Posted Fri Dec 29, 2006 1:01 pm GMT by aaronw
$100NL. 6max. And again no reads on the players. They are new to the table and/or I have never played with them before.
Full Tilt Poker Game #1495037479: Table Elkington (6 max) - $0.50/$1 - No Limit Hold'em - 12:34:30 ET - 2006/12/29
Seat 1: ThELiVinGYeArS ($77.60)
Seat 2: cbboy ($184)
Seat 3: jackpotjohn ($66.40)
Seat 4: Gainsay ($108.50)
Seat 5: XxHoochxX ($100)
Seat 6: FTPickle ($136)
ThELiVinGYeArS posts the small blind of $0.50
cbboy posts the big blind of $1
The button is in seat #6
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to cbboy  
jackpotjohn calls $1
Gainsay calls $1
XxHoochxX calls $1
FTPickle folds
ThELiVinGYeArS calls $0.50
cbboy has 15 seconds left to act
cbboy raises to $8
jackpotjohn calls $7
Gainsay folds
XxHoochxX calls $7
ThELiVinGYeArS calls $7
*** FLOP ***   
ThELiVinGYeArS checks
cbboy checks
jackpotjohn checks
XxHoochxX checks
*** TURN *** 
ThELiVinGYeArS checks
cbboy checks
jackpotjohn checks
XxHoochxX checks
*** RIVER *** 
ThELiVinGYeArS checks
cbboy...
How has this been played so far? What do you think of PF? What do you do on the river? Bet (if so, how much?) Check? Thanks in advance.
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 Fri Dec 29, 2006 1:21 pm GMT by Sean_in_NJ
| aaronw wrote: | | $100NL. 6max. And again no reads on the players. They are new to the table and/or I have never played with them before. |
So they've never played with you either....why didn't you take a stab at it on the flop? If you were going to make a play at the pot, the flop was the time.
Maybe a small blocking bet on the river of half the pot. I don't think you're ever getting called by a worse hand though.
Posted Fri Dec 29, 2006 1:22 pm GMT by BeerWench13
Ugh. Personally, I think this is one of the ugliest hands I've seen posted in some time. I don't like the way you played it at all. Of course, this is just my personal opinion.
1. I wouldn't have raised from BB with that hand. I'm assuming it was a steal attempt preflop?
2. I'd have fired a continuation bet on the flop. The A is the scare card, and I would've represented it. It would also let me know where I was based on the action behind me.
I don't see the point of raising preflop from EP with a god-awful hand and then checking it down from there. Perhaps I misread something or I'm just so tired from getting less than 2 hours sleep that I'm missing something in the history that will make this hand make some sense to me?
Posted Fri Dec 29, 2006 1:37 pm GMT by aaronw
You really like leading into 3 other players on that board? It has to have hit someone, wouldn't you think? And yes, it was a steal attempt, hence "squeeze attempt" 
Posted Fri Dec 29, 2006 1:45 pm GMT by Jauron
Half the pot and be ready to fold if you get raised.
Posted Fri Dec 29, 2006 1:49 pm GMT by aaronw
| Jauron wrote: | | Half the pot and be ready to fold if you get raised. |
I am assuming you mean on the river?
Posted Fri Dec 29, 2006 1:53 pm GMT by BeerWench13
See! I knew I missed something!
As I stated, I wouldn't have made the preflop play in the first place as there really isn't enough in the pot to warrant putting in more money before I see the flop. As a steal attempt, it's iffy at a full table. I don't play 6max tables, so I can't speak well on that particular facet of the play.
| aaronw wrote: | | You really like leading into 3 other players on that board? |
Absolutely. If I'm going to represent a big hand preflop, I'm certainly going to bet the flop when the big cards hit. If you're going to represent it, sell it all the way. And, occasionally, he who bets first wins the pot.
| aaronw wrote: | | It has to have hit someone, wouldn't you think? |
Wouldn't your opponents think so too? I know that, if I was your opponent, with the unorthodox raise from BB preflop, I would be concerned that you had a very big hand and were trying to protect it.
Posted Fri Dec 29, 2006 1:56 pm GMT by Jauron
Yeah on the river. I would have lead out on the flop though myself, you raised and got called the flop brought an Ace, time to show em you got it.
On the river you are beat many different ways, but I think your hand is too good to check down with zero betting, this is the type of hand I'm going to make some money on if I have to show it or fold it when some one gives me a reason to.
Posted Fri Dec 29, 2006 3:18 pm GMT by Muck
I thought a squeeze was when:
Players A to C* fold or limp, Player D raises (say 3xBB), then you re-raise (say 10xBB) immediately after with Rags.
The double show of strength forces everyone to fold around to D because this looks like a fight and they don’t have the hands to get involved.
Then D folds because he never had anything THAT strong really.
On the upside it’s an easy fold if D re-raises and if D calls you still have the possible out of a well concealed hand if the flop is all rags.
However I thought this was a tournament play rather than ring.
*The group of early players could be any number.
Posted Fri Dec 29, 2006 3:18 pm GMT by Iron Butt
| BeerWench13 wrote: | | Ugh. Personally, I think this is one of the ugliest hands I've seen posted in some time. |
Not just him though, what can these people have called with that NO ONE bets that flop or turn???
I like a smaller PF bet, say $4 (though 25o is just too hopeless to be messing with IMO), same again on the flop, and I'd say not a dollar more if that doesn't take it... except for that darn 2 LOL. So what do these people have? KK, JJ, and maybe a very optimistic suited medium ace or small pair?? That's what we need them to have, only reasonable alternative I see is someone's hiding a monster.
I was going to say bet 10-ish, but then it hit me, the perfect play. Minbet.
Posted Fri Dec 29, 2006 3:55 pm GMT by aaronw
I am making this play with a hopeless hand like 52o because it really doesn't have any value seeing a flop 4 or 5 ways. I as just trying to steal the pot PF, which didn't work at all. The players had to have been calling me with something that has hit that board in some way. I would not make this play with a better hand that plays well in multiway pots, like 67s, etc. I only made the play to attempt to steal the pot with a hand that has little value.
Posted Fri Dec 29, 2006 4:20 pm GMT by Ensano
I totally agree with BeerWench... you raised, telling everyone you have a hand. An A hit so you tell them again. I'd bet out 2/3 pot and fold to any agression... Depending on the action reevaluate yourself IF there even is a turn
Posted Fri Dec 29, 2006 4:52 pm GMT by Muck
I’m cautious of a continuation bet:
- I think 3 opponents is just too many. What happens if someone calls? How far should this be taken? Plus he’s UTG on the turn and river.
