Set vs. sorta scary flop with one to act behind you.... you? |
|
Posted Mon May 08, 2006 12:21 pm GMT by supafrey
Your act
http://www.pokerhand.org/?327725
Did you know that participating in a poker forum can help you improve your own game? Be it by sharing experiences or simply asking for help, participation in a forum helps you focus and keep 'on topic' which will help you improve your game. You can learn from other players feedback and from their experiences. Why the THP poker forums? We offer one of the best managed texas holdem poker forums available, and the community within is far more friendly than those typicaly found on other sites. We've made a 'lurkers edition' of the poker forum available here on Holdem Poker Online, but we encourage all visitors to register and join in on the conversations on TexasHoldem-Poker.com
Posted Mon May 08, 2006 12:33 pm GMT by BeerWench13
That's a tough hand. There are so many possiblities. A set of 9's was my first thought, but there's also a straight out there and a flush draw. The check/raise is a bit scary. Could be a steal attempt. I would've raised on the flop, personally.
At this point, raise or fold. I can't say either is the best play here, but I would probably raise. If he reraises again, I'd have to put him on a straight or a higher set. If he just calls, he may have a pair of 8's with the gutshot or T's for the overpair or a flush draw. Tough to say with his limp/call preflop.
Posted Mon May 08, 2006 2:22 pm GMT by kainARGH
Call me a donk , But I think I'm min raiseing as my safe play and going all in as my aggressive play. The min raise is so i can evaluate the turn if he smooth calls , but call if he re-raises. The all in is well - either to end this now or make him pay me off with his two pair or pair + flush draw.
Thats my aggressive take on it - Which i would be agressive seeing as hes monster chip leader and could make this raise with less then top set or the nut str8.
Though you do have posistion on him - but I think smooth calling only begs him to lead aggressivly on the turn regardless , so it seems a fold or raise situation.
*edit* now if you have any kind of a read on him , and put him on less then 99 or the nut str8 , and you want t maximize profit - I would probably pause for a few seconds , then call. re-evaluate on the turn.
Posted Mon May 08, 2006 3:16 pm GMT by Skribbles
I'd prolly push.
I think a set of 9's is highly unlikely as he would have come in raising. 5's is definitly a possibility and the check/raise is an attempt to protect his hand.
Even if you are up against a straight, you have outs.
Only other line I could see is smooth calling and then making your decision on his turn action and the turn card.
(I recommend the push though)
Posted Mon May 08, 2006 3:23 pm GMT by BeerWench13
I'd raise. The more I think on this, the more I put him on A9, possibly of hearts. With the limp/call, then the original bettor made a continuation bet and both behind called, this guy probably thinks his TPTK is good and may have outs for the flush (maybe A  only?). I reraise $50.
Posted Mon May 08, 2006 5:29 pm GMT by Orcy
push,
yeah set of 9 beat you but thats the only possible holding that beat you imo. I put him on an overpair to the board or A9 like Beer chikie said 
EDIT: i just reread it and the guy that raised just limped preflop(i though he raised) well its more dangerous but id prolly still push but its a tougher call to make.
Posted Mon May 08, 2006 7:11 pm GMT by xDiamond_CutteRx
Boy, here's where it really helps to know your player. Most good players would probably have raised with 99 in his spot, so I'm prepared to all but rule out 99. The only hand that's ahead of you at this point is 87. 87s is a possible hand for an aggressive player, especially since he was last to act after the raise. 55 is also a very likely hand for him to have, given the action so far. The other hands I can think he might have are A 9 , A 8 , or A 7 .
There are only two hands that have you beat, as I said, but you have far more out against 87 than against 99. I honestly don't know how likely he is to have 99, because I don't know the type of player he is--some people put 99 in the same category with 99, and others seem to think it's not much better than 44.
Overall, I think I'd probably end up pushing all-in on this hand. Given that the guy has a big stack, I'd bet he's reasonably aggressive. This is a pretty marginal situation, but I'm pretty sure it's +EV if you use SHAL (Structured Hand Analysis).
Posted Mon May 08, 2006 7:22 pm GMT by tame_deuces
We have a guy behind us though, do we want him in or out? (he might fold anyway, but who knows)
Posted Mon May 08, 2006 8:00 pm GMT by supafrey
Interesting. I'll share the right answers after some more discussion.
