50-100 Vs Solid Pro

[HiatusOver]

UTG in this hand is a very solid Pro. Tight, but not ultra-tight...aggressive, but less than the average pro. Reads hands pretty well, hates paying off and not afraid to fold when he thinks he is beat.

So here is the Hand :

New to the game poster in Late position. UTG raises, folded to me in BB and I call with J /images/graemlins/diamond.gifT /images/graemlins/heart.gif. (Note the dead money...I know this is strongly up for debate and I think I fold it here a lot but called this time. Anyways it is up for debate...just try to look at postflop also.)

Flop : Q /images/graemlins/spade.gif9 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif4 /images/graemlins/club.gif

I check-raise he calls, my plan at this point is to follow through the turn and check-fold most likely if I miss the river. Maybe follow through...thats what I usually do, but it didnt seem right against this guy.

Turn : K /images/graemlins/heart.gif

I bet he calls

River 2 /images/graemlins/spade.gif

I check, planning to put in as many raises as possible.

Thoughts?

[TStoneMBD]

preflop and river are the interesting parts of this hand, but you asked not to get into preflop so i wont.

i think the likely hands for villain to have are JJ TT AK and possibly AQ, or possibly a slowplayed set. If he has a hand like JJ or TT, he will probably check behind on the river. If he had a hand like AK would he raise the turn? would he play a hand like AQ this softly? If he has a set he will raise the river and you will get more bets out of him most likely. Therefore, I think leading is the best play.

[HiatusOver]

I didnt ask not to get into pre-flop, I just asked not to ignore post flop. I think pre-flop is kinda interesting, though I assume most wont like it and I am not sure if I do. I really dont think he has a set when he calls the turn. seems he would raise that board and expect me to call.

[SinCityGuy]

[ QUOTE ]
I check, planning to put in as many raises as possible.

[/ QUOTE ]

With a good chance of that being zero. Bet the river and hope that you get raised.

[HiatusOver]

Isnt a very good player value betting almost all hands he will call with on the river?

[James282]

The river CR is great.
-James

[James282]

[ QUOTE ]
Isnt a very good player value betting almost all hands he will call with on the river?

[/ QUOTE ]

My thoughts exactly. And at that point you've played so strangely he almost has to pay off.
-james

[Barry]

I don't know; you checkraise the flop, bet the turn and then check a total blank on the river! That looks really bizarre.

I don't like the check at all. If I were the villan it would seem as if you gave up on your bluff or decided to get fancy on the river.

So if villan had any kind of mediocre hand, which seems likely as you only got called on the turn, if I were him, I would take the free showdown and either beat your busted draw or avoid a checkraise.

If he was slowplaying somthing like a set, by betting out you can get in 3 bets on the river. I think that you wind up either missing a single bet or a 3 bet more than you would get in a checkraise.

[na4bart]

NO

[HiatusOver]

Barry wouldnt he put me on a Q or less and value bet AQ, AK or anything else of value? What hands is he paying off the river bet that he isnt value betting?

[Clarkmeister]

I like it.

[Michael Davis]

This particular sequence is one I use a lot, and I'm surprised if it's not true for others. You check-raise the flop with a marginal holding (weak pair) or ace-high or whatever, bet the turn because lots of people fold then, and then check and give up or check and call to beat a bluff on the river. I'm confused as to why this situation should be unfamiliar or confusing to some very good players here, unless the "strange play" James is referring to is the river checkraise.

-Michael

[HiatusOver]

Clark I assumed that if there was a pre-flop debate you would be on the "call as long as you are gonna play it well post flop side"...do you think its close? I kind of do

[Clarkmeister]

I think preflop is definitely close. I like the postflop line though.

[Barry]

Maybe I'm too cynical or to passive, but when someone plays a hand strangely like that, I'm always suspicious.

[HiatusOver]

My hand isnt played strange until I check-raise the river think about it...when I check the river it looks like I am gonna check and call most likely or maybe check-fold...if your agrument is that he wont pay off the raise then I think that starts to have some merit.