- The pots so big now he’d probably have to risk >=$20 just to get the folds.
- The hand was chosen so it could be walked away from easily.
- The A and T on the flop are horrible cards.
Summary I’m scared 
Posted Fri Dec 29, 2006 4:56 pm GMT by aaronw
| Muck wrote: | I’m cautious of a continuation bet:
- I think 3 opponents is just too many. What happens if someone calls? How far should this be taken? Plus he’s UTG on the turn and river.
- The pots so big now he’d probably have to risk >=$20 just to get the folds.
- The hand was chosen so it could be walked away from easily.
- The A and T on the flop are horrible cards.
Summary I’m scared |
That was pretty much my train of thought. This is a pretty ugly board and more than likely hit some people. If it hit them, they are probably unlikely to fold.
Posted Fri Dec 29, 2006 5:10 pm GMT by MilkyPirate
| aaronw wrote: | | $100NL. 6max. And again no reads on the players. They are new to the table and/or I have never played with them before.. |
That is your first mistake here. You are playing online at a low limit shorthanded table. Players here typically are looser not only cause of the limits, but also because it is a shorthanded table. With that being said, YOU HAVE NO READS ON THE PLAYERS! A squeeze play is a tricky little play that is rarely performed and can only be done so when you establish your table image (as a tight-aggressive player) and get reads on the other players. It seems as though you have won chips and established the former, but with new players, you have yet to establish the latter.
I once performed a squeeze play successfully at a home game with 94o (Leafsfan1122 can tell you about that one  ) against two players whom I had accurate reads on (and this play also benefited me in another tourney...Leafsfan can also tell you about that ).
Mistake #1: No reads on opponents.
Another mistake is raising out of the BB with 3 limpers. You usually want to do this when you have a hand because players are typically loose at these limits (and SH table) and at least 1 or 2 of them to call (it sometimes creates a "bunching factor" of many players calling a raise one after another).
They all ended up calling.
So far your "squeeze play" has failed and you need to hit the flop huge or have a board you could represent.
Ohhhh but the flop hits AT5 with 2 suits. Big cards, straight draws, flush draws....and you only have lowest pair, no kicker and out of position against 2/3 players. You could bet to take down the pot in a bold attempt, however on THIS board it is almost suicidal. You check and everybody does the same.
Turn card doesn't help either as now there is another big card, another flush draw, there is a possible straight and there are still straight draws out there now. No point in betting and everybody checks again.
River card gives you two pair but the board is so deadly I don't think you can bet here. You may call off a bet if it is small enough, however if you bet you will get raised/called by: A set, a straight, a flush, and a higher two pair. Check-call the river if there is small betting and be grateful if you win this pot by fluke. (Side note: You could get a bit fancy if somebody bets, there is a call, and then you reraise representing strength...but this is stupid because a) You have no strong reads on your opponents b) A LOT of hands beat you here and even semi-weak hand on this connected-suited board like AT may reluctantly call you here).
I think you misplayed the hand from the get go and this is a good example of when NOT to do a squeeze play and HOW not to do a squeeze play.
Posted Fri Dec 29, 2006 5:48 pm GMT by aaronw
I don't think not having reads on the players is a "mistake" per se. I don't think this is a terrible place to do a squeeze. Just because I don't have any reads on the players doesn't automatically make this a horrible place to squeeze, does it?
Posted Fri Dec 29, 2006 8:06 pm GMT by Biowza
Isn't a squeeze play when someone raises (like 3-5bb) a call behind (just a call) then you come over the top of both of them with a big raise? You have to have established a tight image at the table and both the raisor and the caller have to be somewhat loose players.
I usually would make a continuation bet here.
Posted Fri Dec 29, 2006 10:18 pm GMT by MilkyPirate
| aaronw wrote: | | I don't think not having reads on the players is a "mistake" per se. I don't think this is a terrible place to do a squeeze. Just because I don't have any reads on the players doesn't automatically make this a horrible place to squeeze, does it? |
Yes it actually does. Have you read Harrington on Hold'em II? He goes indepth to the squeeze play he performed at the 2004 WSOP vs. Josh Arieh and Greg Raymer. His play was based opon two factors: 1) His tight table image and 2) His read on what Arieh and Raymer had. Of course this is an end of tournament situation...but it can be compared to your attempted squeeze play.
Harringtons Squeeze: 1) End of tournament vs. solid players 2) Had tight table image 3) Had accurate reads on opponents
Your Squeeze: 1) At 100NL short-handed table vs. "low limit players" (I say this instead of "loose" or say "donks" because I don't know the table any better than you did...so I'm not going to assume anything other than the calibre of play is moderate) 2) Apparantly you have won chips so you may have a solid image here. However, your opponents are new to the table and have never played with you before. They don't know anything about you and....3)...neither do you. You have no reads on your opponents. You don't know if they are going to fold to your big raise after they limp.
The idea of the squeeze play is to have a tight enough image against players who know you are tight and raise with big hands...while on the flipside you have to have reads that your opponents will fold after they limped. Not all players limp with junk you know. What if some guy was limping with KK trying to limp-reraise and trap a guy? Obviously the action before and after the flop can negate that possibilty of KK for this specific situation, but with no reads, you don't know WITH WHAT they limped with and WHY they limped. With no reads, you can only assume that your raise will make them fold and when making a strong, tricky play in poker, you don't wanna assume anything. You want to have an accurate read on the situation and the players to take the best course of action. IMO, you did not.
Posted Fri Dec 29, 2006 10:46 pm GMT by aaronw
I have read HoH2. And I have seen that play that he made against Raymer and Arieh. So you are pretty much saying that this play is not going to work / stupid without reads, correct? Also, saying you did get to the river, what would you do?
Posted Fri Dec 29, 2006 11:51 pm GMT by MilkyPirate
Not stupid, just ineffective. I'm just saying that a squeeze play would not work on your situation. Obviously if everybody folded preflop, you would be a hero but my feeling is that you have to have a better reason to raise in this spot with your hand. Understand the situation you are in (100NL, shorthanded, against moderate players), understand your opponents and understand why you make this bet.
