|
|
#21
04-29-2005, 03:08 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Busting a loudmouth: Does it get any better than this?
[ QUOTE ]
He was so busy typing that he actually took too much time so that he clocked out and his hand was folded before he could bet (it was HU and he was first to act) [/ QUOTE ] nice. 
|
|
#23
04-29-2005, 08:30 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Busting a loudmouth: Does it get any better than this?
[ QUOTE ]
I was at that table with you. I made a comment about you deserving that pot after you finally won after getting sucked out on a few times. Nice job busting him out. [/ QUOTE ] Sweet. I was wondering if there were any other 2+2ers there. I figured there must have been the way the table tightened up.
|
|
#24
04-29-2005, 08:39 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Busting a loudmouth: Does it get any better than this?
[ QUOTE ]
So you lied about capping every street with 22. Cool, man. [/ QUOTE ] Sorry bout that. That was how I remembered it at the time I posted it. The essence of the play was true though. Going into the hand I decided to throw my balls over my shoulder and isolate with 22 trusting the fact that I was likely to have the best hand at showdown against this guy. He was bluffing so much it wasn't that much of a leap of faith that he would play back with nothing. It worked. Not much of a lie anyways.
|
|
#26
04-29-2005, 10:46 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Busting a loudmouth: Does it get any better than this?
[ QUOTE ]
Going into the hand I decided to throw my balls over my shoulder and isolate with 22 trusting the fact that I was likely to have the best hand at showdown against this guy. [/ QUOTE ] With this type of thinking you'd be better off playing slots or roulette.
|
|
#27
04-29-2005, 10:56 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Busting a loudmouth: Does it get any better than this?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Going into the hand I decided to throw my balls over my shoulder and isolate with 22 trusting the fact that I was likely to have the best hand at showdown against this guy. [/ QUOTE ] With this type of thinking you'd be better off playing slots or roulette. [/ QUOTE ] It's high variance but +EV with the read I had against this guy. I'm not surprised he showed down T high. I look at this type of play against this player as slightly +EV which is good enough for me. I frequently play against micro super-maniacs and this is pretty standard for me. The conditions have to be just right though. I'm not trying this against anybody except a true maniac. If they're beat they'll usually find a fold but it's hard to say where. Sometimes they'll fold to a river cap. I'm not kidding.
|
|
#28
04-29-2005, 11:28 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Busting a loudmouth: Does it get any better than this?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Going into the hand I decided to throw my balls over my shoulder and isolate with 22 trusting the fact that I was likely to have the best hand at showdown against this guy. [/ QUOTE ] With this type of thinking you'd be better off playing slots or roulette. [/ QUOTE ] It's high variance but +EV with the read I had against this guy. I'm not surprised he showed down T high. I look at this type of play against this player as slightly +EV which is good enough for me. [/ QUOTE ] Determining preflop that you're going to showdown with 22 is never +EV.
|
|
#29
04-29-2005, 11:57 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Busting a loudmouth: Does it get any better than this?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Going into the hand I decided to throw my balls over my shoulder and isolate with 22 trusting the fact that I was likely to have the best hand at showdown against this guy. [/ QUOTE ] With this type of thinking you'd be better off playing slots or roulette. [/ QUOTE ] It's high variance but +EV with the read I had against this guy. I'm not surprised he showed down T high. I look at this type of play against this player as slightly +EV which is good enough for me. [/ QUOTE ] Determining preflop that you're going to showdown with 22 is never +EV. [/ QUOTE ] When you're HU against a true super maniac you cannot read anything into their bets and raises. If you know villian will play his any 2 like AA pf and will play the flop like he has the nus but willthen fold randomly on the turn or river you have to like your chances with 22. Like I said it's high variance but certainly shows a profit vs that specific type of player. I think isolating a maniac with even a weak pocket pair like 22 is +EV. Pokerstove 22 against any 2. I can admit I'm wrong if it comes back a loser. Also keep in mind that he will often not see the river so he will have to connect with the flop+turn some of the time in addition to the times he makes it to see the river. It gives you odds that are slightly better than going all-in HU in NL 22 -vs- AK. It's +EV.
|
|
#30
04-29-2005, 03:43 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Busting a loudmouth: Does it get any better than this?
You're right, 22 is 50.334 to 49.666 against a random hand. Here's why its still -EV.
With that slight of edge, you'll never be able to make up for the fact that you'll end up paying maniac off more the 49.666% of the time you lose, than he pays you off the 50.334% of the time you win. It's plain and simple. You were bet/raising on that hand every chance you got no matter what came on the board. While on the other hand the "maniac" only called you down when he was beat on the turn and river. Had he had a hand that was beating you, he would've still been firing raises in on the turn and river. Doing what you did, is basically like flipping a coin and paying more when you lose than what you get if you win.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
