[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]

You are a favorite over AK. You don't know you are up against AK. The 75% advantage you have over AK doesn't make up for the % of time that I believe you are behind in this hand.

[/ QUOTE ]
That is a reasonable position if you can back it up with a suggested range of hands or at least an estimate of how often you think TT is good here. Otherwise, it's just a restatement of the idea that you think folding is correct, which is not progress toward a better understanding of this hand.

[ QUOTE ]

In the long term, in situations similar to this, you are behind a high enough % of the time that folding incorrectly in this case is not a big mistake.


[/ QUOTE ]
Any incorrect fold here would be a big FToP mistake (smallest against a monster draw). If you're talking about the range of hands, then according to the above, you believe folding is not a mistake at all. In neither sense would folding be a small mistake. So, please, don't say folding is a small mistake.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm not in the habit of folding just because my hand is marginal, nor of getting involved because I have a strong hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

Backwards. Folding marginal hands in big pots and getting involved with big hands in big pots is a winning strategy [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img].

[/ QUOTE ]
That is ridiculous. You quoted me out of context. Let me add the context again:

"I'm not in the habit of folding just because my hand is marginal, nor of getting involved because I have a strong hand. The question is how my hand compares with his range of hands, and how much each of us can get paid off."

Level 1: How strong is my hand? Fold weak hands, and bet/raise with strong hands.

Level 2: How does my hand compare with my opponent's hand? Fold when my hand is weaker than my opponent's, and bet/raise when my hand is stronger.

Level 3: What does my opponent think I have? Get my opponent to fold stronger hands he hates, and call with weaker hands he likes.

There are other levels, but I'll stop there.

I was reminding you that level 1 analysis is not the end of the story. Then you quoted me out of context to make it look like I don't understand level 1 poker.

[ QUOTE ]
You have such a huge edge against most of your opponents in small stakes NL games so what is the point in tangling yourself up in messes like this one?

[/ QUOTE ]
Once again, this is not a good argument. That there will be better opportunities later does not mean it is right to pass up a +EV situation now. The question is whether it is +EV, of course.

[ QUOTE ]

As to what hands I think he has, I think its either a straight or a bigger overpair/set/2pair that is scared of seeing four to the straight + might think he can get a weak call from someone who thinks he is bluffing by over-representing a straight...although I seriously doubt he is thinking that deep. I can really see 88 here too. Bluffs and misclicks are a possibility here, but I don't think they are seen here from an unknown often enough to play for your whole stack. From the looks of the TT vs your AA hand, he seems to overplay his good hands. The problem is that most hands I think he is betting huge on the flop are ahead of your TT.


[/ QUOTE ]
Finally, you post a range of hands. Thank you. I would much rather see this than your philosophy of beating small stakes games.