Hand to Talk About

[URMeowed]

[ QUOTE ]
This topic is absurd for online 15/30 as player with description Mason gives above online would bet on turn any Jack and any ace, some draws (which call a turn raise), some bluffs (which would fold to a raise), but very rare boat. Called a raise on turn and called a river with ace and jack. Any ace occasionally also can 3-bet turn against agressive player but maybe will just call river-raise. Safe play here online means call turn and raise river (reducing variance in case of rare cases of -boat first bet turn-). Maximizing EV play here is to raise/cap turn, bet river if checked and call if betted.

But of course, i think 80-160 live have different *basic* rules of playing and thats why online analyze inconvinient here. As well as all these Mason's thoughts are wrong for online.


[/ QUOTE ]

LAG is LAG whether it's online or live, 15/30 or 80/160 says the CAT. Meow.

[David Steele]

I can't understand your post.
In particular, what does this sentence mean?:

[ QUOTE ]
Everyone has an opinion, they are like _________ seems slightly appropriate here.

[/ QUOTE ]
Are you saying we should LEARN to call in this situation because Mason is such an expert and the other posters aren't?

Of course Mason has tought us many things here and in his books but what does that have to do with the posted hand?



D.

[mike l.]

"a vigorous counter-balance where you are often dry bluffing the ace. In my experience, this is something that very few people are willing to do."

you really do need to make it out to commerce sometime soon my friend.

[amulet]

i understood your points on standard deviation, flucations, risk adversion, or whatever term you want to use. however, i still they they are absurd. b&m and online players make personal choices about their risk tolerance. it is not based on where you play.

[amulet]

i was not suggesting that all posters are anything. there are some therrific posters. but i was making a general statement about 2+2 which is correct. as for your constant posts about my game, give it a rest. i think you of all people should not be talking about my general understanding of the game. as i continue to work on my game i take input from many. but you need to stop these repetitive shots on our difference of philosophy. as to if mason was incorrect, i am certain that he like all of us makes mistakes. but the reaction of most posters was indicative of what i perceive as a general hole at this site. yes there were terrific responses - some of which might be correct.

to reiterate, i do not want to hear about how i am incorrect in my general philosophy from you anymore, i think you need to get some professional help and shut up about that subject.

[amulet]

no david, not at all. mason may have played it incorrectly. but i think the general reaction to the hand was not one of wanting to learn to think differently. there were some terrific replys, but in my opinion most just chose not to think. my reaction is to my perseption of a overally aggressive 2+2 poster.

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Cat:

When playing poker you need to adjust your strategy given who you're against and the game you're in. In the lower limit games in Las Vegas where the play on the flop does tend to be much weaker, I would be far more inclined to raise on the river. So I'm sure the same would be true at Party and many other Internet sites.

best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi amulet:

You wrote:

[ QUOTE ]
he has seem every type of game including the very aggressive games some poster are calling "new".

[/ QUOTE ]

Here's the point that many of the posters missed. The very aggressive players in these games who also are too loose will almost always automatically check raise the flop if they have an ace (against a preflop raiser who appears very likely to bet) and they will do this regardless of their kicker. In a smaller limit, more players might be afraid of their kicker and tend to check call. It's my experience that this isn't the case at $80-$160 (but of course there are always exceptions which is what happened here).

So when a hand gets played and it looks like someone who fits this category might have an ace but didn't make the auto-check raise, you have to begin to consider other possibilities. Now this doesn't mean that my call on the end must be correct, but it certainly means it is more likely to be so.

Best wishes,
Mason

[greg nice]

mason

not only are you weak/tight in-game, but online as well. man up and respond to the real posters in the thread instead of picking and choosing your retorts.

[BarronVangorToth]

Mason,

Something I'm still curious about is the following:

1) What was the percentage chance did you think with your river call that your hand was best (approximate is fine)?

2) What was the chance that you thought that if you raised....

2a) You would not get called by a worse hand?

2b) You would get paid off by a worse hand?

2c) You would get reraised?

3) Was a majority of your decision to simply call based solely on that hand OR did you call more than that to let the table know that you will call with hands like AK on the AA board to sow seeds of doubt about the strength of your hands later rounds when you are simply calling?

Any further explanation would be appreciated as I understand now why you didn't raise the turn but I still haven't quite got a finger on not raising the river....

Barron Vangor Toth
www.BarronVangorToth.com