Without knowing your opponents, your line of thinking is limited to "OK. They are all limping. If I raise big they will all fold and if I get to see a flop vs. 1 or 2 players I can take it down with a continuation bet...." instead of this line of thinking when you have more information:
"OK. From what I have seen this table has been loose and players have been limping with junky hands. They percieve me as a tight-solid player and have folded to my big raises before. If I raise here I can most likely take down the pot preflop. I may get called by medicore hands like a low PP or big cards but can probably win on the flop with a continuation bet. One problem here is that I am out of position against two of the three players. If the one or both of the players I am OOP against call me preflop, the hand will become difficult to play once the community cards are exposed...." and so on (some more specifics can be added in here like: I know so and so likes to limp with XX...I know its likely so and so will call preflop with XX after limping...analyzing the texture of the flop...given the possibilties of what so and so may have what do I do after analyzing the texture of the flop...can I bet and make him fold...what hands will he call me with (draws, pairs, etc)...what hands will he raise me with...if he flat calls can I push him off at a later street (or rather: what do I do if my opponents calls and we see the turn->analyze turn card and decided if it has helped him/her or not...is it a scare card...etc)...will he fold if I reraise him (of course this is unlikely) representing a big hand like AA or KK...have I seen this guy raise before and fold to a reraise...blah blah blah....
All those examples are just certain thoughts you can make if you have reads on your opponents. Of course I never go into the "thinking what my opponent thinks that I think that they think I think they have" (I think thats how it goes...I can't remember...I may have worded it wrong) at these levels (I play at lower limits than you lol ) because it isn't very neccisary at low limit poker. What does this have to do with the squeeze play? Simple: Poker is a game of broken information. The more you have, the more you are likely to succeed (if you interpret this information properly and know how to apply it towards winning). Reads on your opponents gives you valuble information that you can use for your benefit. Even something simple like "I know player A is loose" is valuble information because it gives you a sense of the range of hands he/she may play. Understanding this critical information and using it properly is key to wining at poker. In this situation you had no valuble information to base your bet off of other than the assumption that these limpers would fold (what you percieved as) their "marginal holdings", and making plays off assumption rather than information is not solid poker.
I am not trying to say you are a donk or a stupid player. I am not trying to chastise you or criticize you mercilessly. I am trying to show you my point of view on the situation and why I feel that given the information ( ) you have given; the squeeze play not the greatest of plays here. I commend you that you are willing to mix it up and get aggressive preflop with 52, but as I have said before in my posts, there are so many flaws in your play and why you made it that it just wasn't a good move. I don't think you analyzed the entire situation as well as you possibly could and because of it, you made a reckless play instead of a smart one.
I don't want to go in circles reiterating myself because I have made my point rather clear in this post and the others I have made.
By the way I said in another post what I would do on the river.
Posted Sat Dec 30, 2006 12:00 am GMT by aaronw
| MilkyPirate wrote: | Not stupid, just ineffective. I'm just saying that a squeeze play would not work on your situation. Obviously if everybody folded preflop, you would be a hero but my feeling is that you have to have a better reason to raise in this spot with your hand. Understand the situation you are in (100NL, shorthanded, against moderate players), understand your opponents and understand why you make this bet.
Without knowing your opponents, your line of thinking is limited to "OK. They are all limping. If I raise big they will all fold and if I get to see a flop vs. 1 or 2 players I can take it down with a continuation bet...." instead of this line of thinking when you have more information:
"OK. From what I have seen this table has been loose and players have been limping with junky hands. They percieve me as a tight-solid player and have folded to my big raises before. If I raise here I can most likely take down the pot preflop. I may get called by medicore hands like a low PP or big cards but can probably win on the flop with a continuation bet. One problem here is that I am out of position against two of the three players. If the one or both of the players I am OOP against call me preflop, the hand will become difficult to play once the community cards are exposed...." and so on (some more specifics can be added in here like: I know so and so likes to limp with XX...I know its likely so and so will call preflop with XX after limping...analyzing the texture of the flop...given the possibilties of what so and so may have what do I do after analyzing the texture of the flop...can I bet and make him fold...what hands will he call me with (draws, pairs, etc)...what hands will he raise me with...if he flat calls can I push him off at a later street (or rather: what do I do if my opponents calls and we see the turn->analyze turn card and decided if it has helped him/her or not...is it a scare card...etc)...will he fold if I reraise him (of course this is unlikely) representing a big hand like AA or KK...have I seen this guy raise before and fold to a reraise...blah blah blah....
All those examples are just certain thoughts you can make if you have reads on your opponents. Of course I never go into the "thinking what my opponent thinks that I think that they think I think they have" (I think thats how it goes...I can't remember...I may have worded it wrong) at these levels (I play at lower limits than you lol ) because it isn't very neccisary at low limit poker. What does this have to do with the squeeze play? Simple: Poker is a game of broken information. The more you have, the more you are likely to succeed (if you interpret this information properly and know how to apply it towards winning). Reads on your opponents gives you valuble information that you can use for your benefit. Even something simple like "I know player A is loose" is valuble information because it gives you a sense of the range of hands he/she may play. Understanding this critical information and using it properly is key to wining at poker. In this situation you had no valuble information to base your bet off of other than the assumption that these limpers would fold (what you percieved as) their "marginal holdings", and making plays off assumption rather than information is not solid poker.
I am not trying to say you are a donk or a stupid player. I am not trying to chastise you or criticize you mercilessly. I am trying to show you my point of view on the situation and why I feel that given the information ( ) you have given; the squeeze play not the greatest of plays here. I commend you that you are willing to mix it up and get aggressive preflop with 52, but as I have said before in my posts, there are so many flaws in your play and why you made it that it just wasn't a good move. I don't think you analyzed the entire situation as well as you possibly could and because of it, you made a reckless play instead of a smart one.
I don't want to go in circles reiterating myself because I have made my point rather clear in this post and the others I have made.
By the way I said in another post what I would do on the river. |
My bad! I guess I just can't read tonight. Period! lol. I understand your thinking more and that was what I was trying to do with my questions. Thanks! Also, would you believe me if I told you that I made a half pot size bet and everyone folded?
Posted Sat Dec 30, 2006 7:21 am GMT by Muck
| Biowza wrote: | | Isn't a squeeze play when someone raises (like 3-5bb) a call behind (just a call) then you come over the top of both of them with a big raise? |
Yes I mentioned this in my post. Without the initial raiser I don't know if you can call it a squeeze play, more just a big bluff raise.
Posted Tue Jan 02, 2007 10:50 am GMT by BeerWench13
| aaronw wrote: | | Also, would you believe me if I told you that I made a half pot size bet and everyone folded? |
Yes, yes I would. You probably could've made that bet on the flop and taken it down right then. But, who knows?