Posted Tue May 09, 2006 2:03 am GMT by Phil14312
Whats odd is that the check/raise *almost* seems small enough that its for value, something like A 9 , where villain thinks he might have the best hand/best draw. Either that or 78, eeek. I probably end up pushing here and hope I get called by that type of hand, and even a flopped straight will give us 10 outs on the turn.
Posted Tue May 09, 2006 10:29 am GMT by CodeNull
pop it again, min reraise, or, maybe flat call, hoping that some of the others come along for the ride, you are ahead often enough there than I think you need to extract as much money from as many people as possible here. bet/push turn.
Posted Tue May 09, 2006 10:31 am GMT by supafrey
| CodeNull wrote: | | pop it again, min reraise, or, maybe flat call, hoping that some of the others come along for the ride, you are ahead often enough there than I think you need to extract as much money from as many people as possible here. bet/push turn. |
didn't you just give three answers?
Posted Tue May 09, 2006 10:31 am GMT by ScanX
my answer will sound weird/cheeky :
one of them has to have 87, so you should probably call and drag the other player along and make this a monster pot.
u dont really have the odds to call that raise assuming you're beat, but the implied odds are big enough to make it correct
Posted Tue May 09, 2006 10:37 am GMT by Sean_in_NJ
fold preflop
or call
whichever
Posted Tue May 09, 2006 10:51 am GMT by CodeNull
| Sean_in_NJ wrote: | fold preflop
or call
whichever |
I am sensing a bit of apathy here.
Posted Tue May 09, 2006 1:00 pm GMT by zeroswarm
I'm all in.
Posted Tue May 09, 2006 2:53 pm GMT by supafrey
Well here's how I DID play it.
http://www.pokerhand.org/?327724
The proper play is to call. There's about a dozen reasons or so why, but I'll only elaborate if asked.
Thanks for playing guys.
Posted Tue May 09, 2006 3:06 pm GMT by Sean_in_NJ
| supafrey wrote: | | There's about a dozen reasons or so why, but I'll only elaborate if asked. |
Why? Please elaborate.
Posted Tue May 09, 2006 3:55 pm GMT by Phil14312
Proper to call is +EV or is it proper to call if we know villain has two small pair? Please elaborate.
Posted Tue May 09, 2006 3:58 pm GMT by supafrey
| Phil14312 wrote: | | Proper to call is +EV or is it proper to call if we know villain has two small pair? Please elaborate. |
Very interesting question.
It's the former, I realize now, but I never even actually thought about that before. I'll type out a full response in a bit.
Posted Tue May 09, 2006 4:01 pm GMT by tame_deuces
I agree that calling is best, but what's the gameplan if
1.) Last guy calls and a heart falls on turn
2.) Last guy folds and a heart falls on turn
Posted Wed May 10, 2006 1:52 am GMT by xDiamond_CutteRx
Please list the dozen or so reasons, because while I think calling is a good play, it's hardly the most obvious play. If you knew what he had in the Fundamental Theorem of Poker sense, of course calling was correct, but interestingly enough, if you knew the player would call an all-in, raising would be correct also.
I've made plays like that a lot, and it's important to make them as part of a balanced strategy, but I think re-raising here could be correct as part of that strategy as well. I certainly would hate to give a cheap card to beat me here, but if he has something like a flush draw + inside straight draw, he's getting close to calling odds even we push all-in anyway. Is this why you think calling is "correct" here, in hopes that a draw misses on the turn? Or is it because you think giving a cheap card is unlikely to change anything?
You obviously have something in mind supa, so just spill it already. 
Posted Wed May 10, 2006 3:51 am GMT by JohnnyCache
I was thinking yeah, in the worst case the guy has a made hand to beat you and you STILL have draws to beat it...5s 9s two 6s and redraw to the straight yourself...my question is not to call here, but what to do if the straights and flushes get made and your hand doesn't...
I want to hear your reasons
I am addicted to this game so I have to get better or die poor.
Posted Wed May 10, 2006 7:25 am GMT by BeerWench13
| xDiamond_CutteRx wrote: | | I certainly would hate to give a cheap card to beat me here |
This was my reason for raising here. Pay to play. If you're going to suck out on me, I'm not going to make it cheap to do so.
Posted Wed May 10, 2006 7:58 am GMT by Tadzio
I can give a reason:
Implied odds.