[Michael Davis]

Not only do I think he's paying off the raise, I think it's even possible he'll bet with hands he would have folded.

-Michael

[Clarkmeister]

I don't think it's that strange. People will often play like that with some random pair hand to test UTG for unpaired big cards or a medium underpair. Once the river comes, they check. Happens all the time.

[HiatusOver]

You might be right, but rememember this guy is a very good experienced disciplined player.

[Entity]

How often does the river checkraise (which I like against this guy) have metagame considerations attached to it? Seems like you get more free showdowns in the future on boards like this, whether the checkraise works this time or not.

Rob

[DcifrThs]

hiatus,

i really like the line for a few reasons...it looks like a hand you were trying to protect and now check call with on the river.

he will value bet any hand he'd call you're river bet had you decided to bet it. he would fold any hand he had no intention of callin with or betting.

if this is as true as i think it is given the action and player description, i really like the river c-r.

other reasons i like it is because you will sometimes play a flopped great/good hand in the same way. tough for him to put you on a hand here and since he likely has at least a pair here (no real draws for him to call on the turn), he will probably bet that pair when you check on the river. the bad situation is that he has a hand he'd call with but check behind to get a free showdown...

what hands are those?

-Barron

[TStoneMBD]

again i disagree that villain will bet the river with any hand he would call with. most people on this thread seem to think that checkraising the river is an unusual play and villain will never see it coming, but my thoughts on the matter is that checkraising this river is fairly standard at this high a level. that is not to say that villain wont bet with strong hands on the river, as he certainly will, but i dont think he will necessarily pay off a raise simply because its suspect. your river checkraise is a solid play and certainly represents a bigger hand than if you had bet out. just because you inflated the pot by an extra 2BB doesnt mean villain will be more inclined to pay you off. if you take metagame considerations into the matter, checkraising here will have significant implications. however, regarding the hand in question, i still feel that betting out is the +EV play in most situations.

[DcifrThs]

[ QUOTE ]
as he certainly will, but i dont think he will necessarily pay off a raise simply because its suspect.

[/ QUOTE ]

i never said he'd pay off the raise...when he does its a bonus...either way i think the play is good b/c you're not losing bets by not betting b/c he's not calling...

-Barron

[Gabe]

[ QUOTE ]
UTG in this hand is a very solid Pro. Tight, but not ultra-tight...aggressive, but less than the average pro. Reads hands pretty well, hates paying off and not afraid to fold when he thinks he is beat.


[/ QUOTE ]

[HiatusOver]

What are you getting at Gabe?

[Ulysses]

Classic JV screwplay. River checkraise seems pretty standard.

[William Jockusch]

I like it alot.

Preflop -- I think with the dead money you should call.

Flop -- if he is "not afraid to fold when he thinks he is beat", I totally agree with your plan.

Turn -- yup.

River -- the only debatable play. No clue whether it's better to lead or check raise here. I will be interested in what others have to say.

[Steve Giufre]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't know; you checkraise the flop, bet the turn and then check a total blank on the river! That looks really bizarre.


[/ QUOTE ]

I'm pretty hung over but a couple thoughts. I'm like 99% sure you check raise the flop, bet turn and check river with a queen here. You really arnt one for checking the the turn with any kind of hand you like here. I think I remember you telling me you have some history with this player. I'm sure he is gonna value bet AQ or AK on the end, and those are definitely his most likely holdings. I really think your river checkraise is correct agaist this player.

[BarronVangorToth]

Pre-flop: due to the dead money, I think you're right to call. I think you have to do it, if only for future considerations / warnings to players that you will defend.

Flop: very good.

Turn: here is where I'm going to differ with some advice above -- what about check-raising the turn? Check-raising the flop might give the "I have a Q" feel but then you check to the K since you "put your opponent on A-K," which he could likely have.

I'm not certain, but I think I'd like the check-raise the turn vs. trying for it on the river, which might be suspect, as Barry suggested, and might draw 0BB.

