Episode 89: Fumbling in the Dark with Gareth Chantler

There’s no Andrew this week, but Gareth Chantler catches Nate up on his “new job” (it’s one all poker players hope for and also one that many struggle with when they’re lucky enough to get it) and his recent travels. Then the two talk strategy, including a hand where Gareth balances his checking range against a tough opponent.

14 thoughts on “Episode 89: Fumbling in the Dark with Gareth Chantler”

  1. love your work again guys. was funny that you didnt mention that andrew was away until about halfway through the show.

    love when you have gareth on the show, he is extremely easy to relate to, and i enjoy hearing his exploits in far flung places of the globe.

  2. In hand 1, do you really think villain is bet/folding KQ and sets getting 5.4:1 after you shove? Since he doesn’t have many flushes, check/shoving the river with all of your 1 pair hands seems appealing (especially when you have a relevant blocker like AcQx), and that would make me want to c/shove AJ no club to balance.

    • Yeah I am not too sure yusef. Since I think he would be incorrect in calling AJo preflop I think actually he should call QQ and that it was hasty for me to say otherwise.

      That means his value range on the river when I have AJo is AJs (2), ATcc, JTcc, KK (3), QQ (3), TT (3), KQs (3). That is actually a shitload of combos, to be value betting 16 combos on the river for pot after overbetting the turn in MP v UTG. In any case, I doubt he is bluffing 16 combos here in practice to make me indifferent to calling with aces.

      So anyways, say he checks back KQs and calls a shove with the sets, then I am losing to 3 flushes and winning versus 9 sets, making shoving pretty clear. That is pretty compelling to me actually.

      It is a weird spot in practice because a priori him betting the river, I was uncertain as to whether he could in fact overbet the turn with TT and then pot a flush river. I did not say, in my mind, on the river, oh this is easy because he takes this line the whole way with all 3 TT combos. In fact I was saying, man I can’t really do much folding here after making this adjustment in the first place.

      I mean if we hold AcJ or AxJc we have to shove I would think. Though it should also be noted that I believe him to have KK in his preflop flatting range, but have not proven that empirically.

  3. Great episode – got a chuckle from Gareth’s “big timing” comment about Andrew.

    I really loved both hands – took me back to my rush days and getting owned in these spots.

    Gareth – since this is a reg you were facing, and you were pretty sure you were way ahead, is there any value in shoving so he doesn’t see your hand for the times he does fold? (If he does call with the flush, will he think you’re an even bigger fish?)

    • I’d be shocked if the value of not giving information turned this from a call into a shove. First is that I’m still not convinced it isn’t a shove in the first place. Second is that this is a big bet, and if shoving is wrong it’s probably wrong by many BBs. Third is that I’m not sure that Gareth should fear his opponent finding this out too much. *We* know that Gareth is playing this way because he’s done a lot of hard work to figure out where a former leak was. The opponent can’t be sure why Gareth is playing this way, and indeed in a vacuum there’s nothing shocking about his line here.

      • Well the math should be fairly straightforward.

        To call I need better than 33% equity, to raise I need over 50% equity on the additional money going into the pot.

        We started 273 effective and put in 186 after the river bet (6+10+46+124). So villain is going to have to call with 16% equity versus our shove to break even.

        I did not know villain’s river bet range included sets of tens, queens, and kings in advance of making the call. But let’s assume I did.

        Then their river bet range has (let’s say) three better hands than ours, one chop (the remaining ace-jack suited), and nine sets. If none fold, we clearly should shove.

        I am amazed how precise my intuition is! Because if (as I said hastily in the moment) villain folds a set of queens, then shoving is 0EV, give or take.

        But will they? Unlikely given that price as some have pointed out. I am not so sure. They can be pretty confident I am not turning enough AcX into a bluff.

        I will wait until I get in this spot again, check-shove the river with AcQ and report back!

  4. Great interview! I wish though you would have given us some insight about traveling from one country to another with a laptop. Connecting in some rural towns must have its particular problems as well as language issues.
    Story about your travails after BF was intriguing. Perhaps a book is in order.

    • Gareth, this is a wise man who knows a good story. If he says you should put it on paper, I’d take that to heart.

      • I have a lot of notes, a lot of hands, some heartbreak, some triumphs, a lot of things written all over the place from the past years. The first series of Borderline Gambling articles I thought was so self-indulgent, but I needed the money and to get my foot in a door with Stars. Now that they pay me to write about other things I’m pretty happy about not having to write about myself. So I don’t know, I have enough material from the years before BG and after, but I worry about the whole thing being an exercise in egomania.

        • Everytime I hear you speak I learn not only about poker but the world poker lives in and your unique lifestyle carries me into worlds that I did not know existed. Its not about you so much im interested but about me wanting to visit those worlds you talk of.

          • Actually its Piefarmer you should talk to if you want to know where to put that 100K BR. That’s his forte.

  5. I just wanted to say,

    Nate. Fucking. Meyvis.

    I mean that as a compliment of the highest order. Really great episode!

Comments are closed.