Nate Meyvis Premiere Series – Live Poker Hand History Review (Part 2)
[Total: 6 Average: 9.2/5]
You must sign in to vote
MORE IN THIS SERIES : Part 1 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5
Concepts In This Video: Bluffing • C-Betting • Early Stages • Hand Reading • High Stakes • Live Play • Live Poker • Live review • Post-flop • Power point • pre-flop • premier series • WSOP Main Event
sheasmith
Great video, really enjoying it! Quick question: Hand 3 / you say that it is unlikely that the villain played small flush draws (or straight draws) that missed this way on the turn. Would you expect that he would have bet these hands on the turn? Can you explain a little more about your thought process and the elements you considered in narrowing his range after the turn? Thanks
Nate
Thanks for the question!
Yes, I suspect that he would have bet those hands on the turn. A lot of players don’t let a street check through if they’re bluffing. That’s a pretty gross simplification and there are a lot of counterexamples to it, but for the most part, players are more eager to check behind (i) the stronger their draw is and (ii) the more showdown value they have. A hand like a gutshot fails both of those tests and I’d expect a bet from a lot of players if they got to the turn that way. A small flush draw would be a bit likelier to check.
Another aspect of my claim is simply that it’s not easy for such hands to call preflop and call the flop. Plenty of small suited and connected hands fold at one of those decision points.
ABP
I’ve been looking for live reviews, ty man! Looking forward to continue. Hand 3 – full house really? i was guessing A2suited
Quadzilla
In hand number 12, you mention one reason for not floating is seat 6’s erratic play; perhaps I missed it, but it seems the main reason for not floating is that you’re out-of-position vs. the villain, on the button. In hand no. 14, do you fold if the seven-seat shoves all-in, with the pair of fives on the board?
Quadzilla
You’re doing an admirable job, by the way, with a rather difficult task of analyzing live hands. If it’s possible, it would be helpful and interesting–perhaps at the conclusion of your series–if you could scan some of your live notes, and go over your process/technique of actual note taking, itself. Many thanks for your consideration.
Nate
Yeah, A2s would have made some sense (though could fold preflop). Not at all sure that I handled that situation well. Thanks for the comment!
Nate
Yeah, floating is easier in position, but if the price is right the price is right. Note that I’m not really defending the play, but I do think that if your call convincingly represents a good hand and if you’re getting a good price, floating OOP should be considered.
In hand 14, it’s hard to find a fold. On the one hand, the board was paired on the flop, so it’s somewhat more likely that he’d slowplay a full house. On the other hand, the board was paired on the flop, so threes full is unlikely (he’d have folded the flop, probably). Also not everyone will limp-call at that depth with 44 / 33. There are only four combinations of fours full and quads, and people sometimes spazz out for their last chips if they feel shortstacked (“what am I going to do with only 7800?,” they think, even if that’s plenty of chips). So I’d call, but wouldn’t be surprised to see threes full. Note that some people will play a hand like KcQc like this on every street, and figure that they can’t fold but don’t feel like check-calling it off with just one pair, so they just stick it in on the river.
Nate
Thanks so much!
In short: I keep a notebook in my breast pocket at the table. I have developed a shorthand; it’s not so hard to transcribe a hand if you have one-letter abbreviations for most things that happen. As soon as possible (at the end of the day or on the plane home) I transcribe everything into longhand; this helps me fill in some contextual stuff that I remember but didn’t get a chance to transcribe. Also, on dinner breaks etc. I make general notes about my reads and my opponents’ tendencies.
Carlos
At 56:00, you say that you go for the bigger river bet because you don’t think villain would call a smaller bet more than 8/3rds as often as the bigger bet. Can you elaborate on the math behind this statement?
Watching before day 2 of a circuit main event. This has been very helpful.
Nate
Thanks for the comment, Carlos! The 8/3 comment is just because I had discussed 3k as a possible smaller bet size a few seconds earlier. If my choices are between betting 3k and betting 8k, and if I’m always ahead or tied (and if I never get raised, etc.), I need to get called by a worse hand 8/3 as often for the 3k size as I do with the 8k size. Given that he is already getting 7:3 on a call, it seems hard for that to be true.
That said, there is at least the following argument in favor of the smaller bet size: a lot of his hands are likely to be marginal (medium pocket pairs, club draws that picked up a pair, etc.). Given that, it’s at least possible that a lot of his hands are right in that area that won’t want to turn down a very long price but will find a fold if they need to be ahead as much as 30% of the time.