Barron Vangor Toth
www.BarronVangorToth.com (http://www.BarronVangorToth.com)

[LarsVegas]

Two things:

1) The preflop call is obvious. You are getting 4.5-to-1 on the call, and a solid pro should also be loosening up on his opening raising standards (pairs at least from 66 and up is viable raising hands here).

2) How would you play QJo in the same spot with the same board? Asking even more specific, are there any hands of a more immediate made hand value you could checkraise on this flop that couldn't beat that K on the turn?

lars

[SA125]

[ QUOTE ]
Flop : Q 9 4

I check-raise he calls, my plan at this point is to follow through the turn and check-fold most likely if I miss the river. Maybe follow through...thats what I usually do, but it didnt seem right against this guy.

Turn : K

I bet he calls

River 2

I check, planning to put in as many raises as possible.

[/ QUOTE ]

He reads hands well and is aggressive, but hasn't raised yet. Now he's wondering why a duck slowed you down from pounding a board that was likely to have hit or not hurt him.

I think it's 50-50 whether he'd check behind or bet, or call or fold. I'd bet.

[Renaud Desferet]

Not a place to semibluff.
Check call, check call, check fold.
A semibluff is far too expensive, even against a not very tenacious opponent.
If you don't follow through on the river: he won't fold any hands on the turn and will raise you with a good bunch of hands. Note that TT and JJ are less likely holdings, which are typical hands he might just call on the turn.
If you do, he will fold a little, but these hands are far too few to make this a profit.
The only time check raising the flop is fine is if he is very tight on the flop, but I don't know any mid-high limit solid pro player tight on the flop, especially against a known good player. one pro used to be tight on the flop in my game, but he is not anymore.
Louie Landale once explained why being tight on the flop is wrong headsup, because it becomes too easy/cheap to steal for the opponent.

[Michael Jensen]

With a brick on the river, I would bet out on the river. I would not risk missing a bet, hoping the guy bets it for me. Furthermore, if he doesn't mind laying down a hand when he is beat, he more than likely will lay his hand down to a check-raise on the river. Also, if he has this tendancy, me might just check behind especially if he has a hand like AQ fearing he still may be beat. If he were to bet, you still have his bet, but you took too big of a risk of him checking behind on the river. If it is unlikely he will call a check-raise, I'd just bet it out.

BraveJayhawk

[Barry]

I'm not saying it doesn't happen a lot, it's just that my warning lights go off. In those situations my opponent is often either loaded or empty so betting serves little purpose.

OK, OK, I know I miss value bets here and there and maybe this is one of them too.

[Ulysses]

Renaud, you should post more.

[1800GAMBLER]

I guess i don't get it. Someone help me out.

Hands he doesn't have, AA KK QQ 99.

Hands he may or may not have, AK KQ AQ.

Hands that would play like this, JJ TT AT AJ.

Against,

AQ it's a sweet c/r if he pays off.

Against AK KQ - if he does have these hands the reason he has those is because he didn't want to lose the player on the turn and is probably now going to raise the river, so the c/r is bad.

Against, JJ TT he'll value bet (maybe?) but prob wont pay off but he will def call if you just bet.

AT AJ seems like they are folding if you bet and checking the river if you check, but hell, you may just induce a bluff.

So it seems like a bad idea, but if clark and eldiablo both say different i guess my analysis is wrong somewhere, help?

[TStoneMBD]

yah i agree with renaud. semibluffing at this level is an amateur play.

[Clarkmeister]

[ QUOTE ]
yah i agree with renaud. semibluffing at this level is an amateur play.

[/ QUOTE ]

Playing any headsup situation the same 100% is the amateur play. This flop-turn variation is perfectly acceptable from time to time.

