Andrew Brokos Premiere Series – TPE Theory: Hand Reading (Part 2)

Posted

FavoriteLoadingSave for Later
Andrew Brokos Premiere Series – TPE Theory: Hand Reading (Part 2)
[Total: 83    Average: 8.5/5]

MORE IN THIS SERIES : Part 1 | Part 3 | Part 4

Concepts In This Video:

38 Responses to “Andrew Brokos Premiere Series – TPE Theory: Hand Reading (Part 2)”

  3. Nqon

    Great talk about bet-folding a strong hand on the 23KA4 threespade hand @43:50. I feel like all-thought a lot of this readless handreading is kinda basic/fundamental stuff, I haven’t seen it gone through in this well structured and well-paced way before and I’m really enjoying it! Great video! 10 stars. Looking forward to next part.

  4. Turbulence

    Great series. Love the ‘apparently’ simple method for reading pretty deep into a hand. Looking forward to how this could be used to exploite some common leaks as well as plug some.

  5. HTM

    21:55 You say its unlikely Hero has a set, so isnt it bit
    unlogical to add it on heros range on turn(24:30)? Im still gonna give you 10 for this great video but I thougt it was something worth saying.
    Or do I trust my earlier reads too much on later streets? 🙂

  6. Chuck Blaze

    I’m really enjoying the series as well. On the third hand I lump myself into the check call category for the Hero on the river there. Now with hands like AK, AQ, or even straights in those spots if I’m looking to bet for value am how often would i be folding to a reraise on the river?

  7. loxxii

    10:30 I disagree with shifting trip Ks to marginal when the spade turns because V5 is not likely to have spades. Only ATss+ make sense, but that wasn’t our read. We didn’t put spades in V5’s draws range on the flop, so I dont think we should put flushes in his monsters range on the turn.

    I know you want some constructive criticism on the production of the videos. I wish I had something for you, but they are both excellent.

  8. loxxii

    21:30 There are no full houses possible on the flop, so I assume you mean straights there. You left QQ and small pps out of V2 range on the flop unless you meant for small pps to be a part of whiffs which I would agree with.

    23:30 When the A turns, would JT and KT be considered marginal hands or air?

  9. mickman

    At 16.30, I don’t think V5 has flushes in his range because of his weak turn bet. A non-nut flush would bet more for value and to protect and i don’t really think the nut flush would bet that small either.

  10. gsiciliano

    Its very interesting to see how some lines become very crystal clear when, through hand-reading, you come to the conclusion that villain “cannot” have a specific category of hands. The way Andrew explains this concept is amazing and simple. Great video, again.

  11. xtremeungar

    Great job Foucalt!. I went over the first vid quite a few times and this one was an awesome one with the three examples. I agree and see pretty clear the first two examples but on the third one (I could be wrong of course) I am more inclined to check-call river. If we valuebet our top two is of course with the intention of folding to a river raise right? I just see lots of flushes in the guys range after he calls bets on flop and turn and I have top two on a board in which he could not have too much but that… Would like to hear your input in this thought? Please explain the advantages of betting over check calling the river on the AK hand. Also I wanted to comment that is very important for us subscribers to always looks at this great videos with a grain of salt considering the levels we play depending on which buy in levels we are etc. Great job Andrew and TPE Nation for bringing Foucalt on board!!

  12. xtremeungar

    After I raise 2.5x from UTG I don’t like his flat with K10o from UTG+1… hence my comment of which level we play etc. Might be best to bet river but just don’t see him calling on river with second pair weak kicker most of the time…Thanks for this great vids again Andrew

  14. Foucault

    Thanks for the feedback. Hope you’re enjoying the podcast as well.

    Do you mean on the river? In that case yes flushes would be marginal and 22 would be literally the only hand that couldn’t beat the board, so a little worse than marginal 😉

  15. Foucault

    Thanks for the feedback and the very nice rating.

    Unlikely =! never. My point at 24:30 wasn’t that sets were a significant part of Hero’s range, just that if he ever got to this point with them, they would now be marginal.

