have gotten called as much if I didn't show up with some bluffs here and there. This video confirms that I need to keep calling and raising in the right spots.

A river bluff fire of about $800 + here is what you are saying, but thats a expensive daring thing to do if you are wrong about it succeeding. Realistically is our basis that enemy will lay down everything one pair? Including Aces?

Great video. Looks like I was 4 years too late. Hard to find videos that help me grow from my level. I see too many videos that are too basic or too complex, so this was exciting to watch for me.

If the button flat calls the flop and the turn, he usually has a condensed range, which means he usually doesn't have many strong hands that he can raise for value on the river. He should normally raise the flop or turn with sets and strong hands. In addition, he should balance his range, and gutshots would be a good option. I looked up the sample hands in Applications of No-Limit Hold 'em, and gutshots are usually raised before the river. What would you do with the gutshots on the river if you miss? If the river is a blank? Unless you bluff, you cannot win very often, so you would have to bluff to win. But you don't have a lot of value raises if the river is a blank (let's say a deuce), so you can't bluff many of your missed draws, otherwise you would be unbalanced. In addition, the gutshots would have negative removal effects as they block missed draws that your opponent could have. If you do raise your gutshots on the flop or turn, there would not be many hands in the river range that can be bet for value. In the sample hands of Applications of No-Limit Hold 'em, the value river raising range is usually much smaller (only 4 or 5 combos). Exceptions occur mainly on boards where very strong hands can be comfortably slowplayed (such as full houses on a paired flop). You can raise the river only if you slowplayed strong hands on the flop and turn (and you shouldn't slowplay too many of them on this board IMO because of the straight and flush draws). Or if the river card helps some hands in your range, which would be the case for J9s and 97s on this river. But I don't think that you should flat call the flop and turn with gutshots.

QQ shouldnt be in range and how the hell are we getting to the river with 3 of the J9s combos?

@21:30 you say that if Button jams, the HJ is given "around 2:1." I know you say it's just "ball-parky," but unless I've completely misunderstood the whole concept of pot odds (which is possible) that 2:1 estimation is way off. From the math that I did, the HJ would have to put in another $430 into a pot of around $1590 to call a shove from the BUT, which is giving the HJ about 3.7:1 on a call. This changes how many bluffs should be in our range dramatically

Wow split suit your the man! Your videos have elevated my game to an entire different level. You explain everything so well. Cheers man!

Good stuff. The only problem I see with the hand example is that Hero is left with $780 by the river. If Hero chooses to bluff jam the river for $780, his opponent has to call $430 to win a pot of $1592. Villain would be getting pot odds of 3.7 to 1. Villain only needs to be ahead 21% of the time to call correctly which means bluffing all combos of 99 is too much. In this hand example, Hero should only be bluffing with half of his 99 combos.

I am going to find out more of the course and decide between the $50/mon VS the pure edition and the you tube code promo. Thx and the reason_ I am considering it is that d like the Way you teach

So one of your value bets was J9s for four combinations but would you really continue on the turn with anything but J9 of spades? This changes the ratio of value to bluff to 4:3 which would be to bluff heavy right?

