I’m confused why you bet hamfam in the hand where the other guy was eliminated. Surely in that particular hand the main objective is to knock out the all-in and get to heads up. So either hamfam winning or you is a good outcome. Raising on a draw and making hamfam fold seems a strange play, sure you lucked out and hit the river but odds where way better to bust the other guy if you’d checked and kept hamfam in the hand. I get that in this hand he was at almost nothing so was really unlikely to mount a comeback, but I see people do this all the time on PokerStars VR and I just don’t get it.
It’s heads up, he only had 25 chips in the pot, regardless if he won the hand or not i would still get the side pot of her buy-in, which would put me in a positive position. Odd.. Maybe but strategical.
@@uhSublime I understand the side pot existed and was what you were contesting with hamfam, I’m saying that the true point of that hand is the opportunity to cut the number of opponents from two to one, that is golden. But by actively creating and contesting a side pot you were putting the main point of that particular hand, i.e. knocking jbyers out, at risk. By semi-bluffing hamfam to get her to fold you give jbyers a lifeline, he only has to beat one opponent rather than two, increasing his equity, and at the time you were doing it your hand was not particularly strong (you were semi bluffing on a draw). If you hadn’t caught the jack to hit the straight on the river, jbyers would still be in the game, tripled up (though granted still not strong, but surely we all have stories of coming back to win from that chip level), whereas checking it down with with hamfam essentially teams up both your equity to knock jbeyers out. If you’ve got the nuts or near nuts I can understand - try to get as much from the hand as possible. It’s hard to write this and not make it sound critical, but I’m really not trying to be. Explaining the nuance of what I mean is pretty hard and I think it might come across as critical. Apologies if it does. I am genuinely just trying to have a respectful strategy discussion. I get that in this instance jbyers is basically chip dead anyway, but as I said I see people do this all the time on PokerStars, when the all-in has like 100 and would be right back in the game with a tripling up win. Then one of the other two treats it like a regular heads-up hand thereafter and starts bluffing (or semi-bluffing, or betting very thin value), leading to the other folding and the all-in getting a soft easy win.
Loved the different camera angle 👍
I love these videos! They help me learn how to play and get better
nice vid keep it up love what you do
How do you record in PokerStars VR. I can’t record with my camera and I don’t even know where to start with the table overlay
It’s the PC version
How did you just point your midle finger
Hand tracking
I’m confused why you bet hamfam in the hand where the other guy was eliminated.
Surely in that particular hand the main objective is to knock out the all-in and get to heads up. So either hamfam winning or you is a good outcome. Raising on a draw and making hamfam fold seems a strange play, sure you lucked out and hit the river but odds where way better to bust the other guy if you’d checked and kept hamfam in the hand.
I get that in this hand he was at almost nothing so was really unlikely to mount a comeback, but I see people do this all the time on PokerStars VR and I just don’t get it.
It’s heads up, he only had 25 chips in the pot, regardless if he won the hand or not i would still get the side pot of her buy-in, which would put me in a positive position. Odd.. Maybe but strategical.
@@uhSublime I understand the side pot existed and was what you were contesting with hamfam, I’m saying that the true point of that hand is the opportunity to cut the number of opponents from two to one, that is golden. But by actively creating and contesting a side pot you were putting the main point of that particular hand, i.e. knocking jbyers out, at risk. By semi-bluffing hamfam to get her to fold you give jbyers a lifeline, he only has to beat one opponent rather than two, increasing his equity, and at the time you were doing it your hand was not particularly strong (you were semi bluffing on a draw).
If you hadn’t caught the jack to hit the straight on the river, jbyers would still be in the game, tripled up (though granted still not strong, but surely we all have stories of coming back to win from that chip level), whereas checking it down with with hamfam essentially teams up both your equity to knock jbeyers out. If you’ve got the nuts or near nuts I can understand - try to get as much from the hand as possible.
It’s hard to write this and not make it sound critical, but I’m really not trying to be. Explaining the nuance of what I mean is pretty hard and I think it might come across as critical. Apologies if it does. I am genuinely just trying to have a respectful strategy discussion. I get that in this instance jbyers is basically chip dead anyway, but as I said I see people do this all the time on PokerStars, when the all-in has like 100 and would be right back in the game with a tripling up win. Then one of the other two treats it like a regular heads-up hand thereafter and starts bluffing (or semi-bluffing, or betting very thin value), leading to the other folding and the all-in getting a soft easy win.