|
I'm the shortest stack or the four at about $1200. Villain has about $2500, Whales were like $1400-1800.
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2012 16:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 15:02 |
|
|
re-raise to 450 then jam turn 
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2012 15:55
|
|
|
Lord of the Llamas posted:re-raise to 450 then jam turn this is not the answer. he's really nutted when he raises here and i dont think he's going to fold a flush often enough. i probably just flat and ch/eval turn
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2012 16:10
|
|
|
Why flat there? The only card I'm really happy about on the turn is a diamond and I think it'll be really hard to get paid off there unless he has the K because my hand is screaming of a big diamond. On any non-diamond turn I am very likely to face another bet from this player and an A or K doesn't guarantee my hand being in the lead either. The pot odds are like 2.7:1 which aren't good enough for peeling one card, and I think the implied odds are small.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2012 18:06
|
|
|
Mind_Taker posted:Why flat there? The only card I'm really happy about on the turn is a diamond and I think it'll be really hard to get paid off there unless he has the K I really cant see any flaw in your logic here. I mean maybe he can do this some small amount of the time with JJ or QQ with a which would then pay you off if you hit but outside of that and Kx it doesn't seem like you have any implied odds. A lot of the time he's gonna have a small flush/set which aren't gonna pay you off almost ever if you hit. It's a really lovely spot. AARO fucked around with this message at 22:56 on Jun 2, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2012 22:50
|
|
|
MY INEVITABLE DEBT posted:this is not the answer. Why is he making a raise that isolates a cbet on the flop as much as possible with a nutted hand with two retards left to act? I think his range has a lot more vulnerable but better hands that we can fold out and when he doesn't fold we have the nut draw anyway and can call a shove. Flatting sucks because there's literally no good implied payoff when you make the best hand (whether that be a flush or a higher pair). Lord of the Llamas fucked around with this message at 23:43 on Jun 2, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2012 23:39
|
|
|
Lord of the Llamas posted:Why is he making a raise that isolates a cbet on the flop as much as possible with a nutted hand with two retards left to act? I think his range has a lot more vulnerable but better hands that we can fold out and when he doesn't fold we have the nut draw anyway and can call a shove. If he happens to be bluffing and we get there this is definitely how we would make the most but I think that's pretty rare. They might be retards but we're 240bb deep with the person who bet (as villain) and it's a single raised pot. Why would he flat to try to entice $65 more when a lot of turns are really bad and we can never get stacks in with a nutted PFR? it's just bad. Mind_Taker posted:Why flat there? The only card I'm really happy about on the turn is a diamond and I think it'll be really hard to get paid off there unless he has the K I like flatting because we're getting fine odds and he's not absolutely guaranteed to bet every turn. I think what we're missing here is your definition of his flop raising range. You gave some bullet points but bullet points aren't a range. I'm giving him a pretty strong range of no semibluffs and a bunch of flushes. I think a set might raise here too and I think it'd be pretty good if he did. He gets ch to very often on turn and gets to decide how to continue the hand and if he gets 3b on flop he's prolly beat or maybe hes getting pot odds to bink a boat or something. It's extremely read dependent though. I know a lot of villains that would flat Q5s pre here vs a young reg. I know a lot that would fold J9s. e: oh and im ok with him having flushes because when we bink we put him in a ridiculous spot when he ch behind and we bet and we have to make very little money (like $150?) to break even on our flop flat. If we brick ok check and probably fold.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2012 07:33
|
|
|
Dr. Eat posted:who tracks their winrate pre-rake? seems pointless/impossible. Before Rush and FTP went away, I was paying like 50-60/hr for rake 4 tabling NL100 rush. Chan was probably paying a lot more for 100/200/400 rush. And yeah, rakeback starts feeling more important in that kind of volume.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2012 00:25
|
|
|
who's chan? yea i think my roommates and i paid stars something like 10k last month (MTT+180man grinder/6max PLO player/NLHE player(me)). my reward: account got locked for 10 days on first of month because of 30 second login in the US on may 1 2011. i was actually set to do a 'most hands in a month' prop bet vs. a zoom player (i would be 20+ tabling) but stars hosed over our dreams of who could pay them the most money. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2012 14:50
|
|
|