With respect, in regard to potential bluffs, I fail to comprehend how spending a lot of time coming up with a range of bluff hands is productive. What you actually have in your hand on the river is nowhere near as important as what your opponent can reasonably be expected to put you on at that point in time in order to induce folding a superior hand to your bluff. It seems to me that what you should be thinking here is what hands you could potentially have had which would have been reasonably played with three consecutive calls only to be raised all-in at the river when the ten came, as well as whether your opponent will read your bluff as proof of your having had such a hand. If your opponent has a solid hand which beats you at the river if called, yet he cannot see how you could possibly have a much stronger hand under the circumstances, he simply isn't going to buy your bluff and instead will call and take his chances on the showdown. If you're going to bluff here, and I'm certainly not saying that you shouldn't, you need to be able to reasonably represent a hand that scares the crap out of your opponent, depending on just how strong he is. With a ten on the river, your all-in bet may well cause him to read you as having had J9 or 97 and now have the nuts, or TT with second set, or maybe QT and two pair, assuming he thinks you would have called that large bet on the turn with those hands. If so, your bluff might get him to fold a pair of queens, and possibly even to think seriously about laying down something better such as two small pair. But what cards you actually hold at that point as you make that river bluff seem to me to be relevant only if you would have bet them exactly the same way as you would have bet the examples I just listed, otherwise your opponent probably won't believe you. And that's where I humbly suggest there is a problem with your analysis, at least so far, because I don't hear you talking about this concern. Many of the hands that are being illustrated in this video as examples that people should include in their range of bluffing hands are cards with which a reasonably decent poker player really had no business flat calling an opening raise and two strong follow-up bets, at least not in no limit play. It is fine on the button for you to call the hijack raise with 65s and take a shot at the flop, especially in a loose game. But when you get bottom pair with no flush or straight draw possibilities aside from the back door, meanwhile the raiser bets an amount close to the pot with a queen showing on the board, and then does the exact same thing on the turn, in most cases merely calling both bets is just plain stupid. If there seems a fair chance that the bettor has a strong hand like top pair or higher, you should kiss your sixes goodbye and fold, because even with implied odds, you aren't getting enough equity to continue. Or if you get a read that he just has overcards or a straight draw and is semi-bluffing, you should protect your bottom pair by raising him then and there and making him face a tough decision to continue. Also by raising before the river, maybe if he's the kind of player who has middle pair with an 8, you might also get a fold in the process which works to your advantage. Even if he doesn't fold to a flop or turn raise from you, he probably doesn't make that big bet on the river, allowing you to either check down your bottom pair and hope for the best, or to bet big yourself as a more credible bluff and make him fold. And if he does fire big again on the river after calling your raise, then it is a really easy fold for you because you are dead 99% of the time. However, if all you do is call him down to the turn with 65s, not only are you not getting fair value for your hand along the way, but your weak play up to that point makes that river bluff you are promoting here less believable. So really, what does it matter what cards you are actually holding if you choose make a river bluff at that point? From where I'm sitting, the only question is whether your opponent will believe you have that nut straight or set of tens or two pair and fold to you! If I'm wrong about this, that's fine, but please elaborate on why.

ASSUMING villain is a good LAG reg : We have to ask ourselves what our opponents will fold to our bet with 99 : - villain's own bluffs ( x combos, 30,1% to be GTO with this particular raise size = 19 combos ) - AQ, AA, KK (24 combos) Than what villain will give us action considering our raise : - QQ, 88, 66, QT, 97s (2 combos as we have 99), Js9s (21 combos) Using a fold equity calculator, we need 49% of folds by villain. We can assume villain will fold 43/64 combos = 67,2% ====> our move is +EV in that case : +545,65$ -255,84$ = +289,81$ on average But what if we called ? If we call, our EV is (-350 x 45 combos) + (+812 x 19 combos) = 15750 - 15428 = +322$ Conclusion : calling here is gonna be more profitable on the long term, but raising with 99 as a bluff could also balance our raising range, and than allow us to be paid with our monsters when we are raising. PS : my entire comment makes no sense as 80% of 2/5$ live players are old nitty dudes always raising river with the 21 monster combos without balancing their own river bet ranges lol (under bluffing, no 3 barrel light, in short)

I'm curious what about hands that blur the line between value and bluff? Let's say in the example you gave where you have Q7 suited. You are blocking a lot of value QQs, Q10, AQ, etc. but also the hand might be value against random 10 hands, A10, K10,etc.

How can you have 4 combos of J9s as value hands, only J9s of spade will call the turn bet, J9s of club is a questionable call on the flop with no backdoor flush redraw. So your bluffs with 99 better have the 9 of spade in there.

The logic of GTO as presented here and elsewhere misses something crucial. If your bet size and range construction achieve the desired ambivalence... This does not cause you to win in the long run. When you manage to turn the game into a coin flip for them, it's also a coin flip for you. GTO is a lesson in how to make the game neutral, but poker is not won by achieving neutrality. You do not win by perfectly confusing your opponent, because in their state of perfection confusion they make (statisticaly) random errors. You win at poker by exploiting the non-random errors that people make. GTO is good for learning what a mathematicaly neutral position looks like, but a truly neutral position is never the optimal position to take.

Question: is it too optimistic to consider 75 as a candidate for a bluff here? I’d say no, it’s not too optimistic, because you only have 7 high and you do have at least 1 blocker to 79. How about even 77?

I just realized watching this video how unbalanced I am at the river with lack of reasonable check raise bluffs

It’s not as simple as bet/call down.. also there’s a ton of variance so over 10,000 hand sample the most profitable strategy would be LOA and vice versa. New players should play with a basic HUD vip , 3bet and fold to 3 bet

I don't like the 99 as a bluff because I wouldn't have called the turn with 99 unless I had some read that it might be good. (Also, I would likely have raised 99 preflop.) I like 9T a lot better, because I totally would have called the flop and turn with the double-gutter. The only combo that doesn't count is 9sTs, which I would have raised on the turn most of the time, so I have 11 bluff combos. However, sometimes with these I would, depending on read, just use the pair of tens as a bluff catcher -- maybe half the time. OTOH, I don't have the same 11 value combos, because the only J9 I would have here is Js9s. The others, which were only gutshots, would have been folded on the turn.

