#11
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Monstrous pot with Aces
Does anyone other than me think that this sorta play is extremely profitable, although it is most definitely extremely high variance?
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Monstrous pot with Aces
Also would any1 else call this against a hyper maniac LAG?
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Monstrous pot with Aces
Its definitly not an extremely profitable play. If your read suggested he was Bluffing than i agree with the call, i mean its hard to see a set. But long hall when people shoot bullets at you less LAGS a little more pas sives its an automatic fold. Im not saying your right or wrong only you can answer that. The questiin is when he reraised you did you REALLY believe you were ahead or were you HOPING it was a bluff. THe board can make anyone look brilliant. But you have to answer the question yourself and only you truly know if you were sort of hopong or picked up something, also if you did pick up something you need to practice your reading ability and see where you went wrong, also you need to understand you got lucky and thats rare. One final note looks like im going to Foxwoods sounds like a ton of action...
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Monstrous pot with Aces
I was hoping he was bluffing, and you are absolutely correct, I need to practice my reading skills.
But I still wanna know if any1 who has called a massive bluff with naked kings and won against such a player, would play this hand like i did. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Monstrous pot with Aces
I definitely would not charactorize John the Lawyer as a hyper maniac LAG...He is definitely one of the best players in this game. And i don't think there is any chance you have him beat when he moves all in. John almost certainly has top two or a set.
there is a big difference between a hand that he keeps betting, you think long and hard, and call....And then he continues to bluff (i remeber this hand with the KK by the way...Nice calls!).... Anyway, if you are aggressive, john will stop bluffing. When he bets 1k and you raise to 3k john is not going in without a very big hand (even against you)....Why not just call the 1k if you feel you are ahead? Let him keep bluffing. Just my $0.02.....i could be wrong |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Monstrous pot with Aces
[ QUOTE ]
One final note looks like im going to Foxwoods sounds like a ton of action... [/ QUOTE ] The game varies anywhere from very good to very bad....There is almost always a lot of money on the table. I would definitely reccomend the weekend. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Monstrous pot with Aces
I live and die by my reads. If i think i have you beat or thaink i can make you fold ill go all in so yest i would do it.
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Monstrous pot with Aces
[ QUOTE ]
But I still wanna know if any1 who has called a massive bluff with naked kings and won against such a player, would play this hand like i did. [/ QUOTE ] If i was 100% sure John was bluffing on the flop, i would call the 1K and let him continue bluffing. The naked kings hand was a much different situation and it was for quite a bit less money (i think he bet like 2k on the river). |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Monstrous pot with Aces
[ QUOTE ]
I live and die by my reads. If i think i have you beat or thaink i can make you fold ill go all in so yest i would do it. [/ QUOTE ] I concur. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Monstrous pot with Aces
You're right, calling was probably the better play. Woulda been interesting when the ace hit on the river.
|
|
|