View Full Version : My name's Sting, and I have weak tight disease . . .
sting
10-07-2005, 10:11 AM
Party 6 Max NL 100
Hero has $125 in BB and cover Villain in SB
A /images/graemlins/diamond.gif 4 /images/graemlins/club.gif in BB
All limp, I check (pot $6ish)
Flop: 2 /images/graemlins/club.gif 8 /images/graemlins/heart.gif 3 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif
Checks around
Turn: 10 /images/graemlins/heart.gif
Checks around
River: 5 /images/graemlins/spade.gif
SB checks, Hero bets $6, folded around to SB who raises to $15
Hero . . .
4_2_it
10-07-2005, 10:18 AM
Easy push.
Any reads at all? It's been a while since I've seen a 4-checkraise (pre, flop, turn and river check). I think some name should be made up for this, similar to "the sexy"
In fact I can't remember ever seeing one. Well, if I think he's the type of player to call a re-raise with 2 medium pair (like 25 or something) I raise. If not I call.
sting
10-07-2005, 10:27 AM
No reads, villain just sat down.
I totally brainfarted. All I could think is 6 4.
I called. Ill post the results in a while
Kirkrrr
10-07-2005, 10:28 AM
3-bet the min. I really feel no inclination to play for a huge pot here, and am willing to take whatever I can get. He might have checked the nuts here, but it's highly unlikely, so your hand should be good. A push seems a waste since he's folding (or should be) pretty much any decent hand that can still pay off a normal re-raise.
Kirk
Well, I suppose the random 100NL player will pay off, so I guess a raise is in order. Lot's of combo's of horribly played sets and two pairs.
4_2_it
10-07-2005, 10:36 AM
[ QUOTE ]
A push seems a waste since he's folding (or should be) pretty much any decent hand that can still pay off a normal re-raise.
[/ QUOTE ]
Villain's stack size was not given, only hero covers. Pot has $20 (can't see OP) so if villain has $50 or less left I'm getting it in here.
If Villain has the nuts he reraises all-in and hero has to call. If not, if he is willing to call a $30 re-raise, then he will call a push.
If hero loses this hand, he loses the max, why not put villain in the same boat?
sting
10-07-2005, 10:36 AM
I called and kicked myself as I did it.
Villain tabled the worst played KK I've ever seen.
I see monsters under the bed at night too!
BTW: Villain had @$100 to start the hand.
miajag81
10-07-2005, 10:38 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Easy push.
[/ QUOTE ]
Pushing is fine. I also kind of like a reraise to 40-50 and then obviously calling if he pushes. But if you think he'll call your huge overbet, definitely push.
4_2_it
10-07-2005, 10:39 AM
I had a similar situation a couple weeks ago when I had 27o in the BB.
Five limpers.
Final board 2 9 7 T 2.
I'm all-in, get two callers. One has KK the other A9. You gotta bet your monsters. Conversely, never, ever limp with KK into a 5-way pot?!?!
One could argue this is why you should only call...
Obviously if he played KK this badly he might pay off, but if he has a shred of ability at anything card-related he'd know not to call your river 3-bet.
It's an unraised pot that appears to have hit no body very hard until the river, so 46 is a possibility that can't be ignored.
I would call the $15 and expect to win 80% of the time.
-Skeme-
10-07-2005, 10:42 AM
Easy 3-bet, I don't know about push.
Kirkrrr
10-07-2005, 10:42 AM
[ QUOTE ]
But if you think he'll call your huge overbet, definitely push.
[/ QUOTE ]
That's exactly what I don't like about that line of reasoning. Why on earth would he call a huge overbet in an unraised pot when against a player that just woke up with a hand all of a sudden? There isn't that many possibilities on that board for a payoff. A4, 46, and perhaps one or two realistic sets. A huge overbet in that spot just isn't getting called by a worse hand nearly often enough to justify itself.
Kirk
4_2_it
10-07-2005, 10:46 AM
[ QUOTE ]
One could argue this is why you should only call...
Obviously if he played KK this badly he might pay off, but if he has a shred of ability at anything card-related he'd know not to call your river 3-bet.
[/ QUOTE ]
How can you contemplate a call? If villain will fold to a 3 bet/push, you still win the same amount. You have to be raising here.
If villain somehow has the nuts, then I pay him off and add him to my buddy list.
You have 2nd nuts on a board that has seen zero action. Your hand is good here over 90% of the time. Calling this board is the definition of weak-tight.
[ QUOTE ]
How can you contemplate a call? If villain will fold to a 3 bet/push, you still win the same amount. You have to be raising here.
[/ QUOTE ]
If you know he folds worse hands, raising is very bad.
[ QUOTE ]
If villain somehow has the nuts, then I pay him off and add him to my buddy list.
[/ QUOTE ]
Just because he check-raised when he hit the nuts?
[ QUOTE ]
You have 2nd nuts on a board that has seen zero action. Your hand is good here over 90% of the time. Calling this board is the definition of weak-tight.
[/ QUOTE ]
Opponent dependent. Against most, I agree with 3-bet.
4_2_it
10-07-2005, 11:22 AM
[ QUOTE ]
How can you contemplate a call? If villain will fold to a 3 bet/push, you still win the same amount. You have to be raising here.
If you know he folds worse hands, raising is very bad.
[/ QUOTE ]
We don't know he folds with worse hands. OP does say villain is 8/0/1 rock. We have a monster hand and should get as much $$$ out of villain as possible.
I agree that there is room for debate on a three bet vs a push, but if villain 4 bets aren't you calling anyway?
Answer this: Suppose the identical betting patterns except hero has quad 2's which can only be beat by a straight flush. Would you still advocate a call. This situation is not much different. Villain will call many worse hands in both situations.
[ QUOTE ]
If villain somehow has the nuts, then I pay him off and add him to my buddy list.
Just because he check-raised when he hit the nuts?
[/ QUOTE ]
So you advocate calling every check raise when you only hold the 2nd nuts on unpaired no-flush board? If the board were paired or Broadway cards were out then maybe I see your point, but worrying about the 4 6 is just leaving money on the table.
I play a lot of NL 100. Pushing and getting paid in this spot is pretty standard. Maybe I am just more aggressive than most /images/graemlins/confused.gif
[ QUOTE ]
We don't know he folds with worse hands.
[/ QUOTE ]
I agree, that's why I like a 3-bet.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If villain somehow has the nuts, then I pay him off and add him to my buddy list.
Just because he check-raised when he hit the nuts?
[/ QUOTE ] So you advocate calling every check raise when you only hold the 2nd nuts on unpaired no-flush board?
[/ QUOTE ]
I was just commenting on your buddy-list skills. I don't think if he had 64 and check-raised the river it necessarily means he's buddy list material.
4_2_it
10-07-2005, 12:04 PM
Your are correct to critize my buddy list comment. I agree that Villain in the sb is correct to complete with any too.
I think our only disagreement (and it is minor) is on how to extract maximium value from the situation. I enjoyed the debate.
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.