Hand reading is so important using this 1% strategy. I have stolen many pots late against weak players, you can't just blindly call and raise, this is advanced strategy.

Does the bluff shove still have any fold equity by the river when starting with $1k effective? It's basically a min raise by the river and a middling hand will call at that price

Unless I’m confused, the person betting on the river ISNT breaking rule 2 like you say. Why do you say they broke the rules first so you can break them??

Another thing is if you bluff shove the River your opponent is getting 3:1 so is never folding top pair it even 2nd pair… only thing that folds is a missed draw or 3rd pair

I'm missing something from your "raising range" chart. You say 17 raising combos and then list 3 for value combos and 1 for bluffs. But you say there are 11 value combos and 6 bluff combos.

QQ shouldn't be in your range. That should be 3bet 100% of the time, no?

Hmm I don't think 99 has good blocker value, since we're not putting HJ on 97 very often (and even less often J9). I'd put HJ's value range on AQ, KQ, AA, KK, 88, 66, so a better blocker hand would be A8s?

Good stuff. How come I don’t see more results on Hendon mob?

Thank you for calling it the RIVER and not the RIV ;)

Great video ! Thanks for the good content, keep it up !

when you mention to continue betting and to call opponents bet this is when it is heads up post flop correct? thanks

Excellent video! Just want to make sure I have this right: shouldn't your value combos be 8, since on a Q high board there are only 3 combos of QQ? I think only 1 combo of J9 suited makes it to the river (spades). In other words, should we take the board into account for how many value/bluff combos we have? Or am I thinking about this the wrong way?

thx

I had the nine card and the ace of bass, it did not help! I had to drop a deuce which put a spruce in my step!

I know this sounds very "fishy" but I sometimes try to create a story before the hands even begin. I will play any 2 cards as though I have a very strong hand. I create the story and play accordingly. If the table believes my story and their cards are weak, I've won hands just by telling a good story. I know this isn't dealing with high level players, but I'm not doing this all the time. Am I doing something wrong?

How do you tell if you are playing too NITish? I'm a new player but I like to play conservative from the start and get a feel for the other players' playing style. Then I'll adjust my play style to them, if I notice the table is really passive I'll do a few small bluffs and just take everyone's big blind a few times or bluff them out of weaker hands. Usually this gets a chunk of them to play a bit more on tilt and I exploit that by imitating bluffs on my stronger hands. Any suggestions?

does rake affects the nash equilibrium? im talking about shortstack hu cash game.

Why is 98 suited not a better bluff in the example? Seems like it would be because you block 8s

Do we really have 97s in the btn preflop calling range here? And counting all combos of QQ ? None 3bet ? Still a very good video. Quick question, having around 12 combos of value is the usual approximative nbr of value hands against 3 barrels? For 2/3 pot sizes?

"think about the world in general... there are really only two types of people". Ok then.

really efficient. thank you :)

Thank you! Will watch right after I finish Math II, ;)

Is this for plo as well

Having the block on made hand equals an effective bluff?

Love the content!!! New poker player and your content is AMAZING!!!

Doesn't position, raise size, player type and amount of players come into the "2 rule" equation? I mean, if I'm in the HJ and have pocket 99 and raise it up and get 3 callers, and the flop comes out A 2 T rainbow, even if the small and BB check the flop I'm not auto continuing here. Sure I might get 3 folds and I might get check raised. Then, depending on the amount, I have to choose to fold or call to draw to a 2 outer with 3rd pair. Would rather see a free, or at least cheaper, card.

6:45 how did “your opponent broke the rule”? didnt he just said that he bet on the river after the turn as well?

excellent tothink about River play

at 14:17 i would say 14 possible hands to play off on the hand showing not knowing other cards

At 22:05 he talks about "Creating indifference" . That's the money line. Period.

At $0.1/$02., if you jam on the river in the spot at 12:26, you're going to get looked up by 83o for 3rd pair. No, that's not a hypothetical, that has literally happened to me multiple times. Makes it tough to get better. I'm gonna grind out $50 just to prove it and then move up.

Great video James. I would like to add this in my poker game. Only problem at my level at $1-2 live is that I run into a lot of players who are very sticky with top or middle pair which will call you down to the river despite a super wet and connected board. I would assume this only works with players who are nits or a decent regs who can actually hit the fold button. This is definitely something I would like to add to my game but I am a bit hesitant to do so at my stakes. Thoughts?

How do you distinguish between 'calling more often' and being a 'calling station'. Pretty much all of your videos suggest that we call when we have the required equity - are you suggesting that in general people are frequently underestimating this?

