$215 SNG level 3 hand

[DarrenX]

[ QUOTE ]
No relevant reads...

Comments? My results and thoughts later...

***** Hand History for Game 2203388100 *****
50/100 TourneyTexasHTGameTable (NL) (Tournament 13073260) - Mon Jun 13 22:22:46 EDT 2005
Table Table 11131 (Real Money) -- Seat 5 is the button
Total number of players : 10
Seat 1: mush00 (795)
Seat 2: Mooon33 (570)
Seat 3: Jints91 (840)
Seat 4: ineimesis (652)
Seat 5: STOP_Drawing (1540)
Seat 6: Maxrob (755)
Seat 7: DarrenX (955)
Seat 8: projecteros (1163)
Seat 9: Thomas_007 (1835)
Seat 10: Munchausen1 (895)
Maxrob posts small blind (25)
DarrenX posts big blind (50)
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to DarrenX [ 9d, 7d ]
projecteros calls (50)
Thomas_007 folds.
Munchausen1 folds.
mush00 calls (50)
Mooon33 folds.
Jints91 folds.
ineimesis folds.
STOP_Drawing folds.
Maxrob calls (25)
DarrenX checks.
** Dealing Flop ** : [ 6s, Td, 6d ]
Maxrob checks.
DarrenX checks.
projecteros checks.
mush00 bets (200)
Maxrob folds.
DarrenX calls (200)
projecteros folds.
** Dealing Turn ** : [ Ac ]
DarrenX bets (705)
DarrenX is all-In.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow- thanks for the responses.

He folded. My thought process: A full pot bet I took as a sign of weakness (as at least one of you agrees), possibly a draw, possibly any pocket pair. I figured an all-in check-raise would reek of a draw, so I called, planning to push the turn on any blank. When the ace came, I hesitated but pushed anyway, figuring if he had an ace, it may look like I was hoping he hit it, representing a 6. As it was, this was only a semi-bluff as I figured on 12 outs, possibly 15-18 if he was brave enough to call with an underpair. My biggest worry was he was on an Axs flush draw... yeah, it worked out- not my typical move and not sure it's a high-percentage one. [img]/images/graemlins/crazy.gif[/img]

[KramerTM]

I'm merely a 33 player, but this move seems very risky. I agree with the comments about this being even more suspect because of the Villain's relatively small stack.

Something interesting from these replies though... do you guys find that it is true more often than not that a pot-size bet is a sign of weakness? How about when someone bets an inordinate amount (2-3 times size of pot)? Is this a sign of extreme weakness? I suppose the logic makes sense (increasing the bet to increase FE on a weak hand), but doesn't the increased risk-reward ratio make it incorrect to call with draws?

[DarrenX]

[ QUOTE ]
Again...are you trying to lose? I see no reason to get involved with a crappy flush draw in the early levels when a pair is already on the board.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll be the first to admit I may be coming down with a case of FPS... however, I'm not sending my typical ABC plays because those are no fun, now are they? [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]