Percent chance to fill up by the river: 34%
Percent chance a flush will occur without you filling up: 25%
Percent chance a flush will occur and Hero fills up: 9%
Percent chance 87 will become the straight flush nuts: 5%
So you're probably ahead here with a solid chance to improve if someone has 87 and you want as many people drawing as possible. With someone to act behind you, you want to sweeten the pot for him to stick around, not scare him away. If there's more than one person drawing to the flush, your odds actually improve... and whether you're facing multiple flush-drawers or not, driving 1 of them out of the pot does nothing but make the pot smaller (implied odds).
Pot is 16 once the flop comes.
Pot is 31 when Ocean raises to 25
Pot is 56 and someone has to call 20 to win it.
A flush draw can't call with those odds.
But after a fold someone else calls.
Pot is now 76 and person that's last to act only has to call 20 to win it.
Thems be odds for calling.
If Supa had pushed after Ocean had raised, the player behind him would've folded (unless they had Supa beat... in which case pushing wouldn't be the smartest thing anyway....) and Ocean may've folded as well, hurting our longterm earnings. This way they're both in the hand still, and the pot is bloated to 96... Even if Supa pushes on the turn, he's likely to get called by someone. Ebi's stack has also dwindled from 68 to 39... there's a chance he considers himself pot-committed and will bust himself on the turn (he ended up folding to the two all-ins when he didn't draw his heart, natch).
So, the pot is 96 by calling and Supa can pump the pot up to 174 or 226 or even (potentially) 265 on the turn. Supa's also avoided committing more than 29... which even if he's behind, gives him odds to continue to pursue his full house.
By calling, the only hand Supa doesn't have odds to play against is 99. In the long-term, however, the number of pots you'll lose to 99 in this spot is dwarfed by the number of times you take down this inflated pot... even with the danger of a completed flush or straight coming off during one of the 66/100 hands where Hero doesn't fill up.
Summary:
Pushing:
net Minimum made-- 47
net Maximum (reasonably) made-- 107
Minimum loss-- 94
Calling:
net Minimum made-- 67
net Maximum made-- 171
Minimum loss-- 29
.... this is just the way I'm lookin' at it. Lemme know if my logic is flawed.
</asstalking>
Posted Wed May 10, 2006 8:27 am GMT by UrAteUp
Man alot of good reading on this post. I can see why some say to just call and others say to push. I probably would have said push post flop but I like the way you played this hand Supa and Tadzio...I really like that explanation of how you would have played it and why.
Posted Wed May 10, 2006 8:43 am GMT by BeerWench13
| UrAteUp wrote: | | I like the way you played this hand Supa and Tadzio...I really like that explanation of how you would have played it and why. |
I agree. I guess everyone here has their own theories on how and why they would play. For the record, I wouldn't have pushed on the flop, but I would've reraised. I don't want them all to fold, but I don't want them to catch cheaply either. There's a fine line there.
Also, what I think most are leaving out, is that you have to take into account what type of players you're playing. Did you have any reads on any of these guys, supa?
Posted Wed May 10, 2006 9:02 am GMT by tame_deuces
There are some very important considerations to be made.
This is a typical hand to be 'results' oriented in, even for experienced players. Not necessarily because of who won, but because of what happened on the flop/turn.
We got 'lucky' player 3 called and we (in all likelyhood) got 'lucky' that no scarecard fell on the turn.
Not that too many scarecards stop us from getting our money in, but alot of scarecards may shut out hands we beat. Actually, a scarecard (in a sense) did fall, but our opponent for some reason believed his bottom two could beat this board and raged on. (Which is pretty bad, pending on the other two guys in the pot and their image).
Lucky is the wrong word, but our plan for the hand has to take these events into consideration too.
Also, going broke with a set on the flop is rarely a big mistake, because you are often ahead (against most players) and if you are not you usually got solid outs. So I think it is closer between a push/raise and a call than we think. Especially considering we might get our money in on turn being a solid dog in the hand.
(Which equity wise is bad beyond words compared to doing it on the flop).
Posted Wed May 10, 2006 9:13 am GMT by BeerWench13
| tame_deuces wrote: | Especially considering we might get our money in on turn being a solid dog in the hand.
(Which equity wise is bad beyond words compared to doing it on the flop). |
This is why I would raise on the flop, personally. I rarely slowplay a set unless I have an excellent read on my opponent. I may not win a huge pot every time, but I'm not losing one either. I know it's probably not the best theory in poker, but I'd rather win small than lose big. JMO.
