What an interesting system that touches on playing exploitively, how to think about using your image, and how to connect GTO play to live information in a subtle but smart way. So interesting.
@@kjac23 well I’m only two hands in but think it’s worthy of an update. Second hand dealt to me is 77. Flopped quads. Won a $300 pot and $500 for hitting quads. Wild start haha
Maximum exploitative strategy: given your opponents deviate based on your perceived image, you are also allowed to deviate to capitalize on their tendencies.
Well, you've convinced me that a membership to CLP would totally be worth the money. This video is awesome, bringing in to play a totally new concept that I've never thought about before. The only reason I haven't joined yet is that you've provided enough free stuff that I'm about at my limit of learning new things. I need to get some experience applying what I've learned from your free videos before I'm ready to learn anything more. Otherwise, it will all just spill on the floor. But I will definitely be joining eventually.
When you're a regular, you learn who judges your image based upon the current session, versus who judges you based upon your long history playing against them. As an old, tight, normally-winning player, I don't need 4 buyins in front of me to push most other regulars off a hand. They know that overall, calling a bet by me representing a big hand, is simply -EV. Yes, this means I under bluff compared to GTO. But it also means that I can pick and choose spots to push people off even hands around 80th or 90th percentile of their range. Yet, it would be foolish to do it very often, because the months and years of building my "fold when he represents a big hand" image would dissipate after being caught just a very few times. So the main question really becomes, which pots to try stealing with an image play? Obviously, the biggest pots where the pot size likely didn't come from the opponent being nutted (which it pretty often can), PLUS where the line looks sensible and not just a donk bet out of the blue. The other thing you need to be very careful of, is giving off a tell. If you sit there agonizing over whether to bluff, you become a walking and talking tell. You really need to act exactly as if the situation is "I have the 2nd nuts, all I have to do is pick the bet size for that now." I don't run bluffs against random strangers nearly as often as against players well aware of my actual style of play. When someone is down 10 buyins lifetime from trying to bluff-catch you 20 times previously, they remember that, and fold. Image can be money in the bank over the long term.
What kind of sizing would we bluff with in the first situation Bart? Not that the live field is necessarily thinking about this, but like you said, were not even confident betting KK on the river, so were likely checking back a turned Q, and if we back into an A, I would think we would have a modest bet size like 1/2. Anyways, what sizing makes sense here for bluffs and what's your thought process behind it?
Really Good video, my image can be player dependant against certain regulars even in the same session . I have 1 guy who is actually a good player but for some reason he's convinced I'm almost always bluffing.
This is a super informative. Additional question: How do you weigh villain's image into these calculations? For example if they are a calling station or a nit?
youre playing off more of the players range than a player image. ofc if u have a read that your opponent is sticky than don't run this bluff but he is saying with this particular runout, where higher cards come in after the flop especially if the vilian is defending from the blinds.
Of course, that matters at least as much as what you think your own image is. However, don't fall into the trap of assuming that preflop nit necessarily means that they are tight postflop. There are definitely players who are very tight preflop but then get sticky postflop if they have anything. And remember, since they are so tight preflop, they are more likely to have something postflop than the average person, because if they get to the flop, they have, on average, better hands.
Everything stems from perception. You want your opponent to perceive what you're doing, then you do the opposite. Strategy games are fun lots of different possibilities.
I try to keep my image on the low bluff side so when I lead and bluff I get called way less but it's a very tight and readable way to play so often ppl fold when I cbet but chips are chips it just means I have to fight and trap for value on good hands and sometimes the run out can backfire badly because ppl only play you on a good draw. But we are talking very low stakes.
Interesting video. One thing I'm curious to hear your thoughts on is the occasionally unreliable responses to image. For example I've seen people tilt call down spots vs people who have good image, because they think they can't have it every time or just out of a frustrated resignation. It depends how you define image I guess. If you define image as how likely someone is to fold vs you then by definition their reaction is reliable.
