#21
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Tough decision vs frappe
yeah.... i was tired and quite uncritical
|
#22
|
|||
|
|||
RESULT
OK - I ended up folding the hand and it almost killed me to do it. Turns out that frappe was dealt Q K K, so I was facing trip kings on fourth.
|
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Re: RESULT
Are there just a few feeders and lots of tight solid types in a typical 5-10 on party? Because this sounds like a terrible game.
|
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Re: RESULT
[ QUOTE ]
Are there just a few feeders and lots of tight solid types in a typical 5-10 on party? Because this sounds like a terrible game. [/ QUOTE ] A good game has 2 feeders. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Re: RESULT
[ QUOTE ]
Are there just a few feeders and lots of tight solid types in a typical 5-10 on party? Because this sounds like a terrible game. [/ QUOTE ] I think this hand represents a pretty abnormal set of circumstances and is not representative of the ordinary 5/10 play. Frappe and I were chatting last night and I think both of us feel that there are only three people on Party who I would fold that hand against. Guess what - they are all 2+2'ers. I am able to make nice steady money at 5/10, but there are times when there are certainly tables to be avoided. However, most times you can find a table with one or two feeders. The problem is that you can usually count on at least one or maybe even two rocks at the same time It's been a while since I have played anything other than 5/10 - maybe it would be sensible to see if the games are easier at other stakes. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Re: RESULT
Another quick thought on this - I used to avoid really solid players if I could. Now I will sit if there are another two or so of them at the table. I just don't see how I can get better, unless I play against strong opponents. Anyone think this is the wrong thing to be doing?
|
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Re: RESULT
Whether it is right or wrong to sit with strong players depends on a few things. Number one, who else is at the table. If there are two huge fish, two solid players and three unknowns, clearly the table is a good one. Chances are the good players won't tangle much, they'll mainly take turns gutting the fish. On the other hand, a table with two good players, three competent regulars you may have a small edge over and two unknowns would be likely to be a bad spot.
Number two: what are your goals? If it's worth losing a bit (or making less) in exchange for learning and enjoying the game more, then by all means sit with good players. I'm not being sarcastic here -- many players really do enjoy trying to beat strong opponents both because it helps them improve and because it's more interesting. I've played head up and short 2-4 with many good players (and some who are fish in full games but tough head up). There's one or two I think are better than me. I have been avoiding this lately because I felt like a fool wasting time battling to make a small profit or hold to a small loss when I am crushing weaker opponents in full or short games. But I'm sure I'll take on a couple of the toughies again when the mood hits (or the bankroll and/or ego get overly inflated). |
|
|