Are people really doing this?
I watched a Hungry Horse video where he has a lot of suggestions to over bet the flop, over bet the turn and jam the river with bluffs. For example, with a 200BB stack he opens on the button with Kd5d and gets called by the BB. The flop comes As9h5c. It gets checked to him and he suggests playing an over bet or check strategy. He decides to over bet with this because he thinks his opponent won't fast play big hands on this board and the K and 5 block some of those big hands. He is targeting hands like AJ and below that will call the flop, call the turn and fold the river.
This all makes sense but are people really doing this? Is this more of a higher limit thing? Are you folks doing this? This seems like quite a high variance way to play. Perhaps it's absolutely the right play. Maybe this is more of a don't try this at home play unless you absolutely know what you are doing. It seems people may catch on to what he is doing and call down more. Maybe this makes him more money on his good hands.
I really like his videos and I've learned a lot. Plays like this seem scary to me. It must just suck when the villain rivers two pair.
10 Replies
The answer is no, people are not doing this at all. And if you think that means you shouldnt be doing it, you need to understand the concept of non reciprocal play.
There is one and only one thing that makes you money in the long term in poker, and its playing your hand differently than other players. If all players played identically, then everyone would have the same odds of winning, and your edge is derived ENTIRELY via your decision being different than your opponent if roles were reversed.
I got this concept from this book (i actually thought i did from one of his youtube videos but i dont see one on the concept). Its nothing groundbreaking, but a great book on some more basic concepts explained very well.
Overbet 3-barelling as a bluff is not a good idea at low stakes live. Too many will call down regardless.
After watching the HH videos, I've recently started using an over-bet or check strategy as the PFR on ace-high boards.
I haven't been 100% consistent with it though, mostly when I think there's good reason to deviate, such as when I've got the board crushed with AK on AAXrb or ATss on a board like Ah9s8s. I think those are situations where we can bet small or check back.
Also, I'll sometimes check or bet small in situations where I think Mark might suggest an over-bet, like when I flop middle set on an ace-high board with a big PP, like KK/QQ on AK2rb or AQ3rb.
I wouldn't over-bet with weak AX in spots where our opponents are likely to show up with better AX on draw-heavy boards. I would check instead, and play weak AX as a bluff catcher.
I think the nuance in the strat comes from knowing when to check back, and what hands can over-bet with or without an ace. I'd rather have K9 on A95 than K5, but that may be splitting hairs.
It feels weird to over-bet AX on A72rb. Less weird on AT7cc.
I think Mark is right that many opponents won't fast play 77/22 on A72rb, but I doubt opponents are going to want to continue with 88-JJ as often when we over-bet the flop. I think opponents may be more likely to fast play TT/77 on AT7cc, and more likely to chase their draws.
It's much harder to fast play 77 on A72r because it's much more difficult to balance, and so we're either always nutted or always blasting off with air.
77 on AT7cc has roughly 666 draws to balance.
As for OP, some of the HH advice seems almost trolly without a decent amount of context. Also be careful that his idea of low stakes seems to be 2-5-10 games that often run double board bomb pots. So when he makes a bunch of assumptions about how/when players "always" raise good hands, those might not apply in your 1-2 games at all.
As for OP, some of the HH advice seems almost trolly without a decent amount of context. Also be careful that his idea of low stakes seems to be 2-5-10 games that often run double board bomb pots. So when he makes a bunch of assumptions about how/when players "always" raise good hands, those might not apply in your 1-2 games at all.
I think this is a really important caveat. Also the conditions of so many of the hand histories from those videos are extremely rare at live low stakes. A HU SRP BTN vs BB where both players are at least 200bb deep? Feel like I can count on one hand how many of those hands I've played in the last year at 1/2.
That said I really like the videos and think they are helpful and stimulating to watch. They get me thinking about poker in a different way and have helped a few aspects of my game. But, at the same time, I think mis-applying the Hungry Horse strategy could be be an awful, awful mistake for the average live low stakes player.