That just hasn't been my experience, but of course it's possible. Especially vs non regs or occasional I find that the largest function of your image is whether you are winning or losing in the short term (inside that session) and the most common response to image types is that your opponents call down more when you are losing and try to stay away from you when "Running hot"..Bart
Hey Bart, I’m slightly confused by your comment regarding large sizing on boards with fewer value combos and opponents defending lighter, leading to more value. Yes, the opponent will have to reach down into their range with weaker holdings to satisfy MDF, but how does this affect the value you reap? Their formal defending frequency is mostly determined by your sizing. It would seem to me that more value would exist in spots where opponents would be inclined to over defend vs MDF, which would be spots where there are a lot of value/drawing combos on the given board?
Hi, I'm a poker vlogger from the Philippines ( I do vlog in our own language) .I'm curious to know, do you edit the videos showing the cards on your own, or do you hire someone to edit everything for you?
Hey Bart - CLP subscriber here. While I agree with what you are saying in theory, in practice I have two major issues with this approach… 1. Humans are notoriously bad random number generators, especially on a topic this subjective. While I think the Top 20% and Bottom 20% of your might be able to be fairly sussed out, that middle 60% is just a huge muddle with little discernible difference. If I have a night at 2/5 where I’m winning $200 vs. losing $200, do you really think that should effect what I choose to do in a 50/50 situation b/c somehow my image in those two situations is different? That leads me to…. 2. For your idea to work, you have to assume that people are BOTH paying attention AND will act they way you prescribe based on that. You obviously have way more experience playing that I do, but the idea that if you’re in the “God Like” zone someone might fold a marginal made hand vs. calling with it if there’s no other read is specious at best. I’ve often seen the opposite. If I’m running well, people might want to stick it to me and say “there’s no way he can have it every time.” I think there’s just too much subjectivity. At the end of day, in borderline spots, I think having a pre-set method to randomly generate is always best. For example I have a card protector that I can spin with 8 outcomes (4 red, 4 black), and I use that. Your idea could work in some instances, but in the long-run I think humans are better off having a better way to randomize these close decisions.
21:04 I love Bart's brilliance, but in this spot, I totally disagree that betting is a good idea; if I have a bad image. I believe that any decent villain in this spot would check any draw that had a 5 in it or any flush draw; believing the the Hero would bet.
Interesting. You’re saying players with large stacks get called less often on river bets? I can see that being the case on earlier streets, as ppl might be afraid to commit themselves to a big pot. But on the river I’m more likely to call someone’s bet if they have a huge stack because they’re going to be more willing to bluff with what they might view as house money. There is also the opposite situation that you mention where if we know someone’s had a terrible session, they’re more likely to bluff on tilt. So we agree we don’t want to bluff when everyone knows we’re having a bad session. So for the AA example, if we want to have that 50/50 balance for value betting the river, my proposal would be to value bet with the top 25% of my image score and the bottom 25% of my image score rather than just the bottom 50%. Am curious to know your thoughts on this.
The large chip stack discussion has to do with restricted buy in games where the cap is enforced. If you play a $500 cap game and are sitting with $5000 in front of you even new players are going to know that you are "running hot". Obviously this has very little relevance in an uncapped or match the stack game.
He is right. Players with large stacks and a good image, (not going to showdown and showing down strong hands,) get called less often on the river. Earlier on streets it goes both ways in small stakes cash games. People want to play with big stacks for a chance to win a big pot. People also sometimes like to play weak hands against a short stack because a loss would be small. Bart is discussing how maximize profit against your average recreational player and is spot on. Notice that when you check your AA at the end with a strong image, it makes your image even better and more likely to successfully bluff on a later hand when you have no showdown value.
Right, I understand that you meant a large chip stack implied they had won a lot that session. I’m saying if I deem a villain to be a good player I’m more likely to call their river bet because I know they’re capable of bluffing. In my experience rec players rarely bluff the river. But I guess what you’re saying is most rec players are afraid of calling a good player’s river bet, which makes sense. Thanks.
Question regarding the first scenario. If the backdoor that came in on the turn were diamonds, would that reduce the frequency in which you bluff since villain would have fewer back door flush draws?
