100-200 against stoxtrader

[Gabe]

this, from josh's post is spot on:
[ QUOTE ]
Turn is a 9. If I'm Stox, I'm putting James on a pair, which will bet here nearly 100% of the time, AQ, which will bet here 100% of the time, or AK, which may or may not bet here.

SB checks, and James checks. Duh, James must have AK.

River King...bada bing!! what a great river checkraise opportunity we have here!! So, viola, he checkraises James on the river.


[/ QUOTE ]

[fyodor]

[ QUOTE ]
In a shorthanded 100-200 game ... Lakerman_ raises in the CO-1

[/ QUOTE ]

There is no way this is a 4 handed game. 2 blinds plus button plus CO plus CO-1 = 5 and if that were the case I am sure James would have called Lakerman_ UTG. Therefore I (correctly) assumed that it was 6 handed.

If only I could read the cards as well. [img]/images/graemlins/crazy.gif[/img]

[mike l.]

yes i caught all that. i was thinking something more like sb figured bb might take a shot with something like AJs when the K falls so he could make a play there with any hand. also sb might know bb will now bet any pair after sb checks for the third and final time, essentially giving up. so none of this means sb has to have a Q. everyone is just assuming sb has a Q and it just doesnt add up. if sb wants to get the max out on a Q here he puts in more action on earlier streets. maybe he bets the turn and sees if hero is brave enough to raise. or he checkraises the flop so it looks like he's just trying to represent. let's put it this way: if sb is a great player or deserves respect then he sure sucked on this hand if he had a Q. so that means there's something not right here. sb has something else. this river c/r looks like some weird play having nothing to do with trips.

now watch ill be wrong and the guy has quads.

[mike l.]

you are terrified of this guy. that was the main point i was making. that's not good.

it's shorthanded. he can make this checkraise there w/ JJ. nad TT and other hands. after all it looks like he can recognize how scared of a Q you are.

but it sounds to me like youve narrowed his hand down to a Q basically completely. yeah duh anyone can see that it looks like he thinks you have AK and so he's river c/ring the Q here. yeah that's like really brilliant. why post that? it sounds to me like youre 100% convinced he has a Q or better so i guess go ahead and lay it down. this player is straightforward tight great etc okay then just dump your AA. but why post about it?

any time someone posts something obvious, if im going to get involved it's going to try and play devil's advocate and try to find another way to look at it. if youre just posting something to say A is A (or Q is Q in this case) then my bad for wasting my time getting involved.

you are terrified of this guy. or you own him so bad you see right through him and can make this laydown. which is it?

[stoxtrader]

I can assure you, james is not afraid of me. I wish it were so, but it's not.

he just realizes, that I actually consider the fat that 3 bet two solid players out of the BB. This point is really the only one i think not made in the thread yet...puts his range specifically very narrow. And since he knows that I know. you know.

[mike l.]

"Short handed play can be really difficult on the more conservative players."

well apparently according to hero this whole thread isnt about how the game was shorthanded and starting hands changed or how players at higher limits online get tricky or unpredictable or make plays. it's about how the sb is so tight and tough and good and respectable that he simply must have a Q and bb should agonize over not laying down AA here after already checking the turn.

and that's all there is to it. there's no compelling reason to think sb ever has anything other than something that beats AA here. it's really just a brilliant thread and im not at all irritated that i spent time getting involved in it.

/end sarcasm.

[mike l.]

"you know."

yeah i know. and since you know that what a great time for you to make a play against him on the river.

anyway, and im going to assume you had a Q or 9s full or something beating AA since james is being so insistent, why didnt you play the flop or turn differently to try and get more action out of what looked to be a situation where you were against someone who would freeze up against you on that board if you started checking. it seems to me you took the worst route. why not checkraise the flop? or stop n go bet the turn? unless you made 9s full, that's the only hand that makes sense to play this way, even though that screams bet the turn too if you think about it.

[Lestat]

<font color="red">now watch ill be wrong and the guy has quads. </font>

I think this will very likely turn out to be his hand. Although if it is, I'm not sure I like the way he played it given how pre-flop went.

[Lestat]

<font color="red">anyway, and im going to assume you had a Q or 9s full or something beating AA since james is being so insistent, why didnt you play the flop or turn differently to try and get more action out of what looked to be a situation where you were against someone who would freeze up against you on that board if you started checking. it seems to me you took the worst route. why not checkraise the flop? or stop n go bet the turn? unless you made 9s full, that's the only hand that makes sense to play this way, even though that screams bet the turn too if you think about it. </font>

These are very good points. If bb can be predicted down to such a narrow range of hands (as stox himself suggests), then even QQ shouldn't be waiting for him to catch up.

[mike l.]

"Although if it is, I'm not sure I like the way he played it given how pre-flop went."

bingo. we're supposed to hear james and others go on about how brilliant and tough and worthy of respect this guy is that he should dump AA here on the end, but in the hand in question the guy butchers a monster against a guy obviously holding a monster himself (3 bet preflop from bb against two known solids). whatever.

btw i see a lot of new names here so i want to clarify i never play this high online although i do in live games in LA. also i dont know stoxtrader at all and for all i know he may be a genius i just dont love the way he played this hand assuming he had the nuts.