Posted Wed May 10, 2006 9:49 am GMT by UrAteUp
| tame_deuces wrote: | There are some very important considerations to be made.
This is a typical hand to be 'results' oriented in, even for experienced players. Not necessarily because of who won, but because of what happened on the flop/turn.
We got 'lucky' player 3 called and we (in all likelyhood) got 'lucky' that no scarecard fell on the turn.
Not that too many scarecards stop us from getting our money in, but alot of scarecards may shut out hands we beat. Actually, a scarecard (in a sense) did fall, but our opponent for some reason believed his bottom two could beat this board and raged on. (Which is pretty bad, pending on the other two guys in the pot and their image).
Lucky is the wrong word, but our plan for the hand has to take these events into consideration too.
Also, going broke with a set on the flop is rarely a big mistake, because you are often ahead (against most players) and if you are not you usually got solid outs. So I think it is closer between a push/raise and a call than we think. Especially considering we might get our money in on turn being a solid dog in the hand.
(Which equity wise is bad beyond words compared to doing it on the flop). |
I can agree with your stand here as well Tamed. It all goes back to poker being a situational game and the best action in this instance may not be the best action in all instances. Most of this situations are best figured out by your reads on others (ie..tells, betting patterns...etc. )
Posted Wed May 10, 2006 1:16 pm GMT by supafrey
lol. Tadzio did a very interesting run down as I spent the night drinking myself stupid. First off: very nice. Alot of that reasoning you showed is similar to my own. I don't do the numbers as detailed as you, but I just sorta ball park it in my head and usually get it right. =)
Okay. Important points to consider/restate. It's not exhaustive, and I likely won't recover most of what Tadz said. Some interesting questions have been raised...
First off.. Something to consider: I think you guys are getting a little too focused on what hands are "beating" me and narrowing the range of what our opponents may have a bit unfairly as a result. While the two hearts tend to get our attention (and nut flush draw is definitely a possibility) what about hands like TT, JJ, QQ? 88? 77? An idiot with KK or AA? Wouldn't all of these hands have a legitimate reason to raise to 25 dollars there?
Secondly... I can't stress enough how much we want the person behind to call. Their stack is too small to really scare us, they're inflating the pot, they're increasing the money we win from a fh, if we hit AND they hit their draw we're taking all their money, it forces our REAL villian to deal with a much larger pot likely either 1) Giving us more money when we're winning because he's forced to bet larger out of position or 2) causing him to deal with more people/cash and might make a bad decision.
While I realize that some have a tendency to want to "take a pot down right now" , especially from third party drawing hands, we're not playing to "lose a big pot" ... with all of these drawing hands playing against our MUCH BETTER HAND we're putting ourselves in a position to "most likely" win a big pot. This is important.
Thirdly.... about "scare" cards. First off, I don't get how the 4 could be seen as a scare card for anybody, Tame? But that's digressing... Consider this: How many real scarecards ARE there?
Well:
OESD in this situation is unlikely with those flush cards and decent raises, so we're most likely dealing with atleast one flush draw instead. Other considerations are overcards to the board, which could give over-sets, a 5 that could quad up a current bottom set... And that's really it?
What does this mean? Well... In all likelyhood overcards really shouldn't scare us too much. If this IS what the person had they're most probably drawing to 1 or 2 outs right now (flush cards could still be losers for them, too, and we'd be counting those hearts as "crap" cards for us regardless)... This literally means they have about 5% at most to hit by the turn... Not something to concern ourselves with.
Hearts are a definite fear of mine... But here's something to consider... There's 9 hearts left in the deck if someone has a flush draw.. This is our worst case scenario, as the other villian wouldn't be eating up any of his outs so we'd be about 18% to see a heart come up on the turn. MUCH more likely is that the second person has a heart up as well - ***see, i'm not thinking results oriented... =) ... this eats up a few percentage points and we're likely doing better as a result.
Overall, this means that we have about a 25-30% to have our hand turn into a loser by the turn - Not a major concern when we can be calling to build the pot by such a larger margin AND put ourselves in a position to take the entire stack of our two opponents.
If they DO hit this 1/4 chance, we're still in a position to have the board pair and win it for us regardless - oddly enough at about the % of a chance. More good news for us.
