|
|
#11
04-14-2005, 02:51 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Hit the nuts on the turn.......
I agree with 3-bet on turn. I'm prone to play this preflop too...I don't mind the call.
What is most interesting is the river. No bet? CO coming out of nowhere is probably AJ-TJ, as I imagine that CO would have gotten in the raise at turn if he had a set (unless it is JJ [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]). 
|
|
#13
04-14-2005, 03:06 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Hit the nuts on the turn.......
[ QUOTE ]
I dont like the call preflop, either. Maybe him and nate know something I don't..... [/ QUOTE ] This hand PF is entirely different from Nate's due to blind structure, number of limpers, and assumed aggression level of the game. Nate's hand is a 1/2 blind structure, with many many limpers, in a very loose-passive live game. This is Party 3/6 which is much more aggro, it's a 1/3 blind structure, with only 2 limpers. Same hand, same position, but one is an obvious fold and one is an obvious call.
|
|
#14
04-14-2005, 03:24 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Hit the nuts on the turn.......
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I dont like the call preflop, either. Maybe him and nate know something I don't..... [/ QUOTE ] This hand PF is entirely different from Nate's due to blind structure, number of limpers, and assumed aggression level of the game. Nate's hand is a 1/2 blind structure, with many many limpers, in a very loose-passive live game. This is Party 3/6 which is much more aggro, it's a 1/3 blind structure, with only 2 limpers. Same hand, same position, but one is an obvious fold and one is an obvious call. [/ QUOTE ] wouldn't 15/30 be a 2/3 blind structure, that was nate's post
|
|
#15
04-14-2005, 03:30 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Hit the nuts on the turn.......
[ QUOTE ]
wouldn't 15/30 be a 2/3 blind structure, that was nate's post [/ QUOTE ] I do believe you're right. Of course, that makes his PF call even MORE correct.
|
|
#16
04-14-2005, 03:33 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Hit the nuts on the turn.......
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] wouldn't 15/30 be a 2/3 blind structure, that was nate's post [/ QUOTE ] I do believe you're right. Of course, that makes his PF call even MORE correct. [/ QUOTE ] Nate was BB and called a raise. EDIT: But I think he was getting better odds on the call. Im just too lazy to look.
|
|
#17
04-14-2005, 03:41 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Hit the nuts on the turn.......
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] wouldn't 15/30 be a 2/3 blind structure, that was nate's post [/ QUOTE ] I do believe you're right. Of course, that makes his PF call even MORE correct. [/ QUOTE ] Nate was BB and called a raise. EDIT: But I think he was getting better odds on the call. Im just too lazy to look. [/ QUOTE ] Eh, I should have checked Nate's post before responding so curtly. Nonetheless, it's still true that his was a clear call and this is a clear fold IMO.
|
|
#20
04-14-2005, 07:56 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Hit the nuts on the turn.......
[ QUOTE ]
I would 3-bet the turn and would muck this preflop [/ QUOTE ]
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