I've got an interesting spot. I wasn't in this hand. What actually happened isn't particularly interesting-- it was badly played-- but it does raise an interesting non-standard possibility. Buckle in, because this is gonna be a long one. Abandon all hope, ye who have short attention spans. Live 1/2. Villain (Maniac) is UTG w/about 300. CO (TAG with occasional weak-tight tendencies) covers the table. BN (tight image, not especially aggressive, straight-forward and unimaginative with weak-tight tendencies) has ~235. The maniac has been betting and raising constantly with air or with top pair+. I've seen him bet/check/check or check-call/check/check with middle pair and I've seen him turn a weak pair into a bluff. I've also seen him get 200+BB in the middle with top pair with no kicker. He literally always raises when he straddles, he practically always c-bets the flop no matter how many people are in the hand, and he's shown a strong tendency to check the turn when weak if his flop bet gets multiple callers. His river play is especially crazy. If the turn checks through, he fires, no matter how unlikely it looks that he actually has a hand. He has shown an absurd number of big river bluffs. The guy lives to bluff, and he seems to bluff with literally every busted draw or other trash hand that he gets to the river with. He's shown a lot of hands, and I would say 80% of the time he bets the river, it's with air. I've also seen him get chatty at the river while an opponent was tanking once to talk them into a call when he actually had the goods, but he always statues up when bluffing the river. It's also notable that the maniac has recently gone from about 1k down to where he is now, and a significant portion of it has gone to the CO, who has been targeting him for a while. CO is a 2/5 reg, generally considered a solid TAG, but he's folding way too many rivers to the maniac in question. It seems like he keeps getting to the river and facing a big bet, and he convinces himself that after all the bluffs the maniac has shown at the river, he can't possibly be bluffing again with such a bad table image. (These are the weak-tight tendencies I'm talking about.) CO would normally have a fairly tight range, but he's playing wider to get into more pots with the maniac. BN is the one with the interesting spot. She's generally considered solid at 1/2 in the local card room, which frankly says more about the local card room than her play. She's basically inconsequential in this equation, though, because we'll be looking at the hand as if we were playing her spot on the turn and river. What she actually did doesn't matter all that much, but I'll give results after. So! Villain straddles for 5 UTG and gets 6 callers. Villain raises to 25 total, and only one of the callers folds. Flop (~150) comes J  9 2 with two hearts.Villain c-bets for 60, leaving 200 behind. His range here is basically still ATC, because these are all his normal moves. It folds around to the CO who calls. His range is probably any 9 or J, OESDs, heart draws, and two pair+ that is sandbagging to let the bluffy villain keep bluffing. BN has A 6 and calls with the nut flush draw, leaving about 150 behind.Turn (~330) comes 6  .Villain checks, and CO checks behind. Here's where I think things are interesting. We can narrow the villain's range on this street because he regularly checks with air on the turn if he gets multiple callers. Villain pretty much never checks with a big hand, either-- whatever his faults, he knows slowplaying is the wrong thing to do when he actually hits a hand after he's been firing at everything-- and he would probably shove any jack. Basically, the strongest thing in Villain's range is a 9. CO checking means he was probably calling the flop fairly light to go after the villain, but he doesn't seem happy about the button coming in behind him. His range is pretty polarized at this point; he's either slowplaying or he's weak. He's certainly capable of slowplaying against our maniac villain, because I'm sitting in the hijack and he's been talking about just giving the guy rope to hang himself with for a while. Having the BN behind him makes it a bit less likely, though; BN's most likely hand has to be a straight or heart draw. She'd shove combo draws and probably a lot of top pair hands on the flop to prevent overcards from catching, knowing villain was likely weak and CO would often be calling light. Given the huge odds she was getting on the flop, a draw fits easily, and shoving this blank may get her out. It also may not, considering she'd be getting better than 3:1 to call, and the maniac could call behind. Taking it slow with a set or two pair is more likely than usual because of the maniac that the CO is targeting, but less likely because of the button. I don't think it's overall a huge part of his range, but it's worth considering. Now, obviously, the standard move here out of the button is to just shove. Both players have shown weakness, the maniac almost certainly has nothing, and CO was probably calling light and is willing to fold to big bets even to the maniac. We're going to pick up this pot uncontested on a shove a good portion of the time, and even if called, we've got anywhere from 7-14 outs. It's worth noting that our villain can definitely call with a 9 here, so we're