![]() |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I had a friend playing yesterday at Live on the Bike which has a 10 minute delay on the internet. Hole cards are shown and there is commentary. Last night the commentator happened to
be Barry Greenstein. He was very interesting to listen to. He discussed everything regarding holdem, from limit vs no limit, and no limit cash games vs no limit tourneys. A fascinating discussion to say the least. They do this from 6 to 10 PM PST Wed thru Sat. I doubt he'll do it tonight, but I would check. Anyway he kind of took a shot at Dan H.'s book. He is not an advocate of probe bets. He stated that he loves playing against probe betters in tournaments. When a player makes a probe bet he will automatically raise them regardless of what he has. Since they will miss the flop around 70% of the time he can build his stack in this fashion. I'm not sure if I necessarily agree with him. If I bet the same amount on the flop than I am not giving away any information about the value of my hand. Perhaps what he was trying to say is that from his perspective a probe bet signifies weakness which he can exploit whereas a pot sized bet on the flop regardless of what you have suggest you have strength. What does everyone think about this? Bruce |
|
|