PDA

View Full Version : Ciaffone/Hand Quiz


charlie_t_jr
11-19-2004, 05:27 PM
Earlier today, responding to a post, I recommended Ciaffone's Middle Limit book. Which I still do, by the way. I know many don't agree, my only defense would be, check out Clarkmiester's reading list.

Mason's review and others have pointed out it is weak/tight at times. I think this is one of those examples.

He says EP raiser is a maniac, I think this turn needs to be raised...but maybe the 20/40 maniacs are different from the 1/2 - 2/4 ones I'm used to...what say you?

I really think there's a lot to be learned from this book. So I guess my main reason for posting is to make sure I'm properly identifying the weak/tight tendancies, when they crop up from time to time.

http://www.cardplayer.com/pokerquiz.php?PHPSESSID=111878f6dca645bd3b5613310f 1de3f4
"Today's Hold'em Poker Topic: Checking and Calling.

Question
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A $20-$40 game. An early player who is a rich maniac opens with a raise. A middle player reraises. You are on the button with the K-K and make it four bets. They both call. There is $270 in the pot and three players. The flop is: 5-4-4, giving you kings over fours. It is checked to you. You bet and they both call. There is $330 in the pot. The turn is the 2. The maniac bets and the next player folds. What do you do?
Answer
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Call. Your hand may not be good, so you should minimize your loss by just calling. If your hand is good, then let the maniac bet it for you. The key here is that you have position, so you can make sure that every betting round gets bet."

eh923
11-19-2004, 05:52 PM
Uh...what sounds wrong with that advice? It sounds like you're way ahead or way behind. Calling when bet into and betting if checked to sounds right to me.

BTW - there has been a lot of debating about this book...I happen to be neutral! /images/graemlins/smile.gif

charlie_t_jr
11-19-2004, 06:00 PM
I guess I'm focusing on the description "maniac". Other than that I agree with the call down.