Theodore Donald Kiravatsos
02-11-2003, 07:16 PM
Situation:
I'm dealt A /forums/images/icons/spade.gif A /forums/images/icons/club.gif in MP.
One EP limper, I raise, 3 callers behind me. 5 see a pot of Q /forums/images/icons/heart.gif 6 /forums/images/icons/heart.gif 3 /forums/images/icons/club.gif
I bet, there is a caller, the button raises, and I make it 3 bets. The button calls, and the pot becomes heads-up.
The turn: J /forums/images/icons/heart.gif
I bet to avoid giving free cards to a single heart, and to find out if I'm beat. I'm not sure yet what I'll do if I'm raised, but I am called. Hmmm. Now I don't think he has the hearts.
River: A /forums/images/icons/heart.gif
Oh boy. A set of aces. I bet, because I feel a bluff is in order. I am raised, consider the possiblity that I'm being bluffed, and pay off. I am shown
Q /forums/images/icons/diamond.gif T /forums/images/icons/spade.gif .
Generally I think of my "bluff hands"/"pick off bluff hands" as being mutually exclusive; that is, a hand cannot be both. Here is a hand that I think was worthy of both bluffing AND picking off a bluff. Usually we don't bet marginal hands for value, right? This hand was past marginal, it was crap. But it still beat a pure bluff. And if this fool had a hand like 9 /forums/images/icons/heart.gif 8 /forums/images/icons/heart.gif and was slowplaying me on the turn (or if he had ANY small heart), I wanted him to think his hand was ruined.
Here is a hand where I feel both criteria applied. A scary card came that made a bluff at least considerable by me. If this clown held two small hearts, I might be able to bluff him. So first I bluffed, then when I was raised, I thought for a while, and then called.
If, for some reason, my opponent was considering my hand, my play was consistent with a hand like K /forums/images/icons/heart.gif K-X, giving me the second nuts to the royal flush.
So, is this reckless or is there anything to it?
"Your excuses are your own" -- Richard Roma
I'm dealt A /forums/images/icons/spade.gif A /forums/images/icons/club.gif in MP.
One EP limper, I raise, 3 callers behind me. 5 see a pot of Q /forums/images/icons/heart.gif 6 /forums/images/icons/heart.gif 3 /forums/images/icons/club.gif
I bet, there is a caller, the button raises, and I make it 3 bets. The button calls, and the pot becomes heads-up.
The turn: J /forums/images/icons/heart.gif
I bet to avoid giving free cards to a single heart, and to find out if I'm beat. I'm not sure yet what I'll do if I'm raised, but I am called. Hmmm. Now I don't think he has the hearts.
River: A /forums/images/icons/heart.gif
Oh boy. A set of aces. I bet, because I feel a bluff is in order. I am raised, consider the possiblity that I'm being bluffed, and pay off. I am shown
Q /forums/images/icons/diamond.gif T /forums/images/icons/spade.gif .
Generally I think of my "bluff hands"/"pick off bluff hands" as being mutually exclusive; that is, a hand cannot be both. Here is a hand that I think was worthy of both bluffing AND picking off a bluff. Usually we don't bet marginal hands for value, right? This hand was past marginal, it was crap. But it still beat a pure bluff. And if this fool had a hand like 9 /forums/images/icons/heart.gif 8 /forums/images/icons/heart.gif and was slowplaying me on the turn (or if he had ANY small heart), I wanted him to think his hand was ruined.
Here is a hand where I feel both criteria applied. A scary card came that made a bluff at least considerable by me. If this clown held two small hearts, I might be able to bluff him. So first I bluffed, then when I was raised, I thought for a while, and then called.
If, for some reason, my opponent was considering my hand, my play was consistent with a hand like K /forums/images/icons/heart.gif K-X, giving me the second nuts to the royal flush.
So, is this reckless or is there anything to it?
"Your excuses are your own" -- Richard Roma