not folding anything of his that beats us on a shove. The CO is a different story; he'll fold a lot more to the button than he would to the maniac. A shove should get him off a 9 and probably off hands like JT. If villain calls, CO naturally calls with any reasonable draw. More often, though, Villain has air and folds and CO has a hand he's willing to dance with a maniac with, but not a more solid player (even though I doubt the button really scares anyone at the table). So yeah. Standard. But considering the villain, shoving the turn gets him to fold all of the air hands he would normally bluff with, and those times the CO is hiding in the bushes with a big hand, we're in some trouble. Not anywhere near enough to make it -EV, obviously. If we're playing the button's hand, our only moves here are shove or check, and shoving is clearly significantly +EV. At first glance, our other option, checking, looks like a terrible move. The SPR here is just silly at less than 1:2, and we've got more than enough equity to just stick it in the middle. Shoving folds some hands that CO would beat us with and prevents either player from hitting an overcard to beat us when we're ahead. And really, we're usually looking pretty good here with just the pair of 6s that we currently have. All we really know about the villain's range is that he currently has poo poo, but his particular breed of poo poo could be anything that hasn't strongly hit the board, which means any overcard could hit him. We have no way to tell. Therefore, we cannot check behind on the turn with the intention of evaluating the river. The only information the villain's river action can possibly give us is that the villain probably has a middle pair if he checks, as that's been how he's played a hand like that every time we've seen it. If he hits, he shoves. If he misses, he shoves. If he has something marginal, he checks. That's not a lot to go on. Checking and just hoping for a heart to be able to play confidently on the river is weak as all hell. We probably have the best hand. The only argument I can see anyone making for a check and evaluate line is that the Villain has shown some physical tells at the river, but I think planning to go off that is bad because it opens the door to talking ourselves out of the right move on the river. The decision on this hand has to be made on the turn. But what if we check behind the turn with the intention of calling any river when villain shoves and CO folds? This is the prospect I find interesting (which, yeah, I'm longwinded and it has taken me forever to get to). We know Villain loves to bluff the river. He bluffs the river so much, in fact, that's it's mathematically incorrect for us to ever fold to him at the river if we have anything. Acknowledging that, there's nothing to evaluate on the river at all; all we're concerned about is the action from the CO. If the maniac shoves and the CO calls, the CO is definitely beating a A6 (unless we hit our flush, of course, in which case we beat him into the pot). We can easily fold and save our remaining 150. If it checks around, we check behind and hope he has a weaker 6, again saving what remains of our stack. But if Villain shoves and CO folds, we know the coast is clear and we call. Now sometimes, our Villain will spike something that beats us, but I really think he only shoves if he hits a T, Q, or K because he's got basically no jacks in his range (or OESDs, which he would have shoved on the come) but no one else is especially likely to have one either the way things have played out. But how many outs can our villain have if he's unpaired on the turn? Any heart outs are dirty, he could certainly have a hand with only one over (or none, even), or he could be drawing dead with a hand like A3. He'd have shoved a heart draw (which we dominate anyway) or an OESD or significant combo draw on the turn. Basically, he's got six outs if he has a dominated heart draw with two overs (because the cards that can pair him aren't hearts) or less than that if he has two random cards. The most outs I can see him having here is 8 in the event that he has a gutshot (three outs since the heart out is dirty) plus two overs with one heart (3 non-hearts to pair one card, and 2 non-hearts to pair the other). He doesn't have gutshot+hearts+overs in his range because he'd have shoved the turn. So basically, against the brunt of his range, we're looking at probably an average of 5 outs. So basically, 10% of the time when he has air, he improves to beat us. But when he improves with a weak pair, he checks and we save our remaining stack. The other 90% of the time he has air, he doesn't improve and shoves it. Of course, checking behind the turn lets the CO draw on us, too, and he could have more outs against us than our maniac. Some of those, though, he may fold to pressure from the villain, since he keeps folding badly against him. The general question here is whether it's worth the extra risk to check behind this turn to induce a bluff despite the SPR and having enough equity to just jam. If we jam, we're usually taking it uncontested and chipping up to 480 total. If we induce and succeed in snapping him off, we chip up to 630 total. What do you think here?
