EuphoricPoker

Rosaaa, I’m not 100% sure on this, but maybe it’s worth looking at your stats as well, or how you think your table image looks. That might be something to consider.

I’m really just thinking out loud here, but if you’re playing postflop a bit too passively, it could be that people are starting to push you around because your lines make things easier for them.

I don’t know the details of the KJs hand, but just looking at this one with KQs, that hand does have a re-raise range, and the GTO image above does show that.

By re-raising there, you’re at least pushing back against them trying to realise their equity or applying pressure, rather than letting them do it cheaply.

So if you’re being aggressive early in the hand and then suddenly shutting down later, it might make you easier to play against, because your range starts to look capped.

That could explain the villain raising your flop bet as well. If they think your range is capped and unlikely to continue strongly, they can raise more freely and realise their equity more often, whether that’s with draws or thinner value hands.

Again, this is just a thought rather than a criticism, and I might be completely wrong. I’m only throwing it out there as something to maybe think about.

A late reply I know. But just in case this is seen but you or anyone else...

Also, a few trainers I’ve personally found really useful on RIO are:

Paul Gough – https://www.runitonce.com/users/goughy88/

Max Lacerda – https://www.runitonce.com/users/Lagasaurus/

Paul especially has a brilliant way of explaining things so they actually make sense, and Max has some really good 25nl–200nl sessions where you can see solid, practical play in action, and a whole load of great training videos.

It’s only one hand :-)

Rosaaa, I’m definitely not saying I know everything, and I’d never claim to be some amazing player. I’m still learning myself. But the fact you’re on this site suggests you want to improve, which is exactly why I’m here too.

If I can share something from my own experience, and not because I think I’m right about everything, but because I would honestly have played this hand in a very similar way not that long ago…

When I looked back at where I was, I realised I had some pretty big leaks and my foundations weren’t great. So I actually took about six months away from playing and made myself a small study plan (I’ve got around 20–40 days left). I went right back to basics and started again from the beginning.

For me, that meant focusing on one topic or area at a time until I felt comfortable, then moving on to the next, and testing myself in the GTO trainer and reviewing hands in the study section.

Again, I’m not perfect at all, but for me personally, taking a bit of time away and having some clear goals has really helped my game and boosted my confidence.

Also, a few trainers I’ve personally found really useful on RIO are:

Paul Gough – https://www.runitonce.com/users/goughy88/

Max Lacerda – https://www.runitonce.com/users/Lagasaurus/

Pedro Fernandes – https://www.runitonce.com/users/PedroFernandes/

Paul especially has a brilliant way of explaining things so they actually make sense, and Max has some really good 25nl–200nl sessions where you can see solid, practical play in action, and a whole load of great training videos.

And just to be clear, I’m not suggesting for a second that you’re a weak or poor player, that’s not what I mean at all. Poker should be fun, and I really like the positive side of the poker community. I just wanted to share what’s helped me, in case it helps you too :-)

I think this is one of those spots where theory and player tendencies split a bit.

From a GTO point of view, checking some of the time on this flop makes sense. But in practice at NL25, I still think c-betting this board a lot is fine, since K-high in a 3-bet pot favours SB’s range and the pool tends to overfold.

For me, the bigger question isn’t the flop bet, it’s what we do once we get raised. I’m not convinced KQ really wants to start building a big pot straight away, and check-calling to keep ranges wider feels like the more sensible approach.

On the turn, I don’t actually think the 5 is that good for us. Even though it slightly reduces the number of 5x combinations, in practice it strengthens the hands that do contain a 5 (54s, A5s), and it also improves hands like 99 and occasionally slow-played overpairs. Also, a lot of bluffs and weaker Kx hands are likely to slow down.

So, once villain raises the flop and then continues betting on the paired turn, their range becomes much more polarised.

On the river, I understand the idea of jamming to target missed draws, but I’m not sure many of those realistically take a raise-flop, bet-turn line in a 3-bet pot. Most missed draws will just give up, while trips and full houses are very happy.

That’s why check-calling the turn and reassessing the river feels like the lower-variance option compared to piling it in.

Just to ask… if instead you check the turn, called a 27bb bet, then checked the river and faced a shove, what would you do there?

Really great video Alex.

I don’t think this hand means you suddenly need to start overfolding strong hands, and I don’t think it’s an obvious fold either.

