The Top Five Poker Myths That Cost You Money

[@karlinchina]

Great advice on the flush draws! I think a more basic lesson is also useful -- using Flopzilla or something, look at what percentage of the time your opponent has a flush draw on a two tone flop, even assuming the play most suited hands. I think people way overestimate (by a factor of three or so) the proportion of their opponents range that has a flush draw.

[@coachjoel23]

Thanks Karl, couldn’t agree more.

[@goatboy-l3d]

Excellent video! Clear and logical. Understanding equity is not easy. Your explanation in #1 should save people money, but a lot of people will not understand it and continue to make bad calls.

[@coachjoel23]

Thanks, yea there’s been a decent amount of push back on the big blind pot odds one. Probably because it’s fun to gamble from the big blind with trash.

[@juliapardieutroyer9993]

Nice, well reasoned examples of seeing the forest from the trees. Particularly appreciate the flush visual. Not only is their chance of flush lower than feels at times, they could have other hands we may be distracted away from considering. Same situation with the "AK" assumption.

[@coachjoel23]

Glad you found it helpful. Yes the flush draw is a bit of an optical illusion, and we overestimate its importance because of how visual it is.

[@geraldinepeckham3667]

Hilariously true. Thanks for the entertainment. Just subscribed. Looking forward to future pearls of wisdom.

[@coachjoel23]

Thanks and welcome to the channel! This was a fun one to make - Live poker is often hilarious like you said.

[@BigTexidor]

Listen. Accomplished PRO here. In a deep 6+ handed game of NLH. There is absolutely a purpose to bet to see where you are. In one spot specifically, it's a huge equity earner. It's absolutely beneficial to make a range bet when checked to while heads up on a flop that was 3-bet preflop. About 25-35 percent bet will make people raise you with their best hands on a wet board. They will call you with their weak hands that have something to them. Middle pair, top pair weak kicker, naked straight draw, etc. Even on a single raised pot in position heads up, same thing, but use 40-50% pot size bet for same effect. If the turn bricks you can extract a ton of value on the turn and push them off on the river. Call a bet, and watch them try to bluff the river to a huge reraise from you to push them off. If it's a nut changer on the turn, just repeat the flop tactic if the villain range is uncapped. They'll do the same thing. If capped, go with a big 2x+ bet if they check or a huge 4-6x raise if they bet. This is making a big assumption that you are not doing this against a seasoned pro.

[@coachjoel23]

Interesting strategy. It still sounds like equity denial and value betting are at the core of these strategies. Betting for information in a vacuum without a value or equity denial-based benefit is what myth #4 takes issue with.

[@GregHouston-ix3zh]

Great content. Thanks for sharing.. was very insightful

[@coachjoel23]

Glad you liked it, hope you enjoy future videos too!

[@theowl3756]

Excellent Video..! Well reasoned and well presented. Thank you for not starting the video with some dumb music or some dumb graphics. I have been playing poker and watching poker videos for many years. This is one of the very best.

[@coachjoel23]

Thanks, glad you enjoyed it. I'll do my best not to include dumb music or dumb graphics in future videos but everyone has their off-days.

[@BonesawPoker]

All the major poker sites teach the same things. They have you way overvalue a pair. Pocket pair, top pair or third pair, they want you to pile chips in because its a "made hand". As if you are getting called by someone with bottom pair or ace high.

[@coachjoel23]

I can’t speak to the content you’ve watched, but PTO Poker has a very different approach from this.

[@BonesawPoker]

@coachjoel23 Cool! I think that a different approach from those other sites is a good idea. It took me quite awhile to figure that out on my own.

[@againstthestate]

2:00 Well first of all, a lot of the time you are going to be dealing with really loose ranges. But even under the parameters you stated, it is not at all clear that getting 13.5:2 w/ 15.888% is worse than getting 4.5:2 with 32.786% (QT vs 10% open) assuming 3x open. 4.5:2 is ofc 2.25:1 so the break even point is 30.769% I calculate a 6.5% edge on the action here (3.25 * .30769) 6.75:1 has a break even point of 12.9% I calculate a 23% edge on the action here (7.75 * 0.15888) Now I'm not saying that we can use preflop equity to make call or fold decisions, but to the degree that we can, it would appear that QT prefers the latter scenario. Furthermore, we have a lot of potential implied odds. We're only putting in 2 bb pre, and the pot is going to be huge already. If we do manage to flop a big hand, we are likely to get paid with so many players in the pot. What's more, often in live poker you are dealing with whale ranges, especially at lower stakes. So input some fish and whale ranges like 5%-50% and 5%-70%, and now QT has 19% equity in a 5 way pot. Ultimately, this might be a problem that needs to be solved with simulation.