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2012 21:47
|
|
|
shove the flop
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2012 22:59
|
|
|
I'm not really interested in the flop. I'm interested in the turn spot. The button misplayed the hand, but that makes for an interesting turn if we somehow find ourselves there. I don't care about preflop or the flop; it's really a theory question.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2012 23:08
|
|
|
MY INEVITABLE DEBT posted:shove the flop
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2012 00:25
|
|
|
Let's say aliens have hijacked your brain using an experimental alien brain hijacking device, but it shorts out on the turn and you regain control of you faculties after the flop has already been played. What then, buddy?! What then?!
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2012 01:04
|
|
|
then i tell the aliens why flatting flop is horrible
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2012 06:51
|
|
|
Flatting the flop is far from the worst move the button made in this hand.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2012 13:26
|
|
|
If you are really looking for validation yes we can ch behind turn with the intention of calling all rivers and it's probably a lot better than just jamming turn
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2012 16:52
|
|
|
Is flatting the flop bad because it's difficult for BN to extract value if another heart or an ace hits? It also seems bad because with everyone showing weakness on a not very scary board, we should have good fold equity. Is that right? And which of these factors would you say is most important? Excuse me if these are basic questions. I'm just starting to wrap my head around the strategic principles of shipping.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2012 17:14
|
|
|
grass clacking posted:Is flatting the flop bad because it's difficult for BN to extract value if another heart or an ace hits? It also seems bad because with everyone showing weakness on a not very scary board, we should have good fold equity. Is that right? And which of these factors would you say is most important? In this case the primary factor is the large amount of equity we have. We're drawing to the nuts (9 outs) and an overcard (3 outs) which is probably good. If we see turn and river (by shoving) we have 12 outs twice which is about 46%. Shoving flop allows us to: pick up dead money, realize our entire equity by seeing turn and river, and as a bonus we don't have to make any difficult decisions. If we flat flop we're only seeing one card and it's hard to get paid off when another heart shows up, and definitely if an ace shows up. Shoving also lets us win by getting folds, but we have so much equity that it just barely matters. The folds are just icing on the cake. Also they make shoving incredibly good instead of just being ok.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2012 17:40
|
|
|
can't realize all our equity without shoving the flop as MID said. just flatting is kinda weak passive imo. the maniac will also call us with tons of dominated draws when we shove and people can always see flushes so they're hard to get value from unless they have one as well if we just call and hit. uhh just check back turn as played. there is really very little reason to bet cause we have showdown value and there's no reason to build huge pot with 3rd pair. real question is why you wrote such a massive wall of text lol.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2012 05:53
|
|
|
Why would anyone in a forum where people are purporting to try and get better at poker poo poo on anyone for trying to do a thorough analysis of a hand? I mean SM eventually explained his logic but honestly just saying "shove flop" and not elaborating at all just seems like almost shitposting to me. AmnesiaLab clearly put a ton of thought and effort into his post and wanted to think about the turn just as a hypothetical or whatever, it's sort of disappointing to see everyone just dismiss it altogether. FWIW I would check back also I think.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2012 06:51
|
|
|
it's just weird to see such a massive post for a kinda straightforward hand, maybe MID was going for irony with the one-line reply. i also had a lot of trouble reading the HH and following the action...like i have no problem with lengthy analysis and super-longwinded discussions over 'standard' spots (just read some blogs by phil galfond if you want perfect examples) but i think most of the people who read the post got lost...maybe cause hero wasn't in the hand? idk. don't think anyone is actually being dismissive. it is still somethingawful afterall. re-reading it, seems hero wants to shove turn? that is pretty much turning hand into bluff and it represents a huge amount of strength jamming multiway especially into a fish...it's clearly not a shove for value/we don't have much equity to protect. think shoving turn is just a case of us totally owning ourselves and don't see how it isn't total spew. amnesialab: results? Dr. Eat fucked around with this message at 11:29 on Jun 16, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2012 11:26
|
|
|