[Steve Giufre]

[ QUOTE ]
Not a place to semibluff.
Check call, check call, check fold.
A semibluff is far too expensive, even against a not very tenacious opponent.
If you don't follow through on the river: he won't fold any hands on the turn and will raise you with a good bunch of hands. Note that TT and JJ are less likely holdings, which are typical hands he might just call on the turn.
If you do, he will fold a little, but these hands are far too few to make this a profit.
The only time check raising the flop is fine is if he is very tight on the flop, but I don't know any mid-high limit solid pro player tight on the flop, especially against a known good player. one pro used to be tight on the flop in my game, but he is not anymore.
Louie Landale once explained why being tight on the flop is wrong headsup, because it becomes too easy/cheap to steal for the opponent.

[/ QUOTE ]

The part Im not sure I can agree with is that he wont fold any hands on the turn if Hiatus doesnt follow through on the river. I think he probably gives up AK here a good majority of the time on the turn, and with the poster, he might even be rasing AJ preflop, which he is also very likely to dump. Also, I really think Hiatus would be spewing if he bet the river. If he bricks the turn the fun is over right there IMO. What hands will a solid pro call the turn with here and here not the river considering the board and the previous action? The call the turn (with a hand that has showdown value) and fold if they fire the last barrel on the river logic is a lot more useful in live play, but not in an aggreisve high limit internet games. Once these guys call the turn, they almost always put the last bet in and make you turn over your hand.

[esspo]

It really depends on what he thinks of you. If he thinks highly of you, he will interpret your river check as trying to induce a bluff. The only way he's betting a marginal hand for value is if he thinks you are a moron who overplays weak hands and then would pay off a river bet when you are obviously beat. In either case, he probably isn't betting any mid pkt. pair he decided to call you down with.

[esspo]

[ QUOTE ]
This flop-turn variation is perfectly acceptable from time to time.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but it must be a variation and be interpreted as a variation. The value of the semi-bluff is the additional folding equity + the times you suck out. If you overuse the semibluff, the folding equity drops to near zero making it a -EV play.

[Nate tha' Great]

This is the best post in the thread, IMHO, because it's the only one that's really breaking down his likely holdings.

I'd like a checkraise better against an opponent who was described as overaggressive, whereas this guy seems to be playing somewhat too tight.

[ QUOTE ]
I guess i don't get it. Someone help me out.

Hands he doesn't have, AA KK QQ 99.

Hands he may or may not have, AK KQ AQ.

Hands that would play like this, JJ TT AT AJ.

Against,

AQ it's a sweet c/r if he pays off.

Against AK KQ - if he does have these hands the reason he has those is because he didn't want to lose the player on the turn and is probably now going to raise the river, so the c/r is bad.

Against, JJ TT he'll value bet (maybe?) but prob wont pay off but he will def call if you just bet.

AT AJ seems like they are folding if you bet and checking the river if you check, but hell, you may just induce a bluff.

So it seems like a bad idea, but if clark and eldiablo both say different i guess my analysis is wrong somewhere, help?

[/ QUOTE ]

[HiatusOver]

Sup Lars your post got me thinking, so I will try to respond.

>>>Two things:>>>

>>>1) The preflop call is obvious. You are getting 4.5-to-1 on the call, and a solid pro should also be loosening up on his opening raising standards (pairs at least from 66 and up is viable raising hands here).<<<

OK it seems like everyone agrees here pretty much. I just thought it was gonna be a lot closer with a hand with pretty poor implied odds.

>>>2) How would you play QJo in the same spot with the same board? Asking even more specific, are there any hands of a more immediate made hand value you could checkraise on this flop that couldn't beat that K on the turn?<<<<<<

This is a tough and very good question. I'm sure like most of us here, I dont play the same hand the same way all the time. I have started to lead flops lately so this might have been a spot I would experiment with that. I check-raise more flops than most heads up because I also like to run semi-bluff plays like this one. If I called the pre-flop raise here with TT I think I am definitely checkraising and then folding to a turn raise or something and probably checking the river with this board (??)...or something along those lines. With QJ specifically I might check-call the flop and lead the turn based on a few different things, I also have certainly check-raised the flop with QJ in spots like these and almost always if the PF raise came from Mid-late position. With AQ I think there is more than a 50 percent chance I am check-raising this flop. So basically yea I am gonna check-raise this flop sometimes with hands that dont beat the K. By doing this it puts me in tricky spots where mistakes can be made, but hey thats why they call it poker. (right?)