  16. Foucault

    Thanks, much appreciated. I would say trips is still marginal for Hero because he has so many stronger hands in his perceived range that if Villain is willing to give him heavy action, trips aren’t going to be in good shape. It’s something you need to be alert for with your marginal hands that sometimes, even though you’re way ahead of Villain’s range for seeing a particular street, you may not be ahead of his range for putting a lot of money into the pot on that street.

  17. Foucault

    Yeah I meant straights there. QQ should certainly be counted as a marginal hand. At the moment small pairs probably should be as well, they aren’t entirely without showdown value, against certain very loose and passive players I’d say the correct play with them would be just to try to check down, whereas the correct play with a whiff would be to make a small c-bet. Thanks for catching those omissions.

    When the A turns, JT and KT would be marginal. An air hand is one with little or no hope of winning at showdown, which I don’t think is true of two-pair here.

  18. Foucault

    I agree it’s unlikely but I wouldn’t rule them out entirely based on sizing alone. I’d want some more player-specific read about he sizes his bets before drawing such a strong conclusion.

  19. Foucault

    Thanks for the kind words. I wasn’t necessarily saying that betting AK is better than check-calling, just that it’s conceivable Hero could be doing that. I wouldn’t take it out of his range based on the fact that he’s betting. Whether or not it’s correct can easily vary depending on the opponent. Against more loose-passive player I’d say betting > checking because they will call often but rarely bluff. Against other types of players the opposite could be true.

  21. DaKid

    Really great series, my fav so far. Love the format of a theory video first and then applying it in the second with plenty of opportunity for us to practice the concept. Well done, keep them comin.

    One question, How are you using this hand reading technique in real time? Your obviously not using notepad each time so do you have the 3 different categories in your head and then putting hands in them as you go or are you doing it some other way. Any advice or shortcuts on how to do this in realtime?

  22. piefarmer

    I fat-fingered the rating and hit a low number by accident. Should be a 10.
    Third example was really good, as I just recently read “Calling is not a Compromise”. Great example of that concept as well as the hand reading system.
    I know it is early in the series, but at some level we have to consider pre-flop ranges. As close to a criticism as I could get.

  23. Foucault

    It’s not essential to keep track of which hands belong in which category – I was only doing that to give you an idea of what I meant by each category. The whole idea is that this is a simple method that doesn’t require you to track Villain’s entire range, just which of these three categories he can have. Often knowing that alone can lead to much better decisions even if you can’t keep track of all his different possible combos.

  24. Foucault

    Thanks, PF. You’re correct that pre-flop ranges matter, but they are harder to put into categories like this. As you’ll see, it mostly comes up in the sense that I’ll say something like “most of the possible monsters on this board are discounted because of the preflop action”.

  27. folding_aces_pre_yo

    hey Andrew, great video , was really good man! lol , Just wondering on the 1st example , why is it that V5 still had a range of monsters (full house) on the river? their sizing on the turn seemed pretty small so it seemed unlikely at that point that they’ll play a hand like trips king like this i.e. AK/KQ/KJ as they would want to get value from maybe weaker kings or flush draws. I guess at the same time we obv don’t know what their betting patterns indicate , so i guess it’s still possible that it’s in their range , but it’s a small part of their range that we are very much discounting?

    when we reach the river, v5 then checks , which kinda gives away the strength of their as it’s unlikely they’ll bet small ott and then check on the river with a full house there. so then we discounted the full house to be in their range. They could of had a flush in their range, but even then they prolly would of bet more ott to get value from weaker flushes and from a hand like trips K

    am i on the right tracks?

  28. folding_aces_pre_yo

    hey again, andrew on the 2ed example , don’t you think it’s possible that there’s still a possible chance for hero to be firing missed flush draws on the river? v checked back on the turn so as u mentioned it’s unlikely they’ll check back a straight there since they would want to get value from two pair/sets and flush draws.

    so yeah not only will hero be betting monsters/marginal hands for thin value but also i believe they may very well bet their missed flush draws?