Dr. Eat posted:re-reading it, seems hero wants to shove turn? that is pretty much turning hand into bluff and it represents a huge amount of strength jamming multiway especially into a fish...it's clearly not a shove for value/we don't have much equity to protect. think shoving turn is just a case of us totally owning ourselves and don't see how it isn't total spew. lol i guess read it again. hero wants to bluff shove. also the problem isn't that amnesialab writes up books for hands it's that the books he writes are full of random fluff garbage like he's telling a story around a campfire. facts, names, details, important poo poo. He has never made a short post. for instance: quote:We can narrow the villain's range on this street because he regularly checks with air on the turn if he gets multiple callers. Villain pretty much never checks with a big hand, either-- whatever his faults, he knows slowplaying is the wrong thing to do when he actually hits a hand after he's been firing at everything-- and he would probably shove any jack. Basically, the strongest thing in Villain's range is a 9. CO checking means he was probably calling the flop fairly light to go after the villain, but he doesn't seem happy about the button coming in behind him. His range is pretty polarized at this point; he's either slowplaying or he's weak. He's certainly capable of slowplaying against our maniac villain, because I'm sitting in the hijack and he's been talking about just giving the guy rope to hang himself with for a while. Having the BN behind him makes it a bit less likely, though; BN's most likely hand has to be a straight or heart draw. She'd shove combo draws and probably a lot of top pair hands on the flop to prevent overcards from catching, knowing villain was likely weak and CO would often be calling light. Given the huge odds she was getting on the flop, a draw fits easily, and shoving this blank may get her out. It also may not, considering she'd be getting better than 3:1 to call, and the maniac could call behind. Taking it slow with a set or two pair is more likely than usual because of the maniac that the CO is targeting, but less likely because of the button. I don't think it's overall a huge part of his range, but it's worth considering. "he prob checks air on the turn, the best hand he can have is a 9. co ch is prob weakness and he didnt want to be multiway. btn's perceived range is a draw. co slowplaying is more likely than usual because he's targeting fish. still not very likely." and yes i was going for the irony replying with 3 words on the internet comedy website
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2012 14:24
|
|
|
yea i'm all about complex hands and reading postmodern fiction but i found the thought process and action almost impossible to follow lol. way too long to read again. also its just full of random details that makes it really hard to follow (Hero is a female who is a very good player for this cardroom, which tells you a lot about this card room!). this doesn't actually tell us anything about the hero...is she perceived as strong winning player? what has she showndown recently? is she playing a lot of pots? etc.. reminded me of the simple algebra i had to do in middle school that they made into 2 paragraph long word problems with retarded stories. tbh i got really lost near the end of the post and it all started to get jumbled in my head so not suprised i got hero's intention wrong. sorry don't really mean to flame, just would like to see strategy boiled down to the actual strat. anyway bluffing turn is total spew.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2012 17:18
|
|
|
k so there's a villain at my cardroom who is basically a total psychopath. he plays something like 85vpip, will get in any flushdraw no matter odds or how bad the draw is, floats flops with air and double barrels into pre-flop raiser, triple barrels air all the time (he also leads monsters which he seems to have whenever me or my friend call him down), never folds his BB, and basically tries to win every pot he's involved in. he is stereotypical asian whale and doesn't really give a gently caress at all about money and i've seen him have like 10bi swings in a night regularly. he's also slowrolled me pre ~200bb deep (he opens, i 3bet KK on btn, he 4bets, i ship, he takes like 3 minutes to think which i've seen him do with J7x facing two allins pre, and then calls me with aces). i river a king and scoop the 40k bhat (like 1.35k USD) pot and asked him what the gently caress he was thinking about and he goes "ACES LOSE THIS TABLE LAST ORBIT TOO YOU SEE?" (some guy also had aces cracked recently) but i think he just wanted to slowroll me cause the money doesn't mean much to him. problem is he is owning me and my friend! the two of us are the only two FT grinders who play in the game but he has godmode or something. what are some adjustments we should be making versus this vilain? play any suited ace or king so we can get it in dominating? value bet huge? never fold TPTK? ride the variance train or nit it up? problem with nitting is he notices that quickly and will do everything he can to push you off the hand. like, this guy is super-exploitable and rich we're just wondering if we're missing something cause we should be making massive amounts instead of constantly feeling owned. Dr. Eat fucked around with this message at 17:37 on Jun 16, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2012 17:35
|
|
|
