Two Plus Two Older Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Older Archives > Tournament Poker > One-table Tournaments
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 06-18-2005, 07:34 PM
Freudian Freudian is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 24
Default $22 Why getting fancy in the lower limits is a bad idea

Here is a stop-n-go that where I had a good flop (as in he missing it). But I was stupid enough to do it against a somewhat loose big stack. Thus the chance of it working is so reduced that it is a bad bad play. He minraised everything so that isn't a big factor here.

Party Poker No-Limit Hold'em Tourney, Big Blind is t150 (5 handed) converter

Hero (t850)
UTG (t3105)
MP (t1160)
Button (t1075)
SB (t1810)

Preflop: Hero is BB with 4[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], 3[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img].
<font color="#CC3333">UTG raises to t300</font>, <font color="#666666">3 folds</font>, Hero calls t150.

Flop: (t675) J[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], 6[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], T[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">Hero bets t550 (All-In)</font>, UTG calls t550.

Turn: (t1775) 7[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players, 1 all-in)</font>

River: (t1775) K[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players, 1 all-in)</font>

Final Pot: t1775

Results in white below: <font color="#FFFFFF">
Hero has 4d 3c (high card, king).
UTG has As 9h (flush, king high).
Outcome: UTG wins t1775. </font>
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 06-18-2005, 07:37 PM
RicktheRuler RicktheRuler is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 68
Default Re: $22 Why getting fancy in the lower limits is a bad idea

Nice hand.

Seriously though, your are right. At this level anything but straightforward play seems to be suboptimal the majority of the time. Maybe everyone has the same FPS you do and that is why they look so terrible. [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 06-18-2005, 07:38 PM
TheTimeIsUp TheTimeIsUp is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: The OC, Cali
Posts: 527
Default Re: $22 Why getting fancy in the lower limits is a bad idea

When it doesn't work, it is a bad idea.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 06-18-2005, 07:38 PM
Freudian Freudian is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 24
Default Re: $22 Why getting fancy in the lower limits is a bad idea

[ QUOTE ]
Nice hand.

Seriously though, your are right. At this level anything but straightforward play seems to be suboptimal the majority of the time. Maybe everyone has the same FPS you do and that is why they look so terrible. [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

I rarely do it though. But with tiny stack and one of the big stacks minraising every hand it was hard to find any spots to do anything. Plus frustration with not getting any even half-decent starting hands.

This is about as fancy as I have gotten in ages.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 06-18-2005, 07:42 PM
curtains curtains is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 240
Default Re: $22 Why getting fancy in the lower limits is a bad idea


I would never even dream of doing this or anything even remotely similar to it in a situation like this.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 06-18-2005, 07:45 PM
Freudian Freudian is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 24
Default Re: $22 Why getting fancy in the lower limits is a bad idea

[ QUOTE ]

I would never even dream of doing this or anything even remotely similar to it in a situation like this.

[/ QUOTE ]

Because he minraised? He did that the last six hands (when not in a blind).
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 06-18-2005, 07:46 PM
adanthar adanthar is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 27
Default Re: $22 Why getting fancy in the lower limits is a bad idea

No, because you have 43o and big stacks call stuff.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 06-18-2005, 07:47 PM
Freudian Freudian is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 24
Default Re: $22 Why getting fancy in the lower limits is a bad idea

[ QUOTE ]
No, because you have 43o and big stacks call stuff.

[/ QUOTE ]

I know. That why I said it was a bad play in the original post.

Not that I think cards are that important here. The second factor is.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 06-18-2005, 07:49 PM
adanthar adanthar is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 27
Default Re: $22 Why getting fancy in the lower limits is a bad idea

This would be a far less bad play (still bad, but far less bad) if you had, say, K9, so that when he calls you with any two anyway at least you have a chance to be beating Q7.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 06-18-2005, 07:59 PM
jon462 jon462 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 0
Default Re: $22 Why getting fancy in the lower limits is a bad idea

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
No, because you have 43o and big stacks call stuff.

[/ QUOTE ]
Not that I think cards are that important here. The second factor is.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think I probably if Im the largestack there (well, assuming I would be raising utg with A9o, which i wouldnt)
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:34 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.