|
|
#11
07-17-2005, 12:21 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Heads-Up $30-60 Hand
[ QUOTE ]
they both dont play well enough to be at that level. the river play by both was bad. b should never have raised and a should have reraised. [/ QUOTE ] B raising here, imo, is a much smaller mistake than if A were to reraise to $180. I dont think the reraise by A on the river is as obvious as people might think. [ QUOTE ] I'm a little drunk. [/ QUOTE ] Want to play heads-up before you go to bed? [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] Mike Emery 
|
|
#12
07-17-2005, 12:30 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Heads-Up $30-60 Hand
[ QUOTE ]
they both dont play well enough to be at that level. [/ QUOTE ] How is that possible? One of them does, and one of them doesn't. (Assuming playing ability is something of a continuous RV.) [ QUOTE ] the river play by both was bad. b should never have raised and a should have reraised. [/ QUOTE ] B has every reason to believe that A has a big pair in the hole. Once A is called on 6th, he has to know that B has aces. You don't think A bets two pair here enough in hopes to get a call from unimproved aces? But, A has an open pair showing, and is obviously looking strong. his opponents raise is scary, but I agree that a 3 bet is probably in order.
|
|
#14
07-17-2005, 10:37 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Heads-Up $30-60 Hand
[ QUOTE ]
they both dont play well enough to be at that level. the river play by both was bad. b should never have raised and a should have reraised . [/ QUOTE ] I’m with Mike on this. Like he said, player B’s call on 6th means either aces, trips or two pairs. So his hole cards can be: AA 6 ways TT 3 ways 77 3 ways 73 9 ways 7T 9 ways So player A’s hand is good only 6 times out of 30, or 20% of the time. Assuming player B will re-raise again with a boat (and A will make a crying call with his flush), A will win 1 BB 20 times and lose 2 BB 80 times. So the EV of the 3-bet is 0.2 BB - 1.6 BB = - 1.4 BB or - 86$. Someone check my math please.
|
|
#15
07-17-2005, 12:17 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Heads-Up $30-60 Hand
I'd love to comment on this hand.
I'd love to know something well enough to comment intelligently more. Any time I've played heads up it was always key to know how aggressive the other guy was to be able to tell how good a hand I needed to go to war. If the player B folds 39/40 hands to the BI isn't folding this to a completion the best play. But if player B is trying to steal every BI player A makes then this is a great hand to go to war with. Similar auguments can be made at pretty much all streets.
|
|
#16
07-17-2005, 02:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Heads-Up $30-60 Hand
My biggest success in heads-up stud was taking $2 off of Carlos Chadha in a $.04/.08 game, so take this for what it's worth:
Third strikes me as standard. On fourth, I probably raise with the flush draw. I'm not crazy about the check-raise on fifth. How likely is it that the guy with the Aces is going to lay down, well, anything? I agree that the guy with Aces-up should just call on the river and the flush should three-bet.
|
|
#18
07-17-2005, 04:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Heads-Up $30-60 Hand
[ QUOTE ]
the flush should three-bet. [/ QUOTE ] Why? I was going to work out the math this morning but Roland beat me to it (ty Roland [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img], I hate math). As I stated yesterday in my post, given the range of hands B is going into the river with (remember hes calling open kings and a flush looking board with his blank board), its a clear call when you get raised on the end. Raising here in the long run will only cost you money. Mike Emery
|
|
#20
07-17-2005, 10:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
MY FINAL THOUGHTS....
Hello All,
As I hinted in one other post, I actually was player A. I didn't want to mention it first cause I didn't want any 'skewed' analysis. ( I actually was thinking about posting this another way but...... ) I really do think this is an interesting hand, and it shows a lot of concepts that start to happen in the bigger stud games. I really don't think my opponent played the hand all that bad. I however ( and no one mentioned this surprisingly ) HATE that he raised on 3rd with his pocket Aces. If I don't have anything, I am just going to fold. IMHO this is a time where you actually want to slowplay ACES and give your opponent a chance to catch something. We had been playing heads-up for actually quite some time and the game wasn't all that aggressive ( up to this hand [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] ) so he really wouldn't have been giving away too much.. His river raise was what I really thought made this hand interesting, and honestly, I keep changing my mind from thinking its a brilliant play to a foolish one.... and I probably never will. I was chastized by the great Ray Zee for not raising the river. ( at least he said I was the better of the two players [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] )... but seriously.. in all honesty.. after showing that much strength all along, and given my board.. when I was raised on the river.. I thought there was a real chance I was against tens full, and if I wasn't there was a decent chance my re-raise wouldn't have gotten pad off anyway. I just don't see a re-raise being profitable in the long run there. I don't.. and if that makes me weak-tight ( which I was also recently accused of ) so be it. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img] A few other thoughts... My check-raise on 5th wasn't a big hit with most.. MY thinking is 1) If my opponent only has a small pair or overcards, he most likely folds.. and I want him too 2) Check-raise disguises my holding When my opponent 3 bet on 5th I actually put him on pocket Aces ( which is why I was a bit thrown by his river raise.. when I thought I diagnosed wrong ) I am still debating his river raise... [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] Later, CJ
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