I would try to play as many pots in position for as cheap as possible for the lesser hands and bet a slightly wider bet/3bet range on the button for value.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2012 23:21
|
|
|
I didn't go into detail on the button because she barely matters; the CO gives her credit and the maniac is a maniac. If you consider specific information on reads and how I got them to be fluff, I don't know what to tell you, buddy. Yeah, I'm a long-winded motherfucker. Always have been. When it comes to analysis, I prefer to be. You can see where all of my thoughts in the hand come from. I don't know how you manage to get lost in a hand that is just discussing whether to shove or check on the turn, but I know my walls of text can have bewildering effects on the average goon attention span. That's why I started the post with a warning. It's a simple equation, people: If you don't want to read something long, no one is making you. Well aware Moose was going for comedy. Pretty standard, and I laughed. I'm used to getting people taking shots at long posts, and I generally think it's funny. Dr. Eat posted:sorry don't really mean to flame, just would like to see strategy boiled down to the actual strat. anyway bluffing turn is total spew. I totally disagree with this. Villain can't call with most of his range and CO is going to give credit and fold most of his range. I guarantee you shoving here picks up the pot at least 70% of the time, and maybe more. Most people aren't trapping in a pot where everyone should already be committed if they have anything. The only reason CO might be trapping is because the maniac will stick it in with air if you let him. Even if we magically lose every time we get called (which won't happen, considering our draw), a simple EV calculation shows this is hugely +EV without even factoring in the times we get called and win. As for the results, the button did everything wrong. She flatted the flop, and she considered jamming, but checked behind on the turn. The maniac predictably jammed the river, which was an offsuit deuce. CO folded, and BN tank-folded. Villain showed 34 of clubs. Afterward, the button was talking about what she should have done on the turn, which is what got me thinking about the spot.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2012 17:52
|
|
|
Regarding your psychopath, what is his preflop play like? Is he mostly limping with all that, and are people letting him limp? Does he turn a table into a limpfest with constant 6+ handed pots, or do people raise him to isolate? If you try to raise him to isolate, does half the table come along anyway, or can you limit the field? I'm gonna go ahead and assume that he basically never limp/folds, because those types basically never do. First things first, any time you sit at a table with him, get a seat change button so you can move to his left if you're not there already, obviously. I'd limp along with any kind of vague semblance of a hand if the game isn't seeing many raises. This guy sounds like he'll get a lot of money in the middle in an unraised pot, so see some cheap flops and be ready to call him down when he bluffs into you. If you actually have a hand, I'd raise enough to limit the field and isolate (and for value), but don't bother c-betting much if you miss since he's floating with air and nigh impossible to knock off anything. If he actually pays attention to what opponents do, c-bet enough to where it's not obvious you have something if you bet. If he doesn't pay attention, gently caress it. No need to be deceptive. Be ready to play for stacks with one pair, because it's probably going to be good most of the time. I don't mean TPTK-- I mean one pair. I'd call him down much lighter than top pair in a lot of situations. Nitting it up is a very bad idea against a guy like this. You'll be in fewer pots with him, which is a bad thing, and when you are in a hand with him, you're playing to his strengths. You don't need to tighten up against a guy like this; you need to loosen up so you can play with him more, and you need to loosen your calling standards because he's bluffing and semi-bluffing so often. Keep an eye out for any sort of indicators in his betting patterns or body language that might give you a read on when he has something and when he doesn't. Watch everything he does carefully whether you're in the hand or not and see if you can get a line of when he's value betting and when he's bluffing. If you manage to find something, he'll be much easier to play against. If not, it's like bull riding. If you pick up a hand, just hold the gently caress on. If he's bluffing as much as you're saying, it turns hands that would normally be marginal into solid money makers so long as he doesn't knock you off them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2012 18:42
|
|
|
