have you guys seen this hand????
 

http://www.cardplayer.com/pokerquiz.php

I don't get this answer: "Call". He says that the SB would not bet into 6 people without trips. If we are putting him on trips, why not fold? What are we achieving by calling?
Please, help me here....

Re: have you guys seen this hand????
 

Wow, maybe I am missing something but that sounds like pathetic reasoning. Also, why is his only holding here trips? In my games I am betting with a pair of twos or any pp in this situation. This is 30/60 with higher level thinking and the guy can only have trips? This is stupid. If anything you should call if because you think he has a 2 or lower pp and is drawing extrmemly thin. I'm raising in this spot because I most likely have the best hand, but he could also be drawing live if he is doing something stupid with overs. If he 3bets I fold, if he c/r the turn I fold. I don't understand this hand at all and it seems very wrong.

Re: have you guys seen this hand????
 

Well this is taking place in the 30-60 stratosphere so my analysis is probably tainted, but I would still think raising (potential value plus protect your hand from overcards behind you) is the right play there. Sounds like he's advocating a sort of WA/WB line.

Re: have you guys seen this hand????
 

[ QUOTE ]
Sounds like he's advocating a sort of WA/WB line

[/ QUOTE ]
WA/WB line only works HU.

Re: have you guys seen this hand????
 

I didn't mean to imply that it was correct, just that that's the sort of thinking he seemed to be using. (Lose the least if you're behind, win more if you're ahead and he's bluffing, etc.)

Re: have you guys seen this hand????
 

The advice is somewhat contradictory IMO. If we're not raising because a "pro" bets with nothing less than trips here, why are we advocating a call here?

Re: have you guys seen this hand????
 

[ QUOTE ]
If we're not raising because a "pro" bets with nothing less than trips here, why are we advocating a call here?

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly my point.

Re: have you guys seen this hand????
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If we're not raising because a "pro" bets with nothing less than trips here, why are we advocating a call here?

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly my point.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, didn't mean to just repeat what you said.

Re: have you guys seen this hand????
 

I think the decision to call here is wrong, because:
1. beeing pro does not mean only playin trips in a situation like this. But in most situations he has you beaten here.
2. this is a raise/fold situation. calling brings you nothin, because you dont draw. You hope to hold the best hand. Nobody will fold because you call...it is more probably that more people call (or more badly to call +EV) because their odds are better. Other drawing people will not help you here.

So, you are not in a Situation where you can call and you probably have not the best hand:
the right decision is fold!

Maybe the pro is a tricky player (very probably. I cant believe that there are tight-passive progamers anywhere in this world) but there are 4 people with random hands of the best 60% of all hands (if these are bad players, most times there are only the best 40% or 30%). You have nearly no chance to win here and the pot is only medium sized.
Not much to win and nearly no chances... IMO clear fold.

Re: have you guys seen this hand????
 

clearly the correct line is to find the authors Bob Ciaffone and Jim Brier, and tell them they are f*cktards