Posted Tue Jan 02, 2007 12:05 pm GMT by aaronw
| BeerWench13 wrote: | | aaronw wrote: | | Also, would you believe me if I told you that I made a half pot size bet and everyone folded? |
Yes, yes I would. You probably could've made that bet on the flop and taken it down right then. But, who knows? |
I still think its too dangerous of a flop to bet into with 3 other players in the pot. It may have worked though.
Posted Tue Jan 02, 2007 12:23 pm GMT by BeerWench13
I agree it was a very dangerous flop. However, you represented preflop, I would back it up on the flop. Also, you don't know where you stand by checking.
As stated in my original post, I wouldn't have made the raise preflop in the first place. However, after having done so, I would've bet the flop. JMO.
Posted Tue Jan 02, 2007 3:28 pm GMT by xDiamond_CutteRx
In general, a squeeze play is a move more designed for tournaments than cash games. Most of the times I make this move in a cash game, it's with TT-QQ or AK (where I'm trying to narrow the field or win the pot right there), or I'm making a value reraise with AA or KK (although I do not use this move as frequently anymore, and I'm winning bigger pots because of it).
But if you're going to commit to the squeeze preflop, you CANNOT check the flop and just leave your children out there. You have to bet. If you get called/raised, it's back to the drawing board. But checking the flop is terrible and basically tells everyone that you have no hand and have given up.
Posted Tue Jan 02, 2007 4:19 pm GMT by aaronw
| xDiamond_CutteRx wrote: | In general, a squeeze play is a move more designed for tournaments than cash games. Most of the times I make this move in a cash game, it's with TT-QQ or AK (where I'm trying to narrow the field or win the pot right there), or I'm making a value reraise with AA or KK (although I do not use this move as frequently anymore, and I'm winning bigger pots because of it).
But if you're going to commit to the squeeze preflop, you CANNOT check the flop and just leave your children out there. You have to bet. If you get called/raised, it's back to the drawing board. But checking the flop is terrible and basically tells everyone that you have no hand and have given up. |
You really advocate betting the flop with an A on it into 3 other players? And in regards to it showing I had nothing, would I not play KK the same?
Posted Tue Jan 02, 2007 4:22 pm GMT by BeerWench13
| aaronw wrote: | | And in regards to it showing I had nothing, would I not play KK the same? |
Are you saying that whenever you have KK and an A hits on the flop that you check after raising preflop? Truly???
Posted Tue Jan 02, 2007 5:41 pm GMT by aaronw
| BeerWench13 wrote: | | aaronw wrote: | | And in regards to it showing I had nothing, would I not play KK the same? |
Are you saying that whenever you have KK and an A hits on the flop that you check after raising preflop? Truly??? |
Against this many players, yes! I think its a pure spew to bet into this many players on this flop.
Posted Tue Jan 02, 2007 6:00 pm GMT by Geno
And the action on the river went.............
Posted Tue Jan 02, 2007 6:50 pm GMT by aaronw
| Geno wrote: | | And the action on the river went............. |
Whats your point? You think its optimal to bet out here after getting 3 callers on that flop? I don't think so!
Posted Tue Jan 02, 2007 7:28 pm GMT by Sean_in_NJ
| aaronw wrote: | | Geno wrote: | | And the action on the river went............. |
Whats your point? |
Ummm...we just want to know how it ended?
Posted Tue Jan 02, 2007 7:33 pm GMT by aaronw
| Sean_in_NJ wrote: | | aaronw wrote: | | Geno wrote: | | And the action on the river went............. |
Whats your point? |
Ummm...we just want to know how it ended? |
I already said that. I thought he was giving some smart alec comment because of how it ended. My apologies. I bet half pot on the river and everyone folded.
Posted Tue Jan 02, 2007 8:24 pm GMT by suitedaces84
I think this hand is very well played. I like random raises like that from the blind every now and then. If you show your cards it tends to piss others off and this is a good thing, especially at 6-max. You usually win it preflop and can often steal it on the flop when that doesn't work. When you get called it's generally by someone looking to flop big and stack you; they rarely flop big so they usually give up when on the flop. When they flop big you rarely have anything so the joke is on them (yes they win your CB but that's about it). Plus this makes actually having a big hand way better.
It sucks to get called in 3 spots then have such a wet flop, so I'm a fan of giving up on this flop. The only way I'd fire on the flop is if I planned to fire big on a blank turn aswell. Giving up on the flop > going all out to take this thing down > stabbing at it on the flop then giving up.
After it checks around on the flop and turn and you spike your 2 pair OTR your hand is almost always good so I like the river bet too.
Keep in mind you don't have to win this thing every time to make it the right play.
Posted Wed Jan 03, 2007 2:59 pm GMT by aaronw
| suitedaces84 wrote: | I think this hand is very well played. I like random raises like that from the blind every now and then. If you show your cards it tends to piss others off and this is a good thing, especially at 6-max. You usually win it preflop and can often steal it on the flop when that doesn't work. When you get called it's generally by someone looking to flop big and stack you; they rarely flop big so they usually give up when on the flop. When they flop big you rarely have anything so the joke is on them (yes they win your CB but that's about it). Plus this makes actually having a big hand way better.
It sucks to get called in 3 spots then have such a wet flop, so I'm a fan of giving up on this flop. The only way I'd fire on the flop is if I planned to fire big on a blank turn aswell. Giving up on the flop > going all out to take this thing down > stabbing at it on the flop then giving up.
After it checks around on the flop and turn and you spike your 2 pair OTR your hand is almost always good so I like the river bet too.
Keep in mind you don't have to win this thing every time to make it the right play. |
That is a very good explanation. Thank-you very much. What would your plan be on the river if we got raised here?
Posted Wed Jan 03, 2007 3:19 pm GMT by supafrey
i dunno. random bluffs are stupid. hope you have reads.
Posted Wed Jan 03, 2007 5:19 pm GMT by suitedaces84
| supafrey wrote: | | i dunno. random bluffs are stupid. hope you have reads. |
This is more than a random bluff. It uses others' generally correct assumption that a big raise from the blind equals a big hand against them. Also, everyone has already acted and indicated that they don't have strong hands. A player who makes this raise with AA, KK, QQ, JJ, AK and 25o is a tougher opponent than one who raises with AA, KK, QQ, JJ and AK.
Just think about how you'd play agaisnt someone who makes large raises with big hands big from the blind. You'd correctly fold to their large raise.
Now think about how you'd play agaisnt someone makes large raises with big hands from the blinds and occasionally makes a large raise with garbage. You'd correctly fold most of the time and incorrectly fold every now and then.
Which one of these opponents would you perfer?