he open limps pretty much like a typical live player. if a bunch of players limp and he's OTB or in the blinds/straddle he will raise huge (like 8-10x regardless of his stack size). if he limps he will almost never fold pre, the J7x hand i mentioned earlier involved him limping, a guy raising, a shortstack shoving, and the button reshoving and then the psycho thinking for like 2 minutes before lifting up his cards (i could see them) and mucking. it kinda depends on who's in the game but i can narrow the field by raising and i open pretty wide when he's in the blinds so i can play pots with him IP. also i pretty much base my seat selection around him and a few other key donks. i do have a really good, winning TAG image so people tend to respect my raises and 3bets pre but he will almost never fold to them so i pretty much only raise for value if he's already in pot. i did get into a huge pot with him recently where i had TPTK and he bombed the river (never seen him do this before he usually leads pretty small) and i ended up folding cause there were a bunch of 2pairs i thought he could have and 2 possible straights but in retrospect i think it was a big mistake caused by this old iranian guy calling the clock on me after i had tanked for like 2-3minutes and getting flustered by that. it was the largest pot of the night (also it would've been like 2.4k USD had i called and i've never been in a pot that huge with just one pair) and i kinda went off on the iranian dude for a bit after the hand. =/ my friend and i have been tell-hunting and it's kinda pointless...i've probably played like 50 hours this month with this villain and he really doesn't give a gently caress. he acted exactly the same facing allin when he had aces pre as he did with J7x. he tends to think longer when he has a draw but his definition of a draw is pretty lol. he basically views poker as a casino game and tries to win every pot that he has invested any money in. BBV time: the first big hand i ever played with him was my first time at this cardroom and playing with him; have 25k at 50/100, raise to 700 over one limper in the CO w 77, villain calls in blinds, limper calls. flop K76r i cbet 1.6k, villain calls limper folds. turn offsuit 9, i bet 10k (double the pot) because i think he call that much with a king, he calls. river 8 he leads for 2k i just call (there was a 4card straight and i thought maybe he had a higher set idk). he flips over JTx for rivered nuts... edit: this is thai bhat so we were playing like 1/3 USD in the hand; i'm not that baller. in the hand where i had TPTK we were playing like 3/6. Dr. Eat fucked around with this message at 02:58 on Jun 18, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2012 02:35
|
|
|
From that, I would guess your TPTK fold was a mistake, considering he bombed the river there but bet less than 10% of the pot on the river with the nuts. Have you seen him value bet small like that often? And what kind of hands has he shown down when he bombs the river?
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2012 03:37
|
|
|
i had never seen him bomb the river before that's why i was tanking (was trying to remember a spot where he led really big into the aggressor on river). but i think he bet huge because he wanted me to fold so yea should've called. he does these really small value bets pretty often. i think it's pretty likely he has a reverse betsizing tell but he shows down so much weird poo poo as you said have to just strap in and play your cards. have seen him bet half-pot with air which leads me to think the bigger he bets the less likely it is he has it.... Dr. Eat fucked around with this message at 04:47 on Jun 18, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2012 04:22
|
|
|
There you go. That's a massive bet-sizing tell, and a pretty common one with these types. If he's bombing it, you probably don't need anywhere near TPTK to call. Keep an eye out for whether he likes to turn marginal hands into a bluff, and let that determine your calling standards. If he'll bomb the river with second pair, looking to just fold people out, then you probably need top pair to call. Most of them will just look for a showdown with a hand like that, though. I would start with a wide calling range and tighten it up if you see that he's turning a lot of mid pairs into a bluff.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2012 02:39
|
|
|
yea i knew i should've called (that was the main reason i went off against the iranian dude cause i felt if i longer i would've called and scooped huge pot). i am generally pretty good at the poker table  i do have trouble making this adjustment (calling people down really light when i think they're FOS) live...online you get into soooo many spots with fish and you auto-topup when you're wrong plus they will eventually get stacked anyway. live you really only get into one decent pot per hour.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2012 11:58
|
|
|
Not against guys like this, if you've adjusted you calling standards. The beauty of playing with these guys is you don't need a big hand to take a big pot.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2012 04:04
|
|
|
Local card-room spreads a 1/2NL 100max game that I played in tonight. I sat down with a 100bb stack which most of the field was working with. I know nothing about anyone other than it's your standard 1/2 mix of a couple seniors, some young guys with headphones and hoodies and a few wasted guys on a Friday night. Within three hands I was dealt 33 in the SB. 5 limpers to me and I completed and BB checked. 7 to the flop, pot is $10 after rake Flop: 6 37I lead for $8 into the pot and UTG, MP and Button call, pot is $34. Turn is 8 I lead for $30 and UTG calls, the two others fold, pot is now $94 and I have $160 behind. River is the A My questions are: 1) How much should I be betting here given the fact that I know nothing about anyone and 2) Is even contemplating a c/c dumb here given the fact that there are a lot of two pair possibilities out there that may just check behind out of fear? (A7/A8/maybe even an A5/78/56 type hands) TheKevman fucked around with this message at 12:04 on Jun 23, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2012 11:52