Now.. I realize you might be curious as to why I'm saying that it only matters what happens up to the turn... Well.. in all honesty, there's no way that SOMEONE won't be all in on the turn. If it's not the person first to act who has shown HUGE aggression with the c/r out of position, it would be myself. In all likelyhood, any hand that DOES that c/r would be getting the fold equity to push regardless of ANY turn. Even a nut flush draw would push, hoping to scare us out most likely - remember, we're just both calling behind him... not exactly a show of strength. I repeat: we are just calling down his bet, as is the person behind us... there's not a SINGLE hand that raised on the turn there that wouldn't think they're good about 70-80% of the time there and wouldn't raise the river.
Also... I'm not scared of 99 if you noticed. It's not that it's NOT POSSIBLE, but i'd say it's about 50/50 with us playing against 55 instead. With that possibility I'm more than glad to write these two probable situations off against one another and call it a draw.
Oh. And a flush card does suck on the turn. We would call down if one came up.
And I like how none of ya'all came up with the possible two pair. While the flush draw is also a likely scenario, 2 pair has to atleast cross our minds. our set of 6's makes it slightly less likely but still possible.
Dum de dum...
Okay I'm not entirely sober so I forget a good deal of the rest of my thinking, but Tadzio covered most of it fortunately. I'll add to this later today, I just felt guilty not writing up anything when I promised to =)
WHO SAYS I DONT HELP OUT AROUND HERE
Posted Wed May 10, 2006 1:24 pm GMT by Phil14312
| BeerWench13 wrote: | | tame_deuces wrote: | Especially considering we might get our money in on turn being a solid dog in the hand.
(Which equity wise is bad beyond words compared to doing it on the flop). |
This is why I would raise on the flop, personally. I rarely slowplay a set unless I have an excellent read on my opponent. I may not win a huge pot every time, but I'm not losing one either. I know it's probably not the best theory in poker, but I'd rather win small than lose big. JMO. |
Wench I understand where your mentality comes from, "pay to suck out", "win a small pot than lose a big one." But, you realize that sometimes that doesn't always make you the most money at the table? My point is that yes you must raise to give someone bad odds to draw, but you still want them to call with their bad odds right? If you don't want that call, you are leaving money on the table at some point. It basically comes down to your style is a bit smaller EV-wise, but way less variance. Whereas optimal EV may have more variance...does that make sense?
As for calling vs. pushing, I think Tame is on to it when he said that depending on the villains hand, a lot of scarecards hurt us, or hurt the value we may get from our hand. Imagine if you hold 2 small pair on that board, and the turn is a 7 of the suit completing the flush. Now how do you feel about your hand? I really think pushing the flop is best only because the pot may be big enough that, like Diamond said, someone with a gutshot and flush draw will call---and we win money. When the villain reraises to $25, he's committed a significant portion of his stack and most of the times is ready to go to the felt with the hand.
Posted Wed May 10, 2006 1:30 pm GMT by supafrey
| Phil14312 wrote: | | When the villain reraises to $25, he's committed a significant portion of his stack and most of the times is ready to go to the felt with the hand. |
I don't buy that. I ESPECIALLY don't buy that we can be sure enough of that, considering how scary the board is. Alot of smart players, considering how much limping and calling has happened, would want to raise with their overpair to figure out their position in the hand. Top pair top kicker, any overpair, 88.... ALOT of hands would be more than happy to raise from our villian's position to figure out where they are...
When they raise and we push, they're gonna fold and we're gonna lose money that we should have picked up. There's a lot of value in playing weak in this hand. Alot.
Posted Wed May 10, 2006 1:42 pm GMT by BeerWench13
| Phil14312 wrote: | | When the villain reraises to $25, he's committed a significant portion of his stack and most of the times is ready to go to the felt with the hand. |
This is another reason I'm going to raise here. Firstly, there is no guarantee that I'm going to get all of this guy's money in the pot. However, he doesn't have a large stack, so it's likely he won't lay down this hand. I also want to thin the field a bit. My odds are better for my hand to hold up if it's heads up as opposed to being up against two opponents.
When I play the flop, I'm doing so with the turn and river in mind. I am also trying to figure out what this guy is holding. If I just call herem I don't have any more information than the limp/call preflop and the check/raise on the flop. Now the turn is coming. What do I do if a comes on the turn? If a card looks to have made a straight for him? I need some way to know what he's playing.
By raising, I can guage just how strong this guy is. If this guy has an overpair, he'll likely call, hoping to hit his set and/or putting us on TPTK or maybe an overpair to the board, but one inferior to his. If he has a flush draw, I'd rather he have to make a decision and pay to chase.