If the Queen was a Diamond, personally I would continue bluffing since we pick up equity. Of course as you pointed out, since we have two Diamonds its less likely our opponent is going to have a draw and is slightly more likely to have a hand with showdown value, like a pair. Which we loose to if they call down. However, since we specifically have J10 of Diamonds, I dont think its that consequential. On this board, after we c-bet the flop, I think our opponent would fold hands that connect with J10 of Diamonds. So I dont think our J10 of Diamonds blocks any draws our opponent might have. They may have a hand like 4/5 of Diamonds, or Ace/5 of Diamonds, but I dont think our J10 of Diamonds blocks any potential draws they may have backed into. Suppose we had J10 of Spades, is our opponent calling a flop bet with a hand like AJ of Diamonds? That hand would pick up a lot of equity on the turn and continue to call, but I think all those hands that we block from picking up draws fold on the flop. Of course, its hard to say completely, adjust for your opponent if they are a station.
But if you start checking back instead of going for thin value too much people may start noticing then when you do start betting river you have less value
Not that it matters and i haven't watched past the point where you said that is unlikely that a 9 remains top pair by the river but aren't there are more cards lower than a 9 than higher, making it more likely than not to remain the highest card on the board?
That sort of makes sense if there is only one card to come, but there are 2 cards to come. And there is a 2 and a 3 removed from the possibilities of lower cards coming
@@RightFootForward11 there's 20 cards higher and 28 cards lower without considering removal and yes the 2 and 3 are removed from the lower range but Bart's J and 10 remove two from the upper range.
@@RightFootForward11 true, I was just thinking that with it being more likely to be low it also gives the villain a better chance to hit 2 pair with random connected low cards that he's sticking around with after the flop.
I'm having an extremely hard time understanding how you would absolutely bet A4 ans A5 but betting KK is too thin. Lmao. They are exactly the same thing bro. If he has an A, it's better than A4 A5 And if he doesnt, you win. So if youre betting A4 A5 here, you should be betting KK. That simple
CLP now releasing free podcast snippets. CLP has UA-cam videos up almost daily. Other than “training courses,” what are subscribers actually paying for?
This is the first time we have ever posted the podcast to a youtube video. The regular videos are never posted here. So basically everything that you get for a subscription is not posted here, to answer your question. --Bart
How to make better poker decisions; Retire from cash games and stop playing poker for real money. There are so many fishy clowns over valuing weak hands and in general playing "low valued" starting hands (at least in accordance with DAVID SKLANLSKY's book for Advance players) and hitting a piece of the flop nowadays, that today's game is far more about luck than skill. Because lets face it, However good your starting hand is, however good of a flop you hit, even after getting your money in REALLY good, there is no guarantees that your opponent isn't going to hit one of his 2 outs, 3 outs or 4 outs by the river. I don't even believe in the 'theory' of "Variances" balancing themselves out over the long haul nowadays neither. The only comfort you can really take from being beat by inferior players playing weak hands, is knowing that these guys who do over value hands such as K.J o/s and A.T o/s (and worse) pre flop and on the flop, are gonna end up as losing players over the long run.
This is too insightful to be free. I understand you generate interest from your free content (which leads to CLP subs) however based on your online collection of videos it is clear you know the material. In other words, the more CLP material you share for free - once your expertise is established- the less the return. If I was on the cusp of purchasing CLP material incentivize me to do that. Not to utilize all the free videos.
What an interesting system that touches on playing exploitively, how to think about using your image, and how to connect GTO play to live information in a subtle but smart way. So interesting.
Bout to go play live cash for the first time in a bit. Perfect timing.
Let me k ow how it goes. I play online and haven't played live yet either. Good luck
Half your luck our local casino in Aus has closed poker games indefinitely because of the C I assume 🤬
GL let us know how it goes
@@jbpokerwar8962 my wording was poor ha. I meant playing for the first time in awhile. I’ve played live before just not recently.
@@kjac23 well I’m only two hands in but think it’s worthy of an update. Second hand dealt to me is 77. Flopped quads. Won a $300 pot and $500 for hitting quads. Wild start haha
Bart really does have The Best, hands down, live poker tips / advice for mid / low stakes on UA-cam. Very digestible and relevant for live poker
Maximum exploitative strategy: given your opponents deviate based on your perceived image, you are also allowed to deviate to capitalize on their tendencies.
Well, you've convinced me that a membership to CLP would totally be worth the money. This video is awesome, bringing in to play a totally new concept that I've never thought about before.