I'll agree that this would be a bad play vs. players who call far too much; but you can get away with it often enough against random 100nl players as long as you don't have a crazy image.
Posted Wed Jan 03, 2007 6:21 pm GMT by supafrey
how many big pairs check that flop
Posted Wed Jan 03, 2007 6:40 pm GMT by suitedaces84
The gig is up on the flop. We got busted. 
Posted Wed Jan 03, 2007 6:51 pm GMT by Geno
| aaronw wrote: | | Sean_in_NJ wrote: | | aaronw wrote: | | Geno wrote: | | And the action on the river went............. |
Whats your point? |
Ummm...we just want to know how it ended? |
I already said that. I thought he was giving some smart alec comment because of how it ended. My apologies. I bet half pot on the river and everyone folded. |
I missed the bit where you had said how it ended. My bad 
Posted Wed Jan 03, 2007 7:00 pm GMT by aaronw
| Geno wrote: | | aaronw wrote: | | Sean_in_NJ wrote: | | aaronw wrote: | | Geno wrote: | | And the action on the river went............. |
Whats your point? |
Ummm...we just want to know how it ended? |
I already said that. I thought he was giving some smart alec comment because of how it ended. My apologies. I bet half pot on the river and everyone folded. |
I missed the bit where you had said how it ended. My bad |
No problem. I should have asked that a bit nicer as well. I'm sorry too.
Posted Wed Jan 03, 2007 7:32 pm GMT by supafrey
There's so many things wrong with the way this hand played + the assumptions being made from both the OP and our analysis makes these points almost moot. Either way... I'll do a list of considerations and hopefully not just come off as verbal crapola...
1. I understand the shania of letting 25o increase the value of our big pairs. That assumes we play it like a big pair. OP did not.
2. Schooling effect makes blind raises often demand a hand that plays decently multiway.. this hand does not.
3. The UTG limper is our biggest threat, obv. What kind of player is he? (This is rhetorical - I don't really care). What would you do to a decent raise? A min raise?
4. The value of raising out of the blinds, ironically, comes in the fact that we get to act first post flop. You didn't act.
5. Our opps don't know what we have. Why are we playing like they do?
6. The lower the stakes, the simpler you must play. Raising/3betting out of the blinds is a fine enough move at higher stakes. This is 100nl. Are we sure it's a good idea? Opps aren't as creative.
7. For the love of god cont-bet.
8. Re-read 7.
9. Seriously, re-read 7.
10. If you're going to play the flop as a "tricky" AA that flopped a set, for the love of god bet that turn.
11. If you're gonna bet that turn (with the two flush draws out there), you're going to have to bet ANY blank river. Size your bets accordingly.
12. You haveta bet that river, I guess. Sometimes. It depends. Damnit. Why put yourself in tough situations with stupid hands? Way to get schooled into not knowing whether anyone is drawing to the flushes. Good job.
13. Alot of the time you will get raised on the river... are you going to call?
14. Do you want to show down your cards? (The answer is no). What does this mean you must do?
15. Good opps would have bet that turn. Seriously. Regardless of cards being held. You got lucky.
16. Simplify.
Posted Wed Jan 03, 2007 8:47 pm GMT by Jauron
So to sum up, bet $8 to win $4, then walk away from the table if called.
Sounds like a plan.
Posted Wed Jan 03, 2007 9:09 pm GMT by aaronw
| Jauron wrote: | So to sum up, bet $8 to win $4, then walk away from the table if called.
Sounds like a plan. |
Thats not the plan at all. Did you even read the thread? This is just not the flop to make a continuation bet into with 3 other players in the pot to act after you.
And supa, this is NOT the flop to bet into with 3 other players. As played PF, would you bet on that flop?
Edit- Betting flop here is 100% spew. IF you bet this flop, you might as well light the money on fire.
Posted Wed Jan 03, 2007 9:17 pm GMT by supafrey
| Quote: |
And supa, this is NOT the flop to bet into with 3 other players. As played PF, would you bet on that flop?
Edit- Betting flop here is 100% spew. IF you bet this flop, you might as well light the money on fire. |
No, I clearly just wrote that you should bet the flop 4 times in my list for fun.
Edit: (editting just because it's trendy) For the love of god you're so wrong. Mentioning "spewing" and "lighting money on fire" is so ridiculous I'm literally grinning here JUST because I know you're going to read this somewhere down the line and realize how stupid you sound.
Posted Wed Jan 03, 2007 9:20 pm GMT by aaronw
| supafrey wrote: | | Quote: |
And supa, this is NOT the flop to bet into with 3 other players. As played PF, would you bet on that flop?
Edit- Betting flop here is 100% spew. IF you bet this flop, you might as well light the money on fire. |
No, I clearly just wrote that you should bet the flop 4 times in my list for fun. |
Maybe you did . But can you give a reason to bet that flop? I think that suitedaces gives a great analysis on the hand and I agree 100% with him. You may want to reread his post.
Posted Wed Jan 03, 2007 9:30 pm GMT by supafrey
your tone is repulsive.
using the words "spewing" and "burning money" are also so ridiculous - look at the sheer number of respondants that have completely disagreed with you - what are the odds you're spewing just from that single fact alone?
and don't ever assume that I haven't read something. You're wrong. Entirely. I really couldn't care less either way.
Posted Wed Jan 03, 2007 9:34 pm GMT by aaronw
Well, lets start by putting all 3 villains on hands that will fold if we bet this flop. I think that atleast one of them as an A, 2 face cards for a straight draw , a pair, or a flush draw. I just can't think of hands they would have called with preflop and then just fold this flop. Possible suited connectors or small pairs? Possible, but not very likely. I think this flop is likely to have connected with someone and they are likely to call a bet.
Edit- I'm also trying to get a reason why to bet this flop other than we raised PF. I think continuation betting into more than 2 opponents without any hand is pure suicide.
Posted Thu Jan 04, 2007 12:59 am GMT by xDiamond_CutteRx
I can think of one reason to bet the flop regardless of preflop action: the Ace probably looks just as scary to them unless they have maybe AK, AQ, or a set. Of course, that is partly dependent on the preflop action since by betting, you represent a big Ace (a set of Aces, really) yourself.
Maybe if all your opponents are total calling stations I don't bet the flop. But then again, if they're total calling stations, I don't ever make that squeeze move in the first place.
Posted Thu Jan 04, 2007 1:01 am GMT by suitedaces84
| Jauron wrote: | So to sum up, bet $8 to win $4, then walk away from the table if called.