I think a check-call or a check-raise on the flop may have been a better line here. Or that's at least how I would have played it. But it would be good to know if that's not right :-)

BTN can raise the flop here in theory. BTN actually has a flop raising range on K95 in 3-bet pots, mainly to apply pressure and deny equity, so the raise itself isn’t a huge red flag, although it may be a bit overplayed depending on the player.

It’s also worth saying that SB has a flop re-raising range here as well. In theory, SB can’t just c-bet and always call, otherwise BTN could raise too aggressively. So SB does need some re-raises with strong hands and a few bluffs to prevent that.

Where it really gets tricky is the turn. Once the 5 pairs and you keep betting, the range starts to polarise. Some players will still overvalue hands or keep bluffing, but a lot of worse Kx I think should slow down, while trips and boats obviously don’t. That’s why the spot feels horrible.

The bigger adjustment probably isn’t folding earlier, it’s avoiding blowing the pot up on the turn. The check-raise mostly folds worse hands and gets action from better hands. Check-calling turn and reassessing river keeps bluffs in and loses less when you’re behind.

Seeing nits stacking chips is frustrating, but that’s usually just variance and them avoiding marginal spots, not something you need to copy. This feels more like a rough run mixed with a slightly ambitious turn line than a big leak.

Hey Trinity,

Just to say first, if my earlier reply came across a bit blunt, that wasn’t intentional :-)

I just used Grammarly to help make sure what I’d written made sense outside of my own notes. I’m still pretty new to properly studying poker and a lot of this is just me thinking out loud and sharing notes I’ve made as I’ve been learning.

Also, I may not have used the right terminology, but if I can explain my thinking...

What I meant by “natural top pair” is basically the common Kx or Qx hands people arrive at the flop with from their preflop range. With top two you actually block a lot of those hands, but with top–bottom two pair you don’t. Because of that, checking can make sense as it lets them keep betting hands you still beat, rather than pushing them out or building a big pot on turns that can get uncomfortable.

For example, on KQ7 with KQ, you block a large portion of the common AK, KJ, AQ, QJ combinations, so villain has far fewer natural one-pair value bets available. On K72 with K2, all the usual Kx hands like AK, KQ, KJ are still very much in their range, so checking often lets them keep firing with worse instead of forcing the pot to grow when lots of turn cards aren’t great for you.

I’ve actually spent a bit of time thinking about this spot because I realised I was massively overvaluing hands and getting myself into trouble, and I was basically building big pots with hands that felt strong on the flop but didn’t stay that comfortable on later streets.

So, against players who overvalue top pair or like to barrel, like I was, slowplaying top–bottom two pair feels even better because they’ll just keep betting Kx anyway.

Against tighter or more cautious players, I would think that you probably need to take a more active line earlier, because they’re not going to put more money in unless they actually improve.

Again, I'm not a pro, but I'm really trying hard to get better with the theoretical aspects of poker, and really enjoying the process. I just wanted to add my thoughts and what I've been learning.

It would be good to know if I've got this right or wrong though :-)

Another great video Jan. The only thing that I would slightly disagree with is the point you make:

"Consuming self-improvement content all the time can definitely become unhealthy".

I think having a cognative balance of intentional self improvement / learning helps you to outgrow the challenges you may face, not just in poker, but in all aspects of life. Also, if combined with some kind of goal setting I think that this can help significantly.

Hey Jan, I’ve only just joined RIO, so I’ve only recently found your videos and training content, so apologies for being a bit late to the party!

Just wanted to say this is a really great video, super clear and super helpful.

I started playing poker a while ago but found myself getting pretty tilted when I lost hands. So I decided to take time off playing to properly study the game and improve my understanding of the theory.

Now I understand things much better I've come realised it was 100% because of how I played (poor foundations) that was opening the door to what I thought at the time was just a "bad beat".

Now I understand things better, I think taking time away from playing to learn more, review hands etc... and (most importantly) to spend time with the family helps more than anything. Poker and the little fishes will be there in a few days :-)

Jan, great presentation. I found the content genuinely helpful, and the way you explained everything was clear, concise, and easy to follow. Really appreciated it.

I appreciate that you've got DriveHUD, but as I'm fairly new to playing poker I've been studying this as well, and put this together to help me study.

The training here is really good, and I've just found personally, that taking my notes helps me remember things.

I'm not sure if it helps, but I hope that it does.

Not quite. I used Grammarly. You should as well.