When I have a set, I'm not counting on boating. Maybe I'm a pessimist? Or maybe that it's just that I don't get that lucky that often?
| supafrey wrote: | | When they raise and we push |
For the record, I wouldn't push here. I would raise, but just an info raise. I do want to make the pot big because I think I have the best hand right now. However, I don't want to scare both of them away. Only one.
Posted Wed May 10, 2006 1:50 pm GMT by supafrey
Wenchie:
Luck and pessimism are irrelevant. You have 10 outs to hit a boat on the river. That's alot of outs...
Also, your first paragraph about "thinning the field" may be intuitive, but it's completely wrong here. We want to win big pots and we want to do it when we have big hands... This situation is good to play against alot of people, because while it's possible that we're already losing, few cards could come up that we don't immediately know are scare cards - (another 7, 8 or heart, i suppose). Reread what phil wrote... he's trying to explain it to you - You're losing money right now.
Also...
| Quote: | | By raising, I can guage just how strong this guy is. If this guy has an overpair, he'll likely call, hoping to hit his set and/or putting us on TPTK or maybe an overpair to the board, but one inferior to his. If he has a flush draw, I'd rather he have to make a decision and pay to chase. |
So you're saying you want to raise to "guage" sic how strong our opponents are ... Well, you just gave the two different possible scenarios and with both you said it was likely that our opponent would call...... WHAT INFORMATION ARE WE GETTING HERE? Anything but an all in will get called pretty quickly (OR PUSHED BACK AT US) and a push from us just commits us all in regardless. Are you just saying we should "raise" to get info or are you actually considering what info we could possibly get?
A substantially worse hand would fold, costing us future money, and a marginal or great hand would call us. What info is this really buying?
Slowplay this sucker.. Take your time and evaluate on the turn.
Posted Wed May 10, 2006 1:58 pm GMT by supafrey
A brief summary for the lazy:
We're probably winning so we can take our time because there's not much likely to beat us and we want to make a big juicy pot.... If we are losing this makes it cheaper for us to see more cards and hit our many many juicy outs.
Posted Wed May 10, 2006 2:33 pm GMT by Phil14312
Supa when you only call the flop and inviting the third player to stick around, I think there are a bunch more scare cards on the turn. Now any 7 or 8, which is another 6 cards. You are giving that overcaller great odds and great implied odds to take off a lot of cards. I think you might be underestimating the times we get drawn out on in this pot. If there is no caller behind you...then I call. That 3rd caller makes me want to raise...and if I raise I probably push.
Ok I just reread the stack sizes, for some reason I thought that Ocean only had about 70-80 to start the hand with, not playing as deep as he is. We want to get all his money, but I don't think we want the third guy sticking around. A push here is about pot size, so he's getting 2:1 if our third guy doesn't call. Would he call here with bottom-two on this board getting 2:1? I don't know, you tell me.
Posted Wed May 10, 2006 3:39 pm GMT by supafrey
| Quote: | | A push here is about pot size, so he's getting 2:1 if our third guy doesn't call. Would he call here with bottom-two on this board getting 2:1? I don't know, you tell me. |
What if he just has TT? or JJ? 88?
I don't see how we could possibly be scared of those 7s and 8s all too seriously. Don't know how many people draw to the gutshot on a flush board and a 20 dollar raise coming to them....
And yeah. Stacksizes are big factors in this hand.
Posted Thu May 11, 2006 12:21 pm GMT by BeerWench13
You're right, supa. I'm probably leaving a lot of money on the table. I guess my run was so bad for so long that I'm just afraid of slowplaying. Every time I do it, it bites me in the ass.
I'm not misunderstanding what you're saying. I just explained what I would do and why. I much prefer to get more money in the pot at this point than give them any free cards to catch on me. I like my chances better heads-up as well. Like I said, I don't boat very often. Hell, I'm lucky to hit a set. When I do hit a set, I don't slowplay them without a good read on my opponent.
This is what I would do with no further information on the way these guys play. Now, if I had reads or had been sitting with them for a while and knew what/how they play, the scenario may be different. I just don't want to kick myself after the hand (as I've done numerous times) for just calling down instead of raising it up and thinning the field and or making them pay to catch on me.
Posted Thu May 11, 2006 1:47 pm GMT by UrAteUp
It's posts like this one that shows me where I leave a ton of money on the table.
|
|