The only reason I haven't joined yet is that you've provided enough free stuff that I'm about at my limit of learning new things. I need to get some experience applying what I've learned from your free videos before I'm ready to learn anything more. Otherwise, it will all just spill on the floor. But I will definitely be joining eventually.
Great video & philosophical talking point.
When you're a regular, you learn who judges your image based upon the current session, versus who judges you based upon your long history playing against them. As an old, tight, normally-winning player, I don't need 4 buyins in front of me to push most other regulars off a hand. They know that overall, calling a bet by me representing a big hand, is simply -EV. Yes, this means I under bluff compared to GTO. But it also means that I can pick and choose spots to push people off even hands around 80th or 90th percentile of their range.
Yet, it would be foolish to do it very often, because the months and years of building my "fold when he represents a big hand" image would dissipate after being caught just a very few times. So the main question really becomes, which pots to try stealing with an image play? Obviously, the biggest pots where the pot size likely didn't come from the opponent being nutted (which it pretty often can), PLUS where the line looks sensible and not just a donk bet out of the blue. The other thing you need to be very careful of, is giving off a tell. If you sit there agonizing over whether to bluff, you become a walking and talking tell. You really need to act exactly as if the situation is "I have the 2nd nuts, all I have to do is pick the bet size for that now."
I don't run bluffs against random strangers nearly as often as against players well aware of my actual style of play. When someone is down 10 buyins lifetime from trying to bluff-catch you 20 times previously, they remember that, and fold. Image can be money in the bank over the long term.
What kind of sizing would we bluff with in the first situation Bart? Not that the live field is necessarily thinking about this, but like you said, were not even confident betting KK on the river, so were likely checking back a turned Q, and if we back into an A, I would think we would have a modest bet size like 1/2. Anyways, what sizing makes sense here for bluffs and what's your thought process behind it?
I have been employing these strategies for years to much success. These strategies work.
Excellent graphics and overall presentation is top notch.
Really Good video, my image can be player dependant against certain regulars even in the same session . I have 1 guy who is actually a good player but for some reason he's convinced I'm almost always bluffing.
I already know we are tripling when I see that flop!
Bart - this new intro/video format is really neat.
And audio/sound
This is a super informative. Additional question: How do you weigh villain's image into these calculations? For example if they are a calling station or a nit?
youre playing off more of the players range than a player image. ofc if u have a read that your opponent is sticky than don't run this bluff but he is saying with this particular runout, where higher cards come in after the flop especially if the vilian is defending from the blinds.
Easy. U have to pay attention to how many hands they are playing plus what U have seen them showdown
Of course, that matters at least as much as what you think your own image is. However, don't fall into the trap of assuming that preflop nit necessarily means that they are tight postflop. There are definitely players who are very tight preflop but then get sticky postflop if they have anything. And remember, since they are so tight preflop, they are more likely to have something postflop than the average person, because if they get to the flop, they have, on average, better hands.
A4 and A5 of spades are logical hands for button as well
Ready for this one!!!! Let's get it.
This was really helpful. Thank you!
Everything stems from perception. You want your opponent to perceive what you're doing, then you do the opposite.
Strategy games are fun lots of different possibilities.
appreciate the newer and even cleaner styling
I try to keep my image on the low bluff side so when I lead and bluff I get called way less but it's a very tight and readable way to play so often ppl fold when I cbet but chips are chips it just means I have to fight and trap for value on good hands and sometimes the run out can backfire badly because ppl only play you on a good draw. But we are talking very low stakes.
Barts the man
Getting creative with the editing? Weird zoom cuts, blank and white, weird lined filter. New intern is doing too much 😂
This is gold
Interesting video. One thing I'm curious to hear your thoughts on is the occasionally unreliable responses to image. For example I've seen people tilt call down spots vs people who have good image, because they think they can't have it every time or just out of a frustrated resignation.
It depends how you define image I guess. If you define image as how likely someone is to fold vs you then by definition their reaction is reliable.
That just hasn't been my experience, but of course it's possible. Especially vs non regs or occasional I find that the largest function of your image is whether you are winning or losing in the short term (inside that session) and the most common response to image types is that your opponents call down more when you are losing and try to stay away from you when "Running hot"..Bart
I cannot believe this is free
Hey Bart, I’m slightly confused by your comment regarding large sizing on boards with fewer value combos and opponents defending lighter, leading to more value.
