Re: 30-60 9-6 suited hand
 

[ QUOTE ]

If this is the case, does it make sense to raise with 9[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]6[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] before the flop?

[/ QUOTE ]

I can't believe Mason is the only one to have said anything about this.

Re: 30-60 9-6 suited hand
 

Probably because:

[ QUOTE ]
Now, before you go on reading and making any comments, I don't need a twoplustwo lecture on stealing with 9-6 suited. I would like you to comment on my river play and that's it.


[/ QUOTE ]

That said, I do agree with Mason.

-Diplomat

Re: 30-60 9-6 suited hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

If this is the case, does it make sense to raise with 9[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]6[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] before the flop?

[/ QUOTE ]

I can't believe Mason is the only one to have said anything about this.

[/ QUOTE ]

because the original poster basically said he knew it was wrong. or at least something to the extent that he didn't want to discuss it.

-Barron

Re: 30-60 9-6 suited hand
 

This is 20+ BB HU pot. People do silly things in these situations and folding to the checkraise is not ok.

Re: 30-60 9-6 suited hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'd check behind on the river since you have to pay off a checkraise and the fact he stopped raising probably means he doesn't have 6-4. He certainly can't put you on 9-6 here.

[/ QUOTE ]

When a reasonable player goes 10 bets on the turn, that overrides any previous information you have from earlier in the hand. It doesn't matter what he did preflop, he's often got the nuts. I think the villain can put you on 96 just fine.

Re: 30-60 9-6 suited hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'd check behind on the river since you have to pay off a checkraise and the fact he stopped raising probably means he doesn't have 6-4. He certainly can't put you on 9-6 here.

[/ QUOTE ]

When a reasonable player goes 10 bets on the turn, that overrides any previous information you have from earlier in the hand. It doesn't matter what he did preflop, he's often got the nuts. I think the villain can put you on 96 just fine.

[/ QUOTE ]


If he went 10 bets w/ 2 pair (not even top 2) I'd almost guarantee he goes to the felt w/64. I've seen things like this happen several times. When a very Laggy and very stupid player gets the 2nd nuts, and it is unlikely his opponent has the nuts, they just won't stop raising. By the way the river went down, I think the bb most likely put him on a set of 8's I don't think he'd try a checkraise after the board pairs if he puts hero on the straight rather than the underfull.

Re: 30-60 9-6 suited hand
 

It's not raising with 96s I have a problem with, it's doing so with the big blind as described. If that's the reason the poster didn't want to discuss it, that's fine, but that's not how I interpreted it.

It's also strange to post a hand where the decision you make has almost 0 effective on your long term results, where there is such a glaring leak that could turn a winning player into a losing one fast.

Re: Results
 

[ QUOTE ]
There's a debate on whether or not 9-6 suited warrants a steal against a loose blind who is very defensive, but I flopped a pretty decent flop for my hand and couldn't ask for more.


[/ QUOTE ]

You put the ", but" in your sentence like it adds more than absolutely zero to the discussion you are referring to. I respectfully disagree [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

Re: 30-60 9-6 suited hand
 

surely it has to be a split pot with villian holding 69c? don't c how a bet would gain u anything. good thing a club didnt come on river.

Re: Results
 

[ QUOTE ]
But you described a player who wouldn't be paying any attention to how you play. So even though some of the others might be giving you too much respect, this person certainly won't.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think he was saying that he was trying to make an impression on the big blind. Since this player is described as calling too much, this clearly isn't the guy he wants respecting his raises more. He is saying that the rest of the table is respecting his raises too much and that he hopes that showing down 96s will make an impression on them. Even though his opponent on the hand isn't observant, he still has the possiblity of influencing the players who are by showing this hand down. And if you want to show down a bad hand, that means you have to play a bad hand; so choosing to play it against the worst player at the table can be a sensible decision (assuming the "observant" players aren't only observant about the hands in which they are involved and that they will incorrectly think that your raise here is representative of how you will play against them). Not that I'm saying I like the raise with 96s, but I think it is a little more sensible than you are giving it credit for.