CORE lesson clarification: Doug Hull podcast

mbecks83mbecks83 Red Chipper Posts: 76 ✭✭
Hello all. Used to post a couple years ago but been on a hiatus. Back now and working through CORE.

In the Postflop II: "When not to c-bet" lesson, there is an excerpt of a Doug Hull podcast. At the end there is a part which I ended up transcribing, then badgered Kat in the comments section to the point where she turned me to the forums to get an answer.

This is the excerpt, with Dough talking about letting the board texture define your value and bluff ranges.
"This is a board with a flush draw but no reasonable two pair and no reasonable straight draws.

Because of that I am going to have a lot of flush draws in my bluffing range, so I don't need to dig deep and start betting the protection bets nearly as much as I do on a dry board. I don't have a lot of two-pair so that means as far as value hands go, I'm probably going to go a little bit deeper on top pair and pick up maybe one worse kicker than I would on a dry board.

So if you really understand a couple of baseline flops...then you can determine what new things are going to turn up in your value range what things are disappearing from your bluffing range based on those baselines."

The two points Doug makes sounded so alien to me at first, in the sense that:
1) I kinda thought that on a flush draw board we should usually bet single pair hands.. for protection if anything.
2) Having more two-pair hands in our range wouldn't suddenly stop us betting our top pair hands.

Since then the clouds have lifted slightly and I dimly see what's being said. If you look at this through the lens of range shape/balance and value:bluff combos, you'd get an interpretation more like:

1) On a flush draw board we don't need any weak pair hands in our bluff/semibluff range because that range is already padded out nicely with our own flush-draws. (In fact, betting these hands will leave us in a bloated pot with weak holdings and betting them for value is probably too thin). Conversely, on a dry board we can add these weaker/protection holdings to our bluff range, partly because that bluff range is now emptier as it cannot contain any flush draws.

2) Having more reasonable two-pairs in our value range means we don't need quite so many top pairs. In practice this means we might still bet some top pairs but draw the line somewhere on the kickers. In the opposite situation, when have fewer likely two-pairs in our value range, we pad it out by adding more kickers to our top-pair hands.

As you can see I still don't understand it well enough to summarize it succinctly, so would appreciate any input.

Comments

  • TheGameKatTheGameKat Posts: 2,073 -
    You didn't badger me, the points you raised were sufficiently interesting I felt they deserved a wider airing. Incidentally, I do have long flowing hair, but I'm technically male.

    Maybe @Doug Hull could leap in here.
    Moderation In Moderation
  • mbecks83mbecks83 Red Chipper Posts: 76 ✭✭
    Appreciate the clarification on both points!

    That podcast is huge for me. I found the full transcript and am still digesting it all, but it's already opened me to new ways of thinking about classifying hands and range construction.

    So yep it would be good to get some other views - though I appreciate the timing with WSOP etc.
  • TheGameKatTheGameKat Posts: 2,073 -
    mbecks83 wrote: »
    Appreciate the clarification on both points!

    That podcast is huge for me. I found the full transcript and am still digesting it all, but it's already opened me to new ways of thinking about classifying hands and range construction.

    So yep it would be good to get some other views - though I appreciate the timing with WSOP etc.

    Right it does produce a bit of a lag since so many team members are out of the office.
    Moderation In Moderation
  • Doug HullDoug Hull RCP Coach Posts: 1,756 -
    Your restating is fair. Well done for really absorbing what is out there!
    Co-founder Red Chip Poker,
    Author Poker Plays You Can Use
    Author Poker Workbook for Math Geeks
  • mbecks83mbecks83 Red Chipper Posts: 76 ✭✭
    Appreciate it, thanks Doug. My learning arc on this has gone from "is he even talking about poker?!" to "aah makes sense, what's next". Cheers :smile:

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file