Yes, the opponent will have to reach down into their range with weaker holdings to satisfy MDF, but how does this affect the value you reap? Their formal defending frequency is mostly determined by your sizing.
It would seem to me that more value would exist in spots where opponents would be inclined to over defend vs MDF, which would be spots where there are a lot of value/drawing combos on the given board?
Hi, I'm a poker vlogger from the Philippines ( I do vlog in our own language) .I'm curious to know, do you edit the videos showing the cards on your own, or do you hire someone to edit everything for you?
Thanks as always Bart
Hey Bart - CLP subscriber here.
While I agree with what you are saying in theory, in practice I have two major issues with this approach…
1. Humans are notoriously bad random number generators, especially on a topic this subjective. While I think the Top 20% and Bottom 20% of your might be able to be fairly sussed out, that middle 60% is just a huge muddle with little discernible difference. If I have a night at 2/5 where I’m winning $200 vs. losing $200, do you really think that should effect what I choose to do in a 50/50 situation b/c somehow my image in those two situations is different? That leads me to….
2. For your idea to work, you have to assume that people are BOTH paying attention AND will act they way you prescribe based on that. You obviously have way more experience playing that I do, but the idea that if you’re in the “God Like” zone someone might fold a marginal made hand vs. calling with it if there’s no other read is specious at best. I’ve often seen the opposite. If I’m running well, people might want to stick it to me and say “there’s no way he can have it every time.” I think there’s just too much subjectivity.
At the end of day, in borderline spots, I think having a pre-set method to randomly generate is always best. For example I have a card protector that I can spin with 8 outcomes (4 red, 4 black), and I use that. Your idea could work in some instances, but in the long-run I think humans are better off having a better way to randomize these close decisions.
Totally agree.
Class video, thank you
Really love your vids. Keep posting them!
Example 2 and 3 seem identical (to me). Same thought process and same conclusion. Bart, you can do better 😉
21:04 I love Bart's brilliance, but in this spot, I totally disagree that betting is a good idea; if I have a bad image. I believe that any decent villain in this spot would check any draw that had a 5 in it or any flush draw; believing the the Hero would bet.
Interesting. You’re saying players with large stacks get called less often on river bets?
I can see that being the case on earlier streets, as ppl might be afraid to commit themselves to a big pot. But on the river I’m more likely to call someone’s bet if they have a huge stack because they’re going to be more willing to bluff with what they might view as house money.
There is also the opposite situation that you mention where if we know someone’s had a terrible session, they’re more likely to bluff on tilt. So we agree we don’t want to bluff when everyone knows we’re having a bad session.
So for the AA example, if we want to have that 50/50 balance for value betting the river, my proposal would be to value bet with the top 25% of my image score and the bottom 25% of my image score rather than just the bottom 50%. Am curious to know your thoughts on this.
The large chip stack discussion has to do with restricted buy in games where the cap is enforced. If you play a $500 cap game and are sitting with $5000 in front of you even new players are going to know that you are "running hot". Obviously this has very little relevance in an uncapped or match the stack game.
He is right. Players with large stacks and a good image, (not going to showdown and showing down strong hands,) get called less often on the river. Earlier on streets it goes both ways in small stakes cash games. People want to play with big stacks for a chance to win a big pot. People also sometimes like to play weak hands against a short stack because a loss would be small. Bart is discussing how maximize profit against your average recreational player and is spot on. Notice that when you check your AA at the end with a strong image, it makes your image even better and more likely to successfully bluff on a later hand when you have no showdown value.
Right, I understand that you meant a large chip stack implied they had won a lot that session.
I’m saying if I deem a villain to be a good player I’m more likely to call their river bet because I know they’re capable of bluffing. In my experience rec players rarely bluff the river.
But I guess what you’re saying is most rec players are afraid of calling a good player’s river bet, which makes sense. Thanks.
So top of the chart is God-like. What should God do on the river?
Question regarding the first scenario. If the backdoor that came in on the turn were diamonds, would that reduce the frequency in which you bluff since villain would have fewer back door flush draws?
If the Queen was a Diamond, personally I would continue bluffing since we pick up equity.