[HiatusOver]

Barron you said "I'm not certain, but I think I'd like the check-raise the turn vs. trying for it on the river, which might be suspect, as Barry suggested, and might draw 0BB."

We are worried about being suspect but we want to check-raise the flop and check the turn? That is much much more suspect then check-raising the flop, betting the turn and checking the river.

It is very rare for an opponent to check-raise the flop and then just check fold the turn. So he has to "suspect" that I am either calling or raising again. I think he definitely checks AQ for example on the turn if I check it to him.

[HiatusOver]

Renaud,

First of all, thanks for the response. I am honored to have a rare Renaud response in my thread. You say my play is too expensive. I always thought that these plays were pretty cheap and you had both Hand equity and Fold equity working for you to overcome the small extra cost.

If I am willing to check-fold the river, what makes my semi-bluff so expensive? It will probably cost me .75 more Small bets (I came up with this pretty fast, maybe its off) over the long run to run this semi-bluff instead of check-calling it down. Also, saying that you need to follow through on the river doesnt help your argument that a semi-bluff is too expensive because all you are saying that independent of everything else, when you get to the river a bet is in order. You might be right here, I would love to hear others...but it doesnt help you argument that check-raising the flop and betting the turn is too expensive.

Don't you think I have enough draw equity and fold equity to atleast make this close? Isn't AJ and other hands gonna lay down sometimes when the turn is a 7? Also I have a clean 8 outs twice to the nuts and maybe a J or 10 is good sometimes...that lessens the cost.

This guy isnt laying down the flop no I agree...but he cant just keep calling every good players flop check-raise turn lead with A high all day and expect to beat the game.

[HiatusOver]

Anyone who just read my response to Renaud...I just ediited some of the river discussion when I thought about it more. Basically I said that if Renaud thinks we need to bet the river when we get there (I.E. betting the river when 2 blanks come and we have been called so far is a +EV play) Then it can't help the argument that a semi-bluff is too expensive.

[Steve Giufre]

Supose you did bet the flop and turn, and missed your hand on the river. I really think checking is right, and I sorta want to discuss it because I think its interesting. With that board, I think once he calls the turn with 1010 or JJ, he is gonna call the river, since there isnt enough money in the pot to just call with his likely 6 outer. He wont get two bets on the river because there will be 4 to a straight out there when he improves and Hiatus wont pay off with his made hands. So if he calls with those hands on the turn its because he is gonna show it down. If he were capable of raising A10 AJ UTG then it would make a lot more sense, beacause those are reasonable hands he could have gotten to the river with, but folded for one more bet. I know Hiatus didnt mention the player in question, but he is super tight, and he defintely doesnt have A10 here. I really doubt he has AJ either. I just wouldnt see the point of firing again on the river on a miss.

I guess what I'm asking is, since we know a pretty good amount about his preflop rasing standards and his range of hands, what will he call the turn with but fold on the river for one more bet?

[HiatusOver]

OK Gambler I am gonna go through the breakdown with you...good post.

KK, QQ, 99 he doesnt have, so we can ignore those hands...

AA : he might have still, though an unlikely line that King is a scary card on the turn and he no longer beats much. What am I gonna pay off on the river if he raises? Answer : not much that doesnt beat AA.
Will he bet the river and call a raise? definitely bet and maybe call a raise. Will he pay off a river 3-bet NO CHANCE

AK : See AA, by the way if you disagree with the AA possibly not raising the turn, how is that any different than AK which you said might not.

KQ : he probably raises the turn here...if he is waiting for the river then I missed out on some bets definitely.

AQ : I am an expert and ride off into the sunset...although he could definitely fold when I check-raise...