This is really dependent on the player pool you're playing in. In one of the card rooms I play in, it's so nitty sometimes, you cannot fold too much. The only way to make money is to catch them with basically with a cooler type hand.

I've been playing for years, and none of this ever occurred to me I think! Thanks James!

excellent video thanks! what solver do you use?

Very long video but maybe also one of your most important ever. Great description of the difference between GTO and exploitative play and great explanation of the importance of blockers, whenever we choose to bluff.

I feel like I always play too tight and I am trying to get used to playing loser opportunities. I fall victim to people being able to bluff me in certain situations to over pot bets because the math typically doesn’t make sense with my hand only to be shown a bluff. However I am very very patient and typically someone at my table who is deep will think they can push me out on the flop and turn when I do have a made hand. I call a lot more with made hands on the turn In order to make them think they will be able to easily bluff me off with a large bet and I typically will be able to bait into my made hand and win full house over set or nut flush over flush. I am very new to live poker and grinded a lot of low stakes online where I feel like people adhere more to the stakes and play with a lot more structure. In 1/2 online if you 3x it is very common to be playing that hand heads up or 3 way. When I 5x raise in 1/2 live I am likely to end up with 3 callers, this results on my ranges being effected significantly based on the pot being 4 way and realizing less equity then needed to call or raise the turn. I follow my range strictly as I have studied for almost three years now and know what needs to be played in what position and am finding it hard to adjust to how lose people play at low stakes live. If anyone reads this and has any thoughts on if this strategy is +EV for small stakes while I learn to play live I would greatly appreciate it.

I love the Orange and White SU colors. Oh yeah, the concepts and logic are also top notch.

Seeing the first part of this video makes me realise that the 2 rules that are presented are about initiative. You want to keep it and put the pressure , or keeping the possibility to take it when we don't have it at the moment the opponents bet or raise. Am I right ? (I obviously know it's a really simple way to see it, but it's better than useless complication for a beginner like me)

Calling an almost pot bet on the turn with J9s (gutshot no flush draw) seems quite unrealistic/inadequate. Then on the river we may hold only Js9s which reduces our value combos down to 11 - 3 = 8. If we play Js9s and 9s7s agressively on the turn (most of the time) it shrinks river value range to 6 combos.

Hello, where do I get the software so that i can input my poker hands into a table like above? I usually take my mac with me when I play poker, and would find it really useful if I could input the hand like in all these videos - so that it's easier to evaluate once I'e left the table. Thanks

Massive Payoff Fish MPF crowned a new term my friend. Goes right in the mix with OMC and the rest

Incredible content. Thank you so much. Subscribed!

Is this the kind of stuff there is in applications of no limit Holdem by juanda / poker math by Chen?

Dear split I wrote you but you still ain't calling

I’m new to the game . This video opened up my eyes.

tnx splitsuit thats very deep staf that makes sense when thinking about it. i guess i`ll have to watch this video a few more times to get to the bottom of it.

So if they “all in”than you call too with 3 and 8

Terrific video and narration.

The problem with all of this thought process/strategy is that there are players out there, (mostly all of them) that are going to call no matter how coordinated the board is. You have to find people that actually have a fold button and you might have to spend a bunch of money just to find out if they do. Bluffing is the funnest thing about playing poker, but building that image is far more important than trying to find out if someone has a fold button.

Risk. That’s the problem. Consider what can happen to you because of the deal. I’m talking about bad beat scenarios that occur after you make the decision. Especially in a tournament. Risk avoidance get you deeper in a tournament. What if the villain is sitting on a set and slow playing. You will say that’s a rare event, but you will concur it happens a lot.

I mean, the biggest problem with your question at 14:14 is that three hands of (J9s, 97s, and QQ) play better as 3-bets on the button, so you can only really have 88, 66, and your non-3bet combos of QTs by this river. In spirit, yes, raise more rivers, but this example isn't actually a practical one in reality: you have so few value raises by the river that you shouldn't really worry about having bluffs either. GTO simulations confirm this given reasonable players.

18:46 is JJ also a correct hand to bluff here?

I'm gonna tell you all something right now. I have a friend of mine that is a very famous and one of the top poker players on this planet, I will not name him! I play low stakes poker online, really low, I don't have the money to play High stakes. I spent the day with my Pro poker friend one day and had him playing my micro stakes account. All this info is great, not saying it's not! But...the shit doesn't work on most of the low stakes players. You can't make moves on people that don't know how to play. My friend got crushed on 50c $1 takes that day!

At 21:29, the video says that if the button decides to shove, he will give the hijack pot odds of 2:1. This looks wrong. Also do you really call a turn bet with 99 ? 10 9 is a much better turn call as it is a double gutter.