Of course as you pointed out, since we have two Diamonds its less likely our opponent is going to have a draw and is slightly more likely to have a hand with showdown value, like a pair. Which we loose to if they call down.
However, since we specifically have J10 of Diamonds, I dont think its that consequential. On this board, after we c-bet the flop, I think our opponent would fold hands that connect with J10 of Diamonds. So I dont think our J10 of Diamonds blocks any draws our opponent might have. They may have a hand like 4/5 of Diamonds, or Ace/5 of Diamonds, but I dont think our J10 of Diamonds blocks any potential draws they may have backed into.
Suppose we had J10 of Spades, is our opponent calling a flop bet with a hand like AJ of Diamonds? That hand would pick up a lot of equity on the turn and continue to call, but I think all those hands that we block from picking up draws fold on the flop. Of course, its hard to say completely, adjust for your opponent if they are a station.
But if you start checking back instead of going for thin value too much people may start noticing then when you do start betting river you have less value
I almost don't want this video to go viral and let other players see it 🎯
I really like this format, as well as the cool graphics Bart. More of these mixed in with the call ins please.
This was another great video. I did particularly like the sudden close up of Bart in black and white really unexpected twist haha
Why dont you consider A9s?
Also have to worry about the 9 offsuit combos of A9 if villian is in late pos.
Not that it matters and i haven't watched past the point where you said that is unlikely that a 9 remains top pair by the river but aren't there are more cards lower than a 9 than higher, making it more likely than not to remain the highest card on the board?
That sort of makes sense if there is only one card to come, but there are 2 cards to come. And there is a 2 and a 3 removed from the possibilities of lower cards coming
@@RightFootForward11 there's 20 cards higher and 28 cards lower without considering removal and yes the 2 and 3 are removed from the lower range but Bart's J and 10 remove two from the upper range.
With two cards to come given the numbers it's more likely to be lower on both streets.
@@nobodybigger yeah, so it’s likely one will come that is higher. Even a 42% chance I would consider likely
@@RightFootForward11 true, I was just thinking that with it being more likely to be low it also gives the villain a better chance to hit 2 pair with random connected low cards that he's sticking around with after the flop.
Made a very good bluff against two players in a tournament and then showed it. Got called down the rest of the tournament. Image matters.
Awesome awesome
Very curious about bet sizing with image and these scenarios for sure!
Bart, you're like the Dan Carlin of poker :D
I love Dan Carlin, thank you. Wrath of the Khans and Ghosts of Ostfront for the win!
I'm having an extremely hard time understanding how you would absolutely bet A4 ans A5 but betting KK is too thin. Lmao. They are exactly the same thing bro. If he has an A, it's better than A4 A5 And if he doesnt, you win. So if youre betting A4 A5 here, you should be betting KK. That simple
CLP now releasing free podcast snippets. CLP has UA-cam videos up almost daily. Other than “training courses,” what are subscribers actually paying for?
This is the first time we have ever posted the podcast to a youtube video. The regular videos are never posted here. So basically everything that you get for a subscription is not posted here, to answer your question. --Bart
What if he has a set of nines though.
👍👍
How to make better poker decisions; Retire from cash games and stop playing poker for real money.
There are so many fishy clowns over valuing weak hands and in general playing "low valued" starting hands (at least in accordance with DAVID SKLANLSKY's book for Advance players) and hitting a piece of the flop nowadays, that today's game is far more about luck than skill.
Because lets face it, However good your starting hand is, however good of a flop you hit, even after getting your money in REALLY good, there is no guarantees that your opponent isn't going to hit one of his 2 outs, 3 outs or 4 outs by the river.
I don't even believe in the 'theory' of "Variances" balancing themselves out over the long haul nowadays neither. The only comfort you can really take from being beat by inferior players playing weak hands, is knowing that these guys who do over value hands such as K.J o/s and A.T o/s (and worse) pre flop and on the flop, are gonna end up as losing players over the long run.
"Remember, people have short memories." - Bart Hanson
This is too insightful to be free. I understand you generate interest from your free content (which leads to CLP subs) however based on your online collection of videos it is clear you know the material. In other words, the more CLP material you share for free - once your expertise is established- the less the return. If I was on the cusp of purchasing CLP material incentivize me to do that. Not to utilize all the free videos.