JJ-TT : Well first of all its less likely because I have a J and a T, I dont even know if he gets to the river and I dont know if he pays off the river if I bet...my guess is he doesnt pay off the river if he gets there. He is not gonna value bet.

AT-AJ : He certainly isnt calling and he might bluff, probably not.

KJs : You forgot to mention this on, and some other hands he could have...Anyways with KJs I think he could very well play the hand this way and is definitely betting the river.


From all this analyis I still don't know, but I think you have to see how its not a definite bet. A lot depends on if he pays off the river with certain hands. And what he does with AK, AA

[YoureToast]

I checkraise this flop also. My question to you is: why? I'm curious to see what you (or others) have to say about the value of this flop checkraise.

As for the rest of the hand, I like the preflop call; as stated, I like the flop CR; I like the turn bet (hmmm, says the pro, thats interesting, he must have a Q); and I like the river CR because of the strength of the previous action. However, I still think the river CR is wrong (even though I like it).

[J_V]

You picked the perfect player to make this play against and I'm almost sure it's +EV. You are likely gonna get a check-raise in on AQ or AK.

Obviously, the meta-considerations are fantastic as well.
This play doesn't seem that debatable to me either. I haven't read the other posts though.

[BarronVangorToth]

[ QUOTE ]


We are worried about being suspect but we want to check-raise the flop and check the turn? That is much much more suspect then check-raising the flop, betting the turn and checking the river.



[/ QUOTE ]


Check-raising the Q and then checking to the K isn't suspect, in my opinion, and it would paint a picture he would fall into, all Bob Ross style.

Barron Vangor Toth
www.BarronVangorToth.com (http://www.BarronVangorToth.com)

[Renaud Desferet]

I never advocated to follow through on the river, I just had a quick look at both options.
I did a thorough EV calculation. I just ignored the T or J occurence. This might seem like oversimplifying, but i don't think it favors the semi-bluff or by very little.
I of course assumed he would fold AJ and ATs on the turn.
I assumed he would call the turn with AK and fold unimproved. I think this is the right play, the pot odds are almost there and again it prevents from being run over.
77-88 are trickier.
I assumed first that he played 77-AA plus AJ, ATs, KQ, KJs, KTs, QJs.
When you assume he will call 77-88 on the turn and fold unimproved, a check call approach gives an EV of 0.98 vs 0.72 when semibluffing.
If you assume he will fold 77-88, then you get 0.98 vs 1.18 respectively.
if you get rid of KQo, you find 0.98 vs 0.79 for the first case.
Finally, if you get rid of AJ, KQ, KJs, KTs, JQs and assume 77-88 as folding hands on the turn, you find that EV is 1.07 vs 0.97 (check call vs semibluffing)
Again, what makes the semibluffing so expensive is the likelihood of being raised on the turn. Also, you will sometimes have a free card on the turn when checking calling (I assume you would with AJ and ATs and 77-88 and AK...of course you might disagree)
I hope it helps. I can send you the spreadsheet if you wish.
Nothing is really clear and it is a bit closer than what I expected. What is sure is don't do that against Angelina.

[KdoubleK]

At first I thought this play was rather dubious and that following through on the river for value would probably be your best option. After reviewing other posts though, I think the decision is close. You check the river because you think he will fold AK, AQ, or possibly even AA if he thinks he's beat when you bet out. The river checkraise really indicates serious strength though, and if he's capable of folding these holdings to one river bet, he definately folds to the checkraise. If he has a set, you possibly get 4 bets on the river but more likely 2. Leading out definately gets you 3 against a set. So by leading out, you usually get 1 bet (50%), sometimes get 3 (10%), and sometimes get 0 (40%). By checkraising, you usually get 0 (50%), sometimes get 1 (20%), sometimes get 2 (20%), and sometimes get 4 (10%). These are just approximations of what I think is likely to happen, I don't want to argue them. So overall I think leading out is still the better play since it has the best chance of getting you more money, but the possibility of netting 2 and occasionally 4 bets makes checkraising a risky but +EV play as well, especially considering the metagame benefits. Just my opinion.

