Nice hand -- for me to poop on!

[DcifrThs]

[ QUOTE ]
Lestat,

I said 'unscare.' The Q is the only reason this seemed like a hand worth posting -- I thought there was enough chance he was overplaying a Q with the check-raise for my three-bet to be correct.

'Unscare' would of course be the opposite of 'scare.' Thought it might be a mildly interesting concept.

The cap, however, is scary without the -un.

J

[/ QUOTE ]

why would you 3bet that c'r if you wont fold to the cap or river bet? if MP2 had AQ then why wouldn't he bet INTO you so you could raise to get others who are drawing live out? no. he planned this and 3 bet the entire field. he has the 9 almost every single time. i've found folds if the pot wasn't big enough to call for the 2 outter. and then u're on the river w/ a huge pot and 1 bet, so you simply call. invest the 2 bets here and stop being crazy.

i simply call this down at this point. what hands are you really sure you want out of there that would be worth risking the extra 2 bets youd likely have to put in on the turn. why not go for overcalls of people drawing to 2 outs (5 w/ AQ but thats only 1 hand w/ 5 outs)?

also, stop posting the results in the same post even if its in white. it probably biases the resulting comments.

-Barron

[DcifrThs]

[ QUOTE ]
Your first and last sentences contradict each other perfectly.

[/ QUOTE ]

your attitude regarding the QQ checkraise and other hands you post in defending yourself contradicts the point of posting hands.

-Barron

[JimmyV]

Barron, don't be such a dang nit. I've said that I should have folded to the cap.

I should have folded to the cap. That should have been my plan.

You're a cranky SOB, and you can spare me the attitude. We're all here to learn, and I think people can learn from this three-bet even if they don't agree with it.

My pointing out that that last poster made no sense (compared to the plan I've ended up at, which was three-betting and folding to a cap) was not equivalent to saying that I had played the hand correctly.

So pipe down already. And note that three-betting here IS manifestly better than calling as long as you're ready to fold to further aggression. It costs the same.

Note also that I didn't post the hand where I had the set of Qs, Nightwish did; and I think it's fair to be a little defensive on that one since it was adduced as proof that I suck. I explained my reasoning and acknowledged that it was, on balance, wrong. But that one I didn't post, so I can't be fairly blamed for working against the point of posting hands in that case.

You used to be something of a mensch on these boards but for some reason you're taking my threads personally. Take it easy!

JimmyV

[Nightwish]

[ QUOTE ]

Note also that I didn't post the hand where I had the set of Qs, Nightwish did;


[/ QUOTE ]
No, I didn't. I simply commented on someone else's post of that hand.

[ike]

[ QUOTE ]
And note that three-betting here IS manifestly better than calling as long as you're ready to fold to further aggression. It costs the same.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know what manifestly means in the above sentence, but unless its being used as a synonym for "not," I disagree. When he has the 9, if you just call down you get a chance to see your 2 outer and raise the river when you hit. He also might call your 3bet and then lead the river. Are you folding to this bet?

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't know what manifestly means in the above sentence,

[/ QUOTE ]

But it looked cool in the sentence. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

b