  29. folding_aces_pre_yo

    lol ignore the comment above , u answered the question in your video :), basically if v was going to bet as a bluff on the river, it’s likely that they’ll make their sizing bigger.. Also it’s likely that V still has marginal hands in their range like sets and two pair type of hands so that’s also another reason as to why it’s unlikely that V will bet on the river as a bluff, and the odds they’ll be getting would be great to call either way!

    hmmm i’m sorta now thinking what IF hero thinks villain is capable of folding a set/two pair on the river? if hero bets pot on the river, what’s the chance’s that V will fold a hand like that? how often does our bluff need to be profitable to make this ev+ ….

    thanks again andrew 🙂

  31. The Riceman

    Hello Andrew well it looks like I am a coupla light years behind watching this here… just a quickie if you ever see this (anyone else feel free to answer)… at 37:36 or so you say that it “doesn’t make much sense betting i.e. tens in this spot, as you cannot make worse call”. But I would be inclined to rep that ace every time. You totally can make better fold. Just a thought, I probably missed some gem of wisdom why this is not a great line here. Peace.

  33. Comicrican

    I just saw myself in that last hand, I’m that person you described making the mistake of checking OOP w/ AK there. WOW! So many times I’ve done that but the way you’ve explained and built every street up makes some sense…still digesting. But thank you for this, gonna go back and watch it again!

  34. rvgas

    Awesome video Andrew! I saw HRpart1 two years ago, that is ultimately lead me to subscribe because it was nothing short of life changing. This practice was absolutely beyond anything I’ve seen in training material elsewhere.

    I do have one question. There were times you excluded bluffs from a villains range when I wouldn’t have, simply because some villains are capable of turning marginal hands that become nearly void of showdown into bluffs. For example, in the last example when you discuss betting AK for value you make the case that villain has no bluffs in his range, so bet/folding was a good line to take. I play games where people are very aggressive and bluff a lot. For this reason I think people DO call with weak K’s quite a bit, even when the A hits the turn (as was seen in this video), because there is so much air in hero’s range in these games. The problem is that I’ve seen many villains turn this weak K into a bluff because upon seeing hero check the river they fear they are behind but recognize the scare card nature of the spade on the river. They can bluff either by betting when checked to, or raising when bet to. They could do the same with hands as weak as pocket pairs from 66-QQ. This makes the check/call line very profitable. It also makes betting rather dangerous as hero can be forced off the hand in a won showdown where he can collect the pot, plus a potential bluff on the river. You gave one example of marginal hands becoming air/draw with the example of 33-44 on the counterfitted board, but I think it was glossed over a bit. I guess my point is that just because you can eliminate air/draws on one street doesn’t mean they can’t pop back in on later streets as relative hand strengths change, and in particular marginal hands can be turned into bluffs. Any feedback on my thought process there?

    Again, I am delighted with your series, they have helped me more than I can express, and it is a privilege that you take the time for the follow up questions from your audience. Huge fan, thank you Andrew!

  35. gary170764

    Luckily I dont multitable much but this is going to take some practice and I will have to rewatch this again – so glad you pointed out it will become easier and faster with practice i vote 10 ! thanks for pointing me towards this

  36. Filthy

    When the board KhJhTd and the river comes As, and you hold the Qh, you have the option of trying to force villain off of a chop. You can rep the nuts with a redraw. Villain can’t have the nuts and a redraw. You have to have the Qh to have that hand. So if you bet the turn and villain raises, you can shove. Then villain has to call and potentially give you a freeroll or fold the nuts to you. And if villain doesn’t have a straight, he’s very likely to check behind anyway.

  37. AJFocker

    Im an intermediate player trying to take my game up a notch. As Im going through this video, it’s hard for me to see the point. The information we have is severely limited, so this is a LOT of mind work to put in when it’s really mostly guessing. Against weaker players I could see it making a bit more sense, but more skilled players are going to be attempting to disguise their hands. So that adds another layer of guess work on top of what we already have on our plate. I’m just struggling to see the value and purpose in investing this much analysis when there are so many variables at play. It’s probably just me, though lol.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.