I think this is a really important caveat. Also the conditions of so many of the hand histories from those videos are extremely rare at live low stakes. A HU SRP BTN vs BB where both players are at least 200bb deep? Feel like I can count on one hand how many of those hands I've played in the last year at 1/2. That said I really like the videos and think they are helpful and sti
I agree these are quality videos.
I can't imagine how sick I would feel jamming in 200 BB's with a bluff and getting called by a stubborn player with top pair or a player who sucked out on the river. That being said I suppose that is the power of making this play since most people don't want to put in 200 BB's with just top pair. Also, I would think people would catch on to this strategy and maybe call down more. That being said, even if they knew your strategy do they have the balls to put it all in?
It's much harder to fast play 77 on A72r because it's much more difficult to balance, and so we're either always nutted or always blasting off with air.77 on AT7cc has roughly 666 draws to balance.As for OP, some of the HH advice seems almost trolly without a decent amount of context. Also be careful that his idea of low stakes seems to be 2-5-10 games that often run double boa
This is the issue I am having learning this game. I'm finding myself having to parse out the context of what is being taught. I've watched videos where I didn't realize the pre flop charts were based on a non raked game. I've watched vids were they talk about an UTG range but fail to mention it's a 6 max game or they are talking about tournament play. When he was talking about making 100/hr at low stakes I initially thought he was talking 1/2 or 1/3.
I do sometimes because of things like this: "Plays like this seem scary to me." It's scary for Vs too and that's why it can work. Note that for this strategy to really shine you need a few variables first:
1: All players need to be deep - 200bb minimum. Overbets become much more powerful in deep games. If you are at a casino where most people have 100bb or even less, a lot of Mark's strategies go out the window.
2: The V's need to be good enough at poker to have a fold button. Which if they are over 200bb deep and aren't just donkey sunrunning they probably do. At $1/$2 or $1/$3 you'll probably have fewer opportunities to use overbets effectively.
I think with many of these poker videos, getting the strategic idea is far more important than the details. If you get the concept, you can then look for opportunities to apply it to your game against your Vs. For example, if Vs in your game are going to call your jam with one pair, well then in your game you should be jamming with TPTK and better a lot. And I've been in games where I can 3x or even 4x pot on A95r and someone would call me with AJ. Don't bluff that player. But if you know they are going to do that, bet much larger and more frequently for thinner value. It's amazing how many people at $1/$2 or $1/$3 will call down light. So while running a "big boy bluff" might not be advisable if they are willing to call the big flop bet, jamming for value certainly is if they are calling light.
The most important part of poker is being able to read the table and have a sense of what others are doing. Any strategy is going to be good at some table somewhere. The trick is figuring out the best strategy to exploit the particular players you are playing today. To that end, I think working in some of these big boy bluffs, understanding the concept of capping the V and being able to determine whether V is capped or overly passive, and overbetting for value and/or bluffs are all very useful strategies to have in your tool belt. I wouldn't blindly apply them to every game.
Sometimes you'll find people in the game are overly sticky to overbets and then you can value bet like crazy. Other games people will be overly nitty and fold everything but the literal nuts and you can bluff like crazy. Yes, it feels really gross when you make a huge overbet and you get snapped off by the nuts which were slowplayed because somehow the V didn't see there was two flush draws and straight draws so they flatted with top set all the way down. But getting over that fear will make you a much scarier opponent.
I think the most valuable piece of advice from HH is to invert your thinking. "If I had the nuts on this river, would I expect to get paid if I jam?" If you wouldn't because you think V would fold too often, then it's a bluffing opportunity. "If I had a bluff on this river, how much would I bet to make sure they fold?" If you think they'd call an all-in too often to bluff, then jam your value. Thinking that way is efficient and it helps you test your assumptions and refine your bluffing and value betting strategy for your particular player pool.
Villain basically needs to fold two pairs to be making a mistake against someone blasting off like 30 times the initial pot.
As far as extreme exploits go, Iād rather just bet air like 1/4p and make it a mistake to fold a K-high BDFD.