|
|
|
TheKevman posted:1) How much should I be betting here given the fact that I know nothing about anyone and 2) Is even contemplating a c/c dumb here given the fact that there are a lot of two pair possibilities out there that may just check behind out of fear? (A7/A8/maybe even an A5/78/56 type hands) 1 - I would bet somewhere around 2/3 to 3/4 pot as a general value-bet not knowing anything about the table yet. Something like $75 sounds good. 2 - This would be a really bad spot to check/call. Betting is way better, all sorts of two pairs might call and if the dude had the nut heart draw and hit his ace he might call too. Given that this is live 1/2 even a naked 7 might hero call here just thinking you were bluffing the whole way. If you get raised on the river I don't think I could ever fold here for what you have left behind.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2012 12:36
|
|
|
TheKevman posted:1) How much should I be betting here given the fact that I know nothing about anyone and 2) Is even contemplating a c/c dumb here given the fact that there are a lot of two pair possibilities out there that may just check behind out of fear? (A7/A8/maybe even an A5/78/56 type hands) UTG's range is basically like flush draws 89s some 7s 45s 56s and probably all those suited aces you mentioned. also 99 maybe TT? he can have spades so im not thrilled with bet/calling river but it's definitely a bet/evaluate if anything happens. his range isn't very strong but we're taking a somewhat unbelievable line since we have to have a set or 2p to want to 3barrel here. we do very very often but he prob doesn't know that and if you are younger than 40 they probably just assume you don't have it anyway. bet like 50 i think. he probably just calls 70 or 75 to be honest but id rather be sure hes calling the most of his range. also I'd consider overbetting flop. their ranges don't really change if you make it more than 8. You could probably even get away with like 16 or 20. it also sets up the rest of the hand better.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2012 16:28
|
|
|
I ended up betting pot ($90) thinking that if he'd had one of the A7/A8 hands or a 67/78/busted flush draw with a big ace he'd be unable to let go and I'd try to sink max value. At this 1/2 game (and I guess most 1/2 games) I feel like I get called off with TPTK/TPGK extremely light and that if he'd gotten there with an AT hand he'd probably call. (Later on I saw him snap off $100 into a $100 river bet in a $150 pot on a board of 2J9T8 with AJo  ) I can't over-bet shove since max bet is $100 and I felt that betting less would be leaving value on the table. I figured any larger set was raising either flop or turn on a super drawy board, and that even a 45 straight would have played it a little faster given board texture. He ended up tanking for about 2-3 full minutes and then reluctantly called with his 5 9 while saying, "You got it?"  I'd never seen someone so pained to call down with what's almost certain to be the stone cold nuts  WampaLord posted:If you get raised on the river I don't think I could ever fold here for what you have left behind. Yeah I tried to think about bet sizing on the river and had pretty much ruled out folding, regardless. If he jammed for $70 more I just don't see how I could walk away from ~$70 into ~$350 on anything less than a 4/flush or 4/straight board. TheKevman fucked around with this message at 20:04 on Jun 23, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2012 19:20
|
|
|
One thing I would suggest in a loose-passive game like this is to make a small raise with small pocket pairs like this. If your room plays anything like mine, no one is ever folding to a raise of 5-7 after they limp. If you miss, no big deal. If you hit, extraction is much simpler. Half the time, hitting a set in a limped pot just leads to pulling a small pot unless someone gets there.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2012 18:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 15:02 |
|
|
i like betitng 15 on the flop cause no one knows the size of the pot. also players tend not to be aware of the rake/even know there is one so i wouldn't even bother adjusting my betsizing for whatever was taken out of the pot. as played i would bet 70 OTR and book my ticket to valuetown with the extra bucks. where are you playing that there's a maxbet rule? i played at the oaks in san francisco and got kings my first hand sized my flop bet so i could shove the pot on the turn, say 'allin' get told i can't do that, and then forget to throw my last $25 into the pot on the river cause i was so confused. such a tilting rule. AmnesiaLab posted:One thing I would suggest in a loose-passive game like this is to make a small raise with small pocket pairs like this. If your room plays anything like mine, no one is ever folding to a raise of 5-7 after they limp. If you miss, no big deal. If you hit, extraction is much simpler. Half the time, hitting a set in a limped pot just leads to pulling a small pot unless someone gets there.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2012 02:45
|
|