[J_V]

So, you shouldn't semi-bluff at 80-160?

[J_V]

Depending on his range of UTG hands, I think semi-bluffing will push him off enough hands to make up for the times you get raised on the turn.

This is a bad board to try to semibluff on though against a solid player. I think it's closer than you do Renaud, because there are players (maybe this guy) that might fold 8-8, 10-10 and J-J as well as AK and AJ. I'm gonna have to think about this one some more.

I'd bet through the river against most opponents. People always seem to fold to my hopeless river bets more than they should, even high-limit pros. The river bet might be the crux of the hand. It makes your opponent's bluff catching more expensive but in this case it's hard to envision him calling the turn and folding the river, unless he is calling the turn assuming you know better than to bluff the river and will fold there. Sklansky advocating this bluff-catch idea in certain spots in Poker, Gaming, and Life.

EDIT: I just read Renaud's second post and it's fantastic, check it out. My intuition was pretty close.

[HiatusOver]

""Sklansky advocated this bluff-catch idea in certain spots in Poker, Gaming, and Life." -JV

Hey bud, just making sure you realize that there are other books out there besides "Poker,Gaming and Life"...I know its your favorite book and all but you seem to work in a reference to it in every thread you get involved in.

[elysium]

hi hi

you may have played it very well post-flop, but this call pre-flop will lose you many chips over the long run. these type calls should never be made. in fact, to get into how you played it post-flop is kind of like the high diver who is instructed not to jump off the highest level diving board because the pool has been drained of half its water, and the water is too shallow for high dive entry, but who doesn't listen and instead says, " no, no just watch. that's all. i just want you to watch. no really. really. watch. the duck. that's all. i'll do the duck. yea.". and he he jumps, and splendidly launches into a rolling reverse back-flip, a forward roll, and as he begins his waddle, asks, "watcha think? good huh. yea. yea. good. watcha think? quack. quack. yea. yea.".

pool's drained; and "pool's drai...", is his final reply. yes indeed.

you played this half-drained holding very dextrously and in good over-all form, however, the concrete of the long run is epic, and fleeting style and form ephemeral; your best jackknife is still no match for the bottom of the pool. without correct odds of water for the height of the dive, your form and style will pale in significance to the hard character of the concrete at pool bottom. shallow enough, and just standing on the platform not diving takes the trophy, while even flawless dives are disqualified at the point of the decision of the diver to jump. in this hand, your poor starters have made a pre-flop muck a more deft and formidable display of the precision of your ability than a river check-raise with the nuts. the player who mucks this hand pre-flop will elegantly emerge from the water without ever having tasted concrete; but over the long run, the check-raiser with this hand, though he's check-raising with the nuts will, well, grisley shallowy splash shall maketh he. and flat. yea. yea. just like flat. over the long run. you know? yea. yea. really. no come-upeth. like drai....you know?

[BarronVangorToth]

[ QUOTE ]
yea. yea. good. watcha think? quack. quack.

[/ QUOTE ]


Priceless.

There will come a time in the coming weeks where I blatantly rip off this analogy. Hopefully it won't be on 2+2, for that would be embarassing.

Barron Vangor Toth
www.BarronVangorToth.com (http://www.BarronVangorToth.com)

[J_V]

It's the only book I've ever readan also my favorite.

I like your moxy kid but just remember where you came from, otherwise I might post your first JV PM.

Good luck,

JV

[Lawrence Ng]

[ QUOTE ]
Renaud, you should post more.

[/ QUOTE ]

PwNed at the hands of El Sarcasmio.... /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

Lawrence

[Lawrence Ng]

[ QUOTE ]
So, you shouldn't semi-bluff at 80-160?

[/ QUOTE ]

This has to be the perfect situation to semi-bluff.

Lawrence

[HiatusOver]

I checked the river. My opponent bet. I raised as planned, my opponent folded

Go Pats