Re: meta-game makes 4 malicious monetary matters [meticulous memoirs]
 

[ QUOTE ]
the pair+draw checks behind the river instead of betting

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think this is necessarily true. Given the history, I'm not even sure it's likely.

Re: meta-game makes 4 malicious monetary matters [meticulous memoirs]
 

you stopped at the right time and i think you lose this hand to a flush. in the other hands the guy is loose but he's got legit hands when the bets start going in and he even backs down too soon on a couple hands. the only hand i didnt like was where you had K9 preflop and didnt 3 bet.

Re: meta-game makes 4 malicious monetary matters [meticulous memoirs]
 

mike,
you don't think he would raise this flop w/ a FD?

Re: meta-game makes 4 malicious monetary matters [meticulous memoirs]
 

after not 3-betting preflop, you don't raise postflop in the K9 hand either?

Re: meta-game makes 4 malicious monetary matters [meticulous memoirs]
 

Didn't read thru your entire post. Too much. But I'm a little surprised you folded the first hand.

Re: meta-game makes 4 malicious monetary matters [meticulous memoirs]
 

I might've raised in the heat of battle but now i think that the call is better. Since he didn't reraise preflop I think 2 pair that we theoretically beat now is more likely to contain a 3.

Re: meta-game makes 4 malicious monetary matters [meticulous memoirs]
 

I like them all except the 75o hand (turn raise is pointless IMO, except to fold out a better 7, but people never fold those), and I raise the last hand. Edit: although, I don't think you should if you can't fold to a 3bet, but you are ahead at least 50% of the time IMO. The only thing that makes me not want to raise is that I'm afraid he might have some garbage draw that can't call a raise.

Re: meta-game makes 4 malicious monetary matters [meticulous memoirs]
 

I think you played it perfectly. I am a little confused by the combination of his preflop and flop calls, but his turn explosion followed by his willingness to bet the river even though the 3 paired convinces me that a checkraise on your part would be a bad idea. I think the important river choice is whether to donk when the 3 paired. Unless can narrow his hand to specifically two pair or a pair plus a draw (and I certainly can't), then checking was better than donking in my opinion.

For what it's worth, I would have played the 75 hand exactly the way you played it. Although I never play heads up, in a 6-max context I would also have taken a passive line with the K9 hand although I am usually in the minority when it comes to similar situaions. Can you explain your reason playing the K9 the way you did?

Thanks,
Cartman

Re: meta-game makes 4 malicious monetary matters [meticulous memoirs]
 

"you don't think he would raise this flop w/ a FD?"

not necessarily. seems like villain plays fairly erratic/random. i could go through and pick out spots but you could probably find them yourself. villain can also have a straight pretty easily.

Re: meta-game makes 4 malicious monetary matters [meticulous memoirs]
 

Would have been a nice checkraise on the river. I think important things to note are:

Even if he has a flush or straight, you probably aren't going to get 3bet on this river.

It's almost impossible he's full on this river.

I assume he had something like T8o or something. I think 5betting on the turn is a mistake, but a river checkraise is probably in order. To all the people who write "Well he would have raised this on the flop", that's not really a great way to hand read because I'm sure he can play the same hand both ways.