Sounds like a plan. |
Actually, it's risking 7 to win 5. And the plan is making a CB on most flops. This didn't happen to be one of the flops. Sometimes, in poker, you need to adjust your plan.
supa,
I think it's really close between betting and giving up on the flop. I'd lean towards giving up because it's very likely that someone hit the flop and isn't going away for cheap. Had the flop been more ragged I'd be all for firing into 3 players.
I just think you're getting called a lot on the flop, which sucks.
The turn sucks aswell. Someone usually has a hand or big draw here. For that reason I'm not a fan of firing there either. (Yes, I'm aware that you're aware that you need to fire at a brick on the river if you fire at it on the turn). But there are a lot of rivers that won't brick and when the river is a brick your bluff will often fail anyway.
After thinking about it more I'd say trying to steal this thing postflop is not bad as long as the plan involves multiple streets. I agree that trying to steal it once then giving up is really bad.
Good discussion.
Posted Thu Jan 04, 2007 1:09 am GMT by Jauron
I'll simplify, don't make the preflop move in a cash game to limpers, like ever, from either blind without a hand with showdown value. Then you don't have to worry about the rest of it, namely having a plan on the flop, turn or river. You tried a move that requires no hand and then suddenly required yourself to have one...huh?
If you don't have a hand worth showing down don't build a pot you can't afford to bluff at, because clearly one move is working against the other.
Posted Thu Jan 04, 2007 2:37 am GMT by supafrey
I would like a list of possible hands that would do that action preflop and would be beating us on the flop. Now how many of those are willing to stay in to raises? How many of those will reraise our c-bet?
If we're keeping in high straight / flush draws, we realize we're beating them, right?
You also realize that nobody has any idea what cards we have, right? You guys are advocating the BB play SPECIFICALLY because of the power it represents, then arbitrarily losing that power just because 2 suited cards and an ace flop? zzZZZzzzzzz
This decision really isn't close.
Posted Thu Jan 04, 2007 3:37 am GMT by suitedaces84
| supafrey wrote: | | You guys are advocating the BB play SPECIFICALLY because of the power it represents, then arbitrarily losing that power just because 2 suited cards and an ace flop? |
The power lies in 2 places:
1) Making them fold preflop
2) Making them fold on the flop when the miss (which happens a lot).
The large preflop raise won't make them fold when the flop hits them. They didn't toss in the extra $7 intending to fold when they connect with the flop. When they don't fold preflop then and the flop is likely to have hit them much of the power is gone.
Posted Thu Jan 04, 2007 4:01 am GMT by supafrey
you didn't answer my question. what hand is likely to have done this preflop action, seen a flop, and honestly thinks it's beating a c-bet? I dont mean to be fecitious, but I truthfully think that if we break this argument point by point there's almost no reason not to bet that flop or turn.
Posted Thu Jan 04, 2007 4:16 am GMT by TheSalche
| supafrey wrote: | | you didn't answer my question. what hand is likely to have done this preflop action, seen a flop, and honestly thinks it's beating a c-bet? I dont mean to be fecitious, but I truthfully think that if we break this argument point by point there's almost no reason not to bet that flop or turn. |
dont forget our opponents are usually idiots ... theoretically only 55, maybe TT or AT ... probably not aces
Since their idiots including weak aces, and something like JT may call the flop . Even so, the lower pocket pairs and lower suited connectors are folding here ... and we may even get the weak aces to fold. There is certainly a strong case to bet this flop, and its the best play, but then we may have to shut down if we get called.
edit: and if they called $8 preflop with a weak ace, they are definetly idiots, so they will call a flop bet
Posted Thu Jan 04, 2007 8:46 am GMT by BeerWench13
| TheSalche wrote: | | There is certainly a strong case to bet this flop, and its the best play, but then we may have to shut down if we get called. |
Exactly. Why make the play preflop and not continue to represent a big hand? You could've seen the flop for free since you were already in the big blind. Why try to steal a small pot and then give up on it when you fail preflop? Take the bigger pot on the flop. If you get reraised, then you give up, but don't give up before you know whether or not you have a chance to win it. The only way to know this is to bet.
If you're going to get caught with your hand in the cookie jar, at least try to take the cookie.
Posted Thu Jan 04, 2007 10:19 am GMT by arras
Nice post and detailed explanation.
| supafrey wrote: | There's so many things wrong with the way this hand played + the assumptions being made from both the OP and our analysis makes these points almost moot. Either way... I'll do a list of considerations and hopefully not just come off as verbal crapola...
1. I understand the shania of letting 25o increase the value of our big pairs. That assumes we play it like a big pair. OP did not.
2. Schooling effect makes blind raises often demand a hand that plays decently multiway.. this hand does not.
3. The UTG limper is our biggest threat, obv. What kind of player is he? (This is rhetorical - I don't really care). What would you do to a decent raise? A min raise?
4. The value of raising out of the blinds, ironically, comes in the fact that we get to act first post flop. You didn't act.
5. Our opps don't know what we have. Why are we playing like they do?
6. The lower the stakes, the simpler you must play. Raising/3betting out of the blinds is a fine enough move at higher stakes. This is 100nl. Are we sure it's a good idea? Opps aren't as creative.
7. For the love of god cont-bet.
8. Re-read 7.
9. Seriously, re-read 7.
10. If you're going to play the flop as a "tricky" AA that flopped a set, for the love of god bet that turn.
11. If you're gonna bet that turn (with the two flush draws out there), you're going to have to bet ANY blank river. Size your bets accordingly.
12. You haveta bet that river, I guess. Sometimes. It depends. Damnit. Why put yourself in tough situations with stupid hands? Way to get schooled into not knowing whether anyone is drawing to the flushes. Good job.
13. Alot of the time you will get raised on the river... are you going to call?
14. Do you want to show down your cards? (The answer is no). What does this mean you must do?
15. Good opps would have bet that turn. Seriously. Regardless of cards being held. You got lucky.
16. Simplify. |
Posted Thu Jan 04, 2007 10:33 am GMT by Dave B
Isnt a squeeze play when you have a guy on 3rd base w/ 0-1 outs and you send him and lay down the bunt? Or what you do to a well endowed female?
I have never read a poker book, so I am very confused with all this talk.
Posted Thu Jan 04, 2007 10:44 am GMT by supafrey
JT and weak ace won't call the cont bet. Even a shitty player knows that calling with those hands needs a "monster" to continue.
55 would involve the case fives..
TT is the ONLY serious possibility.