Hey Pedro,

I’m fairly new to poker and realised I had a lot to work on, so I’ve taken some time away from playing to properly study the game and the theory behind it.

I’m planning to start a $100 bankroll challenge on GG, documenting the whole journey on YouTube as I improve and track my progress.

Would this review be open again in the future?

Andy

The big difference between top two and top–bottom two pair is how comfortable the hand feels on later streets.

With top two (like KQ on KQx), not many turn cards really change much. You’re already beating all one-pair hands, and it’s hard for your opponent to improve without already having something strong. Because of that, it’s easy to just play the hand fast for value and protection.

Top–bottom two pair (like K2 on K72) is a lot more awkward. Loads of turn cards are annoying:

Any middle card can give them top pair with a better kicker

A paired middle card can mess with your bottom pair

Straights and better two-pair combos become more realistic

So even though it looks strong on the flop, the hand is actually pretty fragile.

That’s probably why it gets slowplayed so often. Checking keeps worse hands and bluffs in, avoids building a huge pot with a hand that might get uncomfortable on the turn, and just makes it easier to realise your equity without putting yourself in tricky spots.

The blocking side of it matters too. With top two, you block a lot of their natural top-pair hands. With top–bottom, you don’t, so letting them keep betting with worse makes more sense.

So for me, the simple way to think about it is:

Top two is stable, so you can play it fast.
Top–bottom is fragile, so it often plays better as a slowplay.

It’s not that the hand is weak on the flop, it’s just that a lot more turn cards make your life difficult.

If a player is genuinely only 3-betting AA, KK, and AK, then KQs is not in great shape. You’re dominated by AK, crushed by AA/KK, and when you flop a king or queen you’re often still behind. So from a pure EV and simplicity standpoint, folding is absolutely fine.

That said, position and postflop tendencies matter a lot. If you’re in position and this player is very honest after the flop (for example, they c-bet big with AA/KK and play more cautiously with AK), you can sometimes justify a call. You’re not calling to make one pair, you’re calling to:

Hit strong draws (flush or straight)

Make two pair or better

Exploit their predictable postflop play

However, this is more of an exploitative call than a standard one. You’re relying on them playing face-up, not on KQs being a great hand versus their range.

In general:

Out of position → just fold

In position vs very honest players → calling can be okay

If they’re not that tight in reality → KQs becomes a much better call

So the simple takeaway is:

Against an ultra-tight 3-bettor, folding KQs is perfectly reasonable.
Only call if you’re in position and confident you can outplay them postflop.

That keeps your game disciplined while still allowing for smart, exploitative adjustments when the situation is right.

There is some maths behind 3-betting, but in practice you don’t need complex formulas to make good adjustments. A simple and effective rule is this:

If someone is opening around 80% of hands (especially heads-up), you should be 3-betting roughly 15–25% of your hands.

The key reason is that their opening range contains a lot of weak, dominated hands. That means your value 3-bets can be much wider than they would be against a tighter opponent. Hands like AQ, AJ, KQ, AT, KJ, most suited aces, many pocket pairs, and strong suited connectors all perform very well when 3-bet against such a wide range.

How many bluffs you add depends on how they respond:

If they fold a lot to 3-bets, you can include more suited Ax and Kx bluffs.

If they call frequently, keep your range more value-heavy.

If they 4-bet aggressively, tighten up your bluffs and focus on hands with good blockers.

So instead of playing the same against everyone, a good adjustment is:

Wide opens = wider value 3-bets.
Foldy opponents = more bluffs.

Against an 80% opener, aiming for a mostly value-heavy 3-bet range of around 20% is a strong, practical baseline that will work well in most games.

Great video and all the explanations throughout, it’s really helpful to get the thought process.

Thanks Paul. I've replied to your message - sorry it was such a long message; I got a little carried away. But, hopefully, that explains where I'm at :-)

Thanks again!

Andy

Paul, genuinely, this video and the whole series with Sam have been amazing for helping me improve. It’s easily some of the most helpful poker content I’ve seen, and I love the way you explain things so clearly.

I’m really trying to level up my game, especially on the theoretical side, so I’ve been watching a lot of educational content lately. Thankfully, and my wife doesn't mind me watching these on repeat as she's from Wales :-)

Bloody brilliant video! Love the explainations, I think, well from me personally, it's the rationale and the "why" behind the theory that has been hard to connect theory and in-game play.