9c8c blind defense at 3/6

[dark_horse]

[ QUOTE ]
This seems like overly FPS. You have 9-high, and the pot isn't big on the flop -- yet. Just check and call the flop and turn (your pair outs might be as good as the straight outs), and fold the river UI.

[/ QUOTE ]

What's FPS mean? I really like this post because it reminds us to think in not so