AT will let you know very, very quickly what they have.
easy, easy, easy, easy bet
Posted Thu Jan 04, 2007 11:32 am GMT by aaronw
| supafrey wrote: | JT and weak ace won't call the cont bet. Even a shitty player knows that calling with those hands needs a "monster" to continue.
55 would involve the case fives..
TT is the ONLY serious possibility.
AT will let you know very, very quickly what they have.
easy, easy, easy, easy bet |
I would agree if there were only 1 other player. Maybe even 2 others players. But into 3 other players, I don't think this is the best flop to bet at. They could have a pair + FD, pair +straight draw where they are probably calling a bet. There are alot of flops that I would have bet on. If it were all rags or something like JJ7 I would definately bet. However, I think this is not the flop you want to bet on because of the amount of hands that it hits. I would like another reason to bet this flop other than "we raised PF". It is generally good to make a continuation bet into a small field, but it is a widely accepted fact that you do not automatically make a continuation bet into a large field when you have nothing.
Posted Thu Jan 04, 2007 11:45 am GMT by Sean_in_NJ
God, someone please lock this thread. I can't read it any longer.
Posted Thu Jan 04, 2007 12:25 pm GMT by BeerWench13
My head hurts.
Posted Thu Jan 04, 2007 2:33 pm GMT by supafrey
| aaronw wrote: | | supafrey wrote: | JT and weak ace won't call the cont bet. Even a shitty player knows that calling with those hands needs a "monster" to continue.
55 would involve the case fives..
TT is the ONLY serious possibility.
AT will let you know very, very quickly what they have.
easy, easy, easy, easy bet |
I would agree if there were only 1 other player. Maybe even 2 others players. But into 3 other players, I don't think this is the best flop to bet at. They could have a pair + FD, pair +straight draw where they are probably calling a bet. There are alot of flops that I would have bet on. If it were all rags or something like JJ7 I would definately bet. However, I think this is not the flop you want to bet on because of the amount of hands that it hits. I would like another reason to bet this flop other than "we raised PF". It is generally good to make a continuation bet into a small field, but it is a widely accepted fact that you do not automatically make a continuation bet into a large field when you have nothing. |
What pair and flush draw are you possibly talking about. What pair and straight draw? You haven't listed a single pair of actual cards. I would like specific letters and suits that you think any of the garbage you're spewing actually applies to. You haven't actually countered a single point except by saying "there's alot of people in there so someone could have something". You've ignored entirely the vig that you're supposedly getting from your position/action and are contradicting yourself on key elements of what you're trying to accomplish preflop vs what you suddenly redecided after the flop.
You obviously don't know how to play in multiway pots, which is fine, but then you really shouldn't be trying to get extra creative with these kinds of holdings if you don't have the balls to follow through with your action. You are, quite literally, the reason that nits make adequate money at lowish stakes - overcreative preflop and post-flop passive. Any decent player would have destroyed you in this hand on the flop or turn, and the river decision is so awkward that you're literally costing yourself more and more money as this hand continues. It is played horribly on all streets and the conviction with which you stubbornly hold on to ideas that you provide little rational argument for is why YOU, sir, are "spewing" and "burning money".
Posted Thu Jan 04, 2007 2:43 pm GMT by aaronw
| supafrey wrote: | | aaronw wrote: | | supafrey wrote: | JT and weak ace won't call the cont bet. Even a shitty player knows that calling with those hands needs a "monster" to continue.
55 would involve the case fives..
TT is the ONLY serious possibility.
AT will let you know very, very quickly what they have.
easy, easy, easy, easy bet |
I would agree if there were only 1 other player. Maybe even 2 others players. But into 3 other players, I don't think this is the best flop to bet at. They could have a pair + FD, pair +straight draw where they are probably calling a bet. There are alot of flops that I would have bet on. If it were all rags or something like JJ7 I would definately bet. However, I think this is not the flop you want to bet on because of the amount of hands that it hits. I would like another reason to bet this flop other than "we raised PF". It is generally good to make a continuation bet into a small field, but it is a widely accepted fact that you do not automatically make a continuation bet into a large field when you have nothing. |
What pair and flush draw are you possibly talking about. What pair and straight draw? You haven't listed a single pair of actual cards. I would like specific letters and suits that you think any of the garbage you're spewing actually applies to. You haven't actually countered a single point except by saying "there's alot of people in there so someone could have something". You've ignored entirely the vig that you're supposedly getting from your position/action and are contradicting yourself on key elements of what you're trying to accomplish preflop vs what you suddenly redecided after the flop.
You obviously don't know how to play in multiway pots, which is fine, but then you really shouldn't be trying to get extra creative with these kinds of holdings if you don't have the balls to follow through with your action. You are, quite literally, the reason that nits make adequate money at lowish stakes - overcreative preflop and post-flop passive. Any decent player would have destroyed you in this hand on the flop or turn, and the river decision is so awkward that you're literally costing yourself more and more money as this hand continues. It is played horribly on all streets and the conviction with which you stubbornly hold on to ideas that you provide little rational argument for is why YOU, sir, are "spewing" and "burning money". |
I will give it to you that I suck at poker. However, can you really think that 3 people that are calling PF and have not connected whatsoever with this board? They could have a hand like QJ, KQ, spades, JT, a weak Ace, all of which probably call a bet on the flop, which is what I definately DO NOT want. Theoretically, if I bet on that flop and get 1 caller, do you recommend continuing to bet at the pot? Maybe my reasoning is flawed, but I don't think there is anyway that this bet gets through on the flop.
Posted Thu Jan 04, 2007 2:48 pm GMT by supafrey
There's a difference between me saying you suck at poker (whether that's true or not i couldn't care less) and saying that everything you're saying right now is contradicting itself.
Posted Thu Jan 04, 2007 3:05 pm GMT by aaronw
| supafrey wrote: | | There's a difference between me saying you suck at poker (whether that's true or not i couldn't care less) and saying that everything you're saying right now is contradicting itself. |
I realize you aren't saying I suck. I am saying that. I am just saying that that board is very likely to have connected with the 3 other players and that is why I advocate check/folding in this situation. There are many flops that I would bet on, however, this is not one of them due to the board texture.
Posted Thu Jan 04, 2007 3:23 pm GMT by BeerWench13
| aaronw wrote: | | I am just saying that that board is very likely to have connected with the 3 other players |
This is a valid point. However, how are you going to know if it did hit any of them? By betting perhaps? Knowledge is power. Placing a continuation bet at least by the turn would give you information.
