Re: I call? (2/5 NL)
 

[ QUOTE ]
The most i have played is $100NL. That being as it may , my less schooled opinion is as follows:

1. referring to the Fundamental Theory of Poker, you call.

2. it's the 2 minute pause that convinces me he has trips and has reviewed your play so far at table, and figured you to not have AA. I put him on QQ. He's not pushing with A,9 and that's all you beat here. Fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

why are you posting here?

Re: I call? (2/5 NL)
 

For me hand 2 is usually a clear fold. I can't think of a hand that waits 2 full minutes then moves allin other than a set. The underbet on the flop then allin after a raise--that's not AK or AJ. Well if he does have that strong of a hand live you should be able to pick that up anyway...

Re: I call? (2/5 NL)
 

call IMMEDIATELY in both hands
gl

Re: I call? (2/5 NL)
 

1. call, no point in raising really.

2. if you dont want to call this, dont raise. WA/WB here.

Re: I call? (2/5 NL)
 

Some quick results:

Hand 1: I called. Turn was the very sexy Ad. Me and the BB got the rest of our money in. BB had 8d5d. PFR had JT, and spent the next 15 minutes berating me. I didnt mind.

Hand 2: I called. BB had 99. Whoops. Turn J, River A. Oooooooo.

Re: I call? (2/5 NL)
 

1. referring to the Fundamental Theory of Poker, you call.

2. it's the 2 minute pause that convinces me he has trips and has reviewed your play so far at table, and figured you to not have AA. I put him on QQ. He's not pushing with A,9 and that's all you beat here. Fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

question, what is the fundamental theorem of poker

Sklansky in this book "The Theory of Poker" on page 17 states:
Everytime you play a hand differently from the way you would have played it if you could see all your opponents cards, THEY gain, and everytime you play your hand the same way you would have played it if you could see all their cards, THEY lose. " a paragraph later he goes on to state "Sometimes the amount of money in the pot makes it correct to call , even if you could see that your opponent has a better hand than you. "
In the case of hand #1, pot odds dictated a call, even though he was probabily behind because pot odds were greater than his odds of losing. Sklansky elaborates in his book that when the odds are with you, you call.
Thus my comment on hand #1.

p.s that is how he played it, and it did work out. (so there...lol)

Re: I call? (2/5 NL)
 

I'm sticking it all in everytime on the second hands. AK is far too likely at these mid stakes. But... the whole premise is what you would do if only an A came. I had a similar hand to this that I'll post.

Re: I call? (2/5 NL)
 

[ QUOTE ]
call IMMEDIATELY in both hands
gl

[/ QUOTE ]

Call the second one faster than immediately.

Re: I call? (2/5 NL)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
call IMMEDIATELY in both hands
gl

[/ QUOTE ]

Call the second one faster than immediately.

[/ QUOTE ]

the first one too.