[@coachjoel23]

Thanks for running the numbers. I do think in the multiway scenario, reverse implied odds are a big factor any time you hit top pair. In addition, equity realization will be worse in the multi-way scenario than the heads up scenario because of all the players in the field that can bet and raise. If you assume that you'll only realize about 2/3 of your equity from out of position and without the initiative (and likely even less than this multi-way), the numbers you show above swing pretty quickly. Granted, if you are in a very soft lineup where people are making huge post-flop mistakes, you can break the rules, but people often overestimate how well they'll be able to exploit this from out of position.

[@chrisowen3878]

I bet for information all the time, using sizes to both filter and shape villains range. I do this exploitatively in low stakes games. Let me give you an example: We arrive at the turn with an uncapped range, villain has called a raise pre and called on the flop. A 3rd flushing card appears We bet half pot: We choose this size as villains will be unbalanced and fold/call their weak hands and raise their strong hands. - if villain calls - we can be certain he almost never has a flush as in lower stakes live cash games this is where recs will reveal the strength of their hand, we can then setup river for a big juicy overbet or a jam - if villain raises - we get the hell out of dodge! So yes, betting for information is absolutely fine against unbalanced players.

[@coachjoel23]

Nothing wrong with this as these are targeted value bets. The bets I warned against are those that are primarily for information and not related to value or equity denial. Hungry Horse would approve of your strategy ;)

[@David-rf6bk]

Great video!

[@coachjoel23]

Thanks!

[@laurencechen1111]

Matheus #2 is an excuse from nisso who are waiting for AA or KK. They don't like how the game becomes super aggressive preflop and flop. Bad or losing players always avoid short table games. They will always find an excuse and claim to be a good player.

[@coachjoel23]

6-max live poker would be awesome. But then again maybe a lot of players would stop playing.

[@roupenohanian5652]

I hate suited cards and paired boards .The flush very rarely comes and the paired board is three of a kind or full house .

[@coachjoel23]

Flushes on paired boards can be tricky for sure.

[@Fixundfertig1]

When Phil Hellmuth jammed he really had blockers, he had the nuts 😂

[@coachjoel23]

It all makes sense now…

[@Fixundfertig1]

@coachjoel23 I don't think Doug would call though but Phil might have a better chance if he said that he was trying to find where was he at instead of saying that he has blockers, but I don't know 😂

[@etherjoe505]

Great video !! AK all day all the time. And very interesting point on BB completing action.

[@coachjoel23]

Thanks, it’s as if a whole book could be written about just AK ;)

[@sevenfootman6808]

Dueces never loses

[@Rancher-oh7ew]

Well done! Your future is bright.👍

[@coachjoel23]

Thanks, I hope you keep enjoying the content!

[@paulmaier6305]

nothing to say but THANK YOU.

[@coachjoel23]

You’re welcome, hope it helps!

[@stewiegriffin6503]

pot control , pot control, pot control

[@coachjoel23]

Sometimes!

[@NathanHamer-bh2ti]

I think i understand myth #3 but am still a little confused… if your opponents range is concentrated towards large-draws/combo-draws, wouldn’t you want to get all the due equity from those big draws while you still can (i.e., before they’re equity diminishes on the turn)? Are they not often likely to fold to a bigger compensating bet on the turn due to their now lower equity? And are their top-of-range value hands not just gonna let you value-own yourself on your big turn bet which is originally purposed to get those now low-equity draws to make mistakes (and when that low-equity part of their range does make mistakes w/ turn shoves, are they not still polarized w/ their value which were trying to avoid losing big money to, how would u differentiate between these parts of their range on the turn)? And if you size smaller on wet flops, are you not just as prone to losing money to those two-pairs and sets when they check-raise to polarize and you have to call because of their polarized range? I’m just having trouble understanding how going smaller on the flop and bigger on the turn reduces chances of losing money to those top-of-range value hands, as don’t you eventually (i.e., either with a big bet on the flop or big bet on the turn) value-own yourself either way? (new player)

[@coachjoel23]

That is a great question - I’d start with questioning your first assumption that your opponent’s range is concentrated with draws. Many players overestimate the likelihood of a flush draw, because it is so prevalent visually.

[@glaubs65]

There is often confusion/lack of clarity among online content providers about whether you are trying to get villain to call with their draws (against your made hand) or to fold the draws.

[@DM-it2ch]

Number 1 maybe true but look at it the other way round: You're BB, the first player raises and 5 others call, and now it's back to you. Those six players have all got good cards- pictures, aces and high pairs. That means there's a better chance of your 3-7 off suit hitting 2 pairs or making a straight, as at least 12 of the "good" cards have gone.

[@coachjoel23]

Thanks for this: You got me curious enough to experiment with something... Say the original opener is raising with 10% of hands, and each of the 5 callers is calling with a capped 20% of hands. 37o in this scenario has 9.4% equity. I guess that's better than a hand like A3o which only has 9.2% equity in this hypothetical. But we are splitting hairs: Rather than saying one is a better call than the other because it is dominated less often, it's better to just fold both of them lol

[@glaubs65]

@@coachjoel23 what about 46s 35s 24s ?

