Neil's 100NL Session Review

This video is a two minute preview. To view the entire video, please sign in or Sign Up Now!

Jan 11th, 2012
Neil Gewirtz
Small Stakes
Teaching Method:
Replayed Hands
6 Max
(5 Ratings) 7.40

Neil reviews a few interesting hands to discuss from his most recent 100NL session.

More From Neil Gewirtz  Get RSS Feed For Neil Gewirtz's Videos


  • NeilGewirtz NeilGewirtz Bluefire Pro Poker Apprentice
    231 Posts
    Neil's 100NL Session Review
    12 Jan 2012 at 1:15am
    Discussion for Neil's 100NL Session Review.
  • Jimbozgrapes Jimbozgrapes Poker Prodigy
    345 Posts
    Re: Neil's 100NL Session Review
    12 Jan 2012 at 7:40am

    Hey Neil, good video and I had questions on two of the hands.

    10/8dd at around 11:30. Isn't this a perfect iso hand pre-flop vs a poster/limper? OOP its a hand that you are going to be able to barrel a ton of flops, and just raise c-bet a lot and take it down, where as just checking, you can get yourself into some difficult situations vs a completely random range, plus you don't have the pre-flop lead with a very nice flopping/barreling hand. You didn't even mention isolating pre so I wanted to just confirm that this was indeed a good spot to iso? Seems like it plays a lot better and you make more money doing it that way.

    Next hand was QQ at around 43:00. I just can't help but feel you played this hand really weird. Pre, if this guy is never folding, and I think the raise size was perfect, and should have been mentioned. I dunno if this is 100% standard raise size, but 5 seems to big, and 3.50-4.00 seems normal, but vs this guy you want max value obviously since he is a huge fish.

    I just can't help but feel the turn decision to check was wrong. You don't mention his raising tenancies, but since he is a huge calling station I can only assume he is mostly calling with draws, and not raising them. We can clearly see his range is very very wide, and I think he can call with many many worse hands on the turn that are just abysmal to let go check check. Again, I am going to assume that this guy is passive, and checks back his draws more often than not, but he is pretty much always calling with A/2, A/3, A/4, 6/3, 6/4, 3/4, any two diamonds, any pocket pair 22-88 (assuming he raises 99+ pre at minimum) and any 2/3, 2/4. I think this range outweighs his 10's that you can c/r and get it in vs, so I feel like you are gaining more value over-all by betting here, and there is no gaurantee you even get it in vs a 10, but I do think you get value on the turn from all of his drawing/showdown hands that aren't going to bet as much.

    If your plan was to c/r, then all of those hands that would call a bet but fold to a raise you get the same value from if he calls (just that he obviously gets to see a river) but I think that outweights the times where it goes c/c and he just relinquishes all of his value for free. The other thing is its really hard to get value on the river from anything we beat. We either check and hope he bluffs here, or bet and try to get value from a really small part of his range (any 2, or small pp). Then our line basically is bet flop, check turn, check river, which is super weak imo concidering our hand vs his range.

    Even if he folds a hand like K/J here we aren't really that upset to get rid of his low equity, but I think trying to squeeze out an extra bet from this guy by a broadway hand is just to ambitious compared to all the free equity we are giving his range.

    Having bet the turn, I would then pretty well check call any river, as said he has a ton of draws, and will most likely turn these into bluffs, or at least never call a bet. I think he has more air in his range on brick rivers than show-down hands, so c/c is more likely the right line. On non-bricks we don't want to get raised, and he still has lots of missed draws, and may even bet worse just because he is a fish, so c/c is still pretty manditory on pretty well all rivers, possibly not Ad depending on bet sizing.

    I just think the problem in the logic here was saying air is the vast majority of his range, where I don't really think it is. If he is a calling station, and is more on the passive side, (which it seems he is) I really beleive we need to bet for value/protection on the turn. I just don't think he turns his hands into bluffs enough in this spot, and calls with tons of worse hands that are very bad to let check. I also think his air hands on the turn don't bet a high enough % of the time anyways compared to the free equity you give him, and he may even raise a 10 some % of the time so we can still get max value from a 10 anyways.

    Ill just say I rarely play cash game, so lmk if I am an idiot haha. However, I do kind of think I am somewhat on track with this one being played wrong.

  • NeilGewirtz NeilGewirtz Bluefire Pro Poker Apprentice
    231 Posts
    Re: Neil's 100NL Session Review
    13 Jan 2012 at 2:57am
    Regarding the T8s I generally take flops from the bb with weaker/marginal hands, and prefer not to raise hands that arent more clearly for value without any information about my opponent's limp (post) folding tendencies. I dont consider this an iso spot, (though I have heard others use refer to it as such) because it is already a hu pot, and whatever you want to call it, my play here is a bit different than if other players will act after me. Since I am already hu with the poster one of the large benefits of aggression, knocking other players out of the pot to get hu with a weaker opponent, no longer applies making the play less attractive to me, unlike in a similar spot such as having the same hand in the sb or otb with the same poster where I would prefer a raise.
  • NeilGewirtz NeilGewirtz Bluefire Pro Poker Apprentice
    231 Posts
    Re: Neil's 100NL Session Review
    13 Jan 2012 at 3:27am
    In the QQ hand my opponent wasn't folding flops at all. With this players large vpip and small fold to cbet tendencies I expected my opponent to have some small pairs, and the straight, and flush draw hands you mention in his range, but also have far more combos of hands like J3s, 97o, Q8o etc. so his range is extremely wide on the turn with much more in it than reasonable hands such as pairs and draws. As I said I did expect this opponent to bluff his air on the turn, as well as draws, as I would describe him as a "bets when checked to" type fish, as opposed to other fish who may be more passive postflop. I will also add that this villain was extremely stubborn, which I didnt explicitly say in the video, but this is why I expected to stack random T's in villains range, and I actually expected b/c's from my opponents draws as opposed to b/f's. Your line is much more standard and correct vs the majority of villains with the tendencies you outlined, but my judgement was that my opponent in the video was not such a villain.
  • Jimbozgrapes Jimbozgrapes Poker Prodigy
    345 Posts
    Re: Neil's 100NL Session Review
    13 Jan 2012 at 4:44am
    Okay thanks for clearing that up about the Q/Q hand, as I said it did seem weird to me. Regarding the 10/8 hand I guess I forgot what the meaning of ISO was :P . You could probably lead into him with all draws/good backdoor equity and barrel anyways without raising pre. Yeah, I was pretty much just thinking this was a perfect ISO hand, and it is, and you agree, but we were all ready heads up haha =D. Thanks for the response!
  • pokani pokani Poker Newbie
    5 Posts
    Re: Neil's 100NL Session Review
    3 Feb 2012 at 2:01pm
    sry wrong rating...misclick... video is great
  • derrickkwa derrickkwa Poker Newbie
    2 Posts
    Re: Neil's 100NL Session Review
    19 May 2012 at 10:20am
    With the KQs hand around 22 mins, you mention that squeezing could be better. Why is it better? I'd think you dominate a lot of the limpers' limp/calling range (a bunch of QT/QJ/etc) hands and don't really have to worry too much about RIO (AQ+/QQ+ make up very little of their ranges). You also have a hand that plays post flop decently OOP (not very many marginal situations post flop I think?) and SPR < 1 against the two short stacks. So, I don't know, personally I agree with the flat here. Also it's suited and you easily get paid from worse flush draws if you hit that. One last thing about that. If you squeeze and one of the short stacks ship, are you calling a ship? (this is one of my biggest problems, I think, not really knowing when to call a short stack ship)

You must be logged in to post comments. Take a minute to sign up if you don't yet have an account.