Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Your hosts talk about Nate’s new book as well as strategy from a limit hold ’em game and a heads up no-limit game.
Timestamps
0:30 – hello and welcome
15:08 – strategy
Strategy
Hand 1
30/60 Limit Hold ‘Em.
Hero opens K9o from the CO, BB calls.
Flop 884r. Check, bet, raise, call.
Turn 2r. Bet, call.
River J. Bet, call.
Hand 2
Seat 3: NateMeyvis (2336 in chips)
Seat 7: Villain (1416 in chips)
NateMeyvis: posts small blind 5
Villain: posts big blind 10
HOLE CARDS
Dealt to NateMeyvis [Td 8s]
NateMeyvis: raises 15 to 25
Villain: calls 15
FLOP [Kc Qh 5d]
Villain: checks
NateMeyvis: bets 32
Villain: calls 32
TURN [Kc Qh 5d] [Ac]
Villain: checks
NateMeyvis: bets 175
Villain said, “wtf?”
Villain: calls 175
RIVER [Kc Qh 5d Ac] [4d]
Villain: checks
NateMeyvis: checks
A really enjoyable show – I just wish it had gone on twice as long as it did.
In Nate’s hand, you passed over his opponent’s ‘wtf?’ as an incidental part of the hand, but I actually think that comments of this nature in an online environment can be very revealing, and very much worthy of consideration.
It takes a reasonable amount of effortful action, not to mention conscious decision making, to click into the chat box, write something and then hit send, all while you are also pondering your next move as the action timer ticks down – it’s very different in this regard to a seemingly similar expression of bewilderment in a brick-and-mortar environment, where it can be quite easy for a comment to inadvertently slip out your opponent’s mouth as he reacts to something.
Look at it this way: if your opponent is actually thinking to himself “what the fuck?” and is confused about what to do next, it’s not all that likely that he’s going to break off from his deliberations to write things in the chat box – he’s going to be focused on what the right play is. And if he genuinely has a dilemma and doesn’t know what to do, then the last thing he will want to do is let you know what a tricky spot he’s in. It’s not impossible that he’s hoping to elicit a reaction from you to give him an indication of what to do but I don’t think it’s hugely likely.
More likely is that he’s doing it as a deliberate play (as I say, typing in the chat box is a much more deliberate and effortful action than making a spoken comment) in the hope of inducing a further bluff, if you are indeed bluffing. An overbet like this looks pretty polarising and if your opponent has a bluff-catcher kind of hand then it’s in his interests to induce the bluffing part of your range to put more money into the pot. Equally, if he has the nuts, or something close to it, then he will likely do the same for much the same set of reasons (in that way, it can be a classic “weak means strong” tell).
Essentially, whether villain has a bluff-catcher or a nutty hand (or something in between), when he makes a comment like ‘wtf?’ I think he very often has a hand that he has decided is too good to fold at any point against your range, and therefore wants to look weaker than he is so that you put more money in when you’re losing.
Which does of course mean that Nate made exactly the right play by checking on the river!
Agreed – a really good show – but let’s be honest, they’re all pretty awesome for different, and sometimes recurring reasons. With that in mind, I’ll put a vote out there for another Andrew, Nate, Gareth, Carlos “chat it up” casual show at some point. Maybe with one or two interesting strategy hands each? Who knows what fun could come out of that.
And at the risk of sounding a little too complimentary – I’m also digging the outside podcast content. Vol 6 of Andrew’s diaries was really good, reminding me to go back and get a few more of these. And I’m really looking fwd to settling down with Nate’s ebook on the WSOP tournament hands too. Thanks and keep it up 🙂
Thanks, glad you’re enjoying!