Why would you make this play preflop for such a small pot with such an abysmal hand and not at least take a stab at the bigger pot postflop? Please don't repeat that you don't like betting into 3 players in this situation. That much has been established. I understand your trepidation, but don't understand why you would make the play preflop and automatically assume that everyone's going to fold and then tuck your tail when they didn't.
Posted Thu Jan 04, 2007 3:26 pm GMT by aaronw
| BeerWench13 wrote: | | aaronw wrote: | | I am just saying that that board is very likely to have connected with the 3 other players |
This is a valid point. However, how are you going to know if it did hit any of them? By betting perhaps? Knowledge is power. Placing a continuation bet at least by the turn would give you information.
Why would you make this play preflop for such a small pot with such an abysmal hand and not at least take a stab at the bigger pot postflop? Please don't repeat that you don't like betting into 3 players in this situation. That much has been established. I understand your trepidation, but don't understand why you would make the play preflop and automatically assume that everyone's going to fold and then tuck your tail when they didn't. |
I cannot just make a continuation bet on any and every flop. I am not going to "tuck my tail when they call" on every board. This is just one of those boards that I feel it is best to give up because it is very likely to hit one of the opponents. If it was something like KK2 or JJ7 or 932 or something along those lines, I am definately betting. Just not on this flop.
Posted Thu Jan 04, 2007 3:33 pm GMT by TheSalche
| aaronw wrote: | | I cannot just make a continuation bet on any and every flop. |
No you can't but you can't raise this big preflop and then check the flop. Even if you are almost 100% certain your bet on this flop is going to get called or raised, you should bet for image purposes or just get up and leave the table. If people see you make a big preflop raise and shut down on a flop like this, you're giving them a tell with your betting pattern.
Like supa has been trying to help you see, the pair + flush draw combination is 5  X ... There's a lot of dumb players out there, but hopefully nobodys making that preflop call with a suited king or queen. You're getting most pocket pairs to fold, probably the weak tens and aces too.
At most lower limit games c-betting is where you should get a lot of your money from, and you missed out on a good cbet.
Posted Thu Jan 04, 2007 3:37 pm GMT by Sean_in_NJ
| aaronw wrote: | | If it was something like KK2 or JJ7 or 932 or something along those lines, I am definately betting. Just not on this flop. |
And you realize also that you're much more likely to get called, or played back at, by a much wider range of hands on a board like the one you describe? You mean to tell me people are more apt to believe you have a K on a KK7 board than you are to have an A on an Axx board?
Posted Thu Jan 04, 2007 3:37 pm GMT by BeerWench13
Ugh. Apparently you don't really want anyone to give you any recommendations and/or opinions on this hand and my head hurts so I will, as politely as possible, bow out of this conversation.
Posted Thu Jan 04, 2007 3:42 pm GMT by aaronw
| Sean_in_NJ wrote: | | aaronw wrote: | | If it was something like KK2 or JJ7 or 932 or something along those lines, I am definately betting. Just not on this flop. |
And you realize also that you're much more likely to get called, or played back at, by a much wider range of hands on a board like the one you describe? You mean to tell me people are more apt to believe you have a K on a KK7 board than you are to have an A on an Axx board? |
I just think these players are more likely to hand onto a random A preflop than a random K. These players are more apt to call PF with A5 than K5 (not saying that they don't call with K5, it is just more common for them to call with an A).
Posted Thu Jan 04, 2007 3:45 pm GMT by Sean_in_NJ
Ok, you're missing my point completely, so I'll follow Wenchie's lead and bow out as well.
We'll be at the Trop, "Going South," together.
Posted Thu Jan 04, 2007 3:46 pm GMT by aaronw
| Sean_in_NJ wrote: | Ok, you're missing my point completely, so I'll follow Wenchie's lead and bow out as well.
We'll be at the Trop, "Going South," together. |
I apologize for missing your point. Maybe you would like to restate or reiterate that point?
Posted Thu Jan 04, 2007 3:55 pm GMT by Sean_in_NJ
| aaronw wrote: | | I apologize for missing your point. Maybe you would like to restate or reiterate that point? |
I choose not to.
Posted Thu Jan 04, 2007 3:58 pm GMT by aaronw
| Sean_in_NJ wrote: | | aaronw wrote: | | I apologize for missing your point. Maybe you would like to restate or reiterate that point? |
I choose not to. |
Fair enough. Thanks anyway.
Posted Thu Jan 04, 2007 5:22 pm GMT by supafrey
i'm also out =P
Posted Thu Jan 04, 2007 5:31 pm GMT by Hurricane Ham
| BeerWench13 wrote: |
If you're going to get caught with your hand in the cookie jar, at least try to take the cookie. |
Pretty much what this entire thread boils down to. Bet the fregging flop.
Posted Thu Jan 04, 2007 5:36 pm GMT by TheSalche
| BeerWench13 wrote: | | Ugh. Apparently you don't really want anyone to give you any recommendations and/or opinions on this hand and my head hurts so I will, as politely as possible, bow out of this conversation. |
Posted Thu Jan 04, 2007 6:47 pm GMT by aaronw
Fair enough. I guess we will just have to agree to disagree.
Posted Thu Jan 04, 2007 9:36 pm GMT by supafrey
that's because some of us know how to play and some of us don't
Posted Thu Jan 04, 2007 11:54 pm GMT by suitedaces84
| TheSalche wrote: | | No you can't but you can't raise this big preflop and then check the flop. Even if you are almost 100% certain your bet on this flop is going to get called or raised, you should bet for image purposes or just get up and leave the table. If people see you make a big preflop raise and shut down on a flop like this, you're giving them a tell with your betting pattern. |
This seems like a lot of money to invest in metagame. And this tell will only hurt you if you play straight forward from then on. If your opponents are convinced you'll check when you miss the flop couldn't you easily exploit them by simply betting when you miss?
Metagame stuff can only hurt you if your image causes others to play better against you. For example, if you get stuck a bunch of money predictable passive players are more likely to take shots at you and can turn into tough aggressive ones. If your opponents were too aggressive to begin with they'd get easier to beat when you're stuck.
There are some good reasons to bet the flop. Having initiative/having planned to CB preflop is not one of them.
The problem with the last 3 pages of this thread is some of us think that players who will fold Ax on this flop and some of us don't. We could argue for another 10 pages about what someone who called a large raise from the blind will call a CB on the flop with, but neither side could prove they were correct. Until this can be answered the discussion is somewhat pointless.
supa,
Sorry I didn't answer your question about what hands call the flop earlier. My answer is any A, any FD, possibly two picture cards with a backdoor FD or the very rare set.
|
|