[@jendrasek16]

Nice to see Polish money in your video :D

[@JUanHernandezism]

if i'm going to actually play gto poker in texas, how do I deal with 5-8 people calling my raise? the standard raise in 1/2 is already insane at $15 and if they straddle $5 it's $20, they 3bet way too much and call with any two hands. Should I try raising to $20 or $25? with no straddle? I feel like nobody will ever call me, there's also some places where people never call me until they have aces or kings and they trap me. I just play abc poker with a merged limping range and a merged or poloraized raise range depending on the table if they 3bet a lot or raise a lot. I tried moving up to 2/5 one time when I had the money but I lost 60 bb in 3 minutes compared to 150 bb in 8 hours at 1/2. There's also a 5/10 game sometimes but I'd rather play 5/10 in vegas where I'm not playing against 5+ calling stations. I bet if I open go all in, I would get 2-3 callers every time at 1/2. I've considered playing PLO instead but I really need a deep bankroll for that, and I haven't even played poker in months becuase I'm broke and in so much debt becuase of my credit cards and doordash. I just play in freerolls now and micro tournaments online.

[@coachjoel23]

Sorry to hear. Sometimes the best thing to do is to press pause on poker, or reduce exposure, like you have been.

[@PAlt-p6y]

GTO seldom works well in live poker.

[@coachjoel23]

Agree, that's why this is a PTO channel! (Player Theory Optimal)

[@jamesbell1613]

Those games are very beatable! Your variance skyrockets but if you are patient with proper bankroll management you will print money in the long run in these crazy games.

[@lefullhouse]

I appreciate your advice but the problem is that I make money with other people's mistakes and if they start making less mistakes, then I'm making less money. STOP EDUCATING THEM!!! I'm just kidding. Keep up the good work.

[@coachjoel23]

Lol it can be a tough line to walk. Some opponents already think they know everything and don't bother watching content like this.

[@kevinlindstrom6752]

You are SO right about "blockers."

[@coachjoel23]

They are dangerously overrated!

[@Carson_Van_McUber]

Guilty of #4. No one taught me it, I picked it up as a habit on my own. It seemed to make sense, but your explanation makes more sense.

[@coachjoel23]

Glad it helped. It's a natural habit to want clarity and to know where you stand, but over-doing it can hurt your results.

[@Fixundfertig1]

😂😂😂😂😂

[@HanoKMakatona]

Is it true the deckmate 2 shuffle master machines are hacks ?

[@coachjoel23]

Haha if I do a sequel video for this topic, that one would be in there, along with switching to lucky seats.

[@HanoKMakatona]

@ yeah it’s not a myth though. They cheat even Doug Polk agrees and he’s your daddy

[@PAlt-p6y]

They are hackable, yes. All someone needs to do is, well. I'm not going to say.

[@HanoKMakatona]

@@coachjoel23 Typical answer that treats this as a conspiracy and or joke when it is a dead serious topic , and cost poker players thousands and aspiring players their dreams

[@coachjoel23]

@ Don’t give up on your dreams because of shufflers. Also, if live poker is doomed, online poker has no shufflers, so what could go wrong?

[@wgtansey]

This advise is silly…. Everyone.. and every game plays differently. The key to poker is reading people. Percentages only work, if your Opponent acts the way %’s dictate. All of the game theories are just a suggestion.

[@coachjoel23]

Sorry it wasn’t what you were looking for, just doing my best!

[@albertjohnson1944]

Maybe a bit beyond our understanding lol

[@coachjoel23]

lol maybe one day it will all make sense…

[@ToddMitchell-s7s]

Hi, just subscribed. Good content. Thank you for the vid.

[@coachjoel23]

Thanks Todd, glad you enjoyed it and welcome to the channel!

[@skipprice6843]

Isnt betting to find out where youre at, the same thing as betting to get a fold? Same thing……

[@coachjoel23]

Not necessarily. Often the motive behind these information bets is relieving discomfort and getting rid of ambiguity. Neither of these things are connected to making poker profit.

[@charlesnewborn3760]

I see you never taken a geometry class; All squares are rectangles, but not all rectangles are squares. How you apply this to this situation is fairly simple: if you bet to get someone to fold this also serves the purpose of seeing where you're at because if they don't fold you kind of know where you're at. On the flip side, not everyone that is betting to see where they're at is necessarily trying to get the opponent to fold. If opponent is like nearly drawing dead or drawing slim I think we'd want multiple streets of value versus this opponent

[@coachjoel23]

The question I'd ask is what is your primary reason for betting. If your primary reason is for information, you may make a play that is not connected to value or equity denial and leave profit on the table or bleed money. There's nothing wrong with getting information as a side benefit of one of your equity denial/value bets. That's when you get the square and rectangle as a package deal ;) I never did like geometry very much but I do like deals.

[@rickystephenson518]

I think someone wasn’t listening.

[@coachjoel23]

Here is the associated article: www.pto-poker.com/post/the-top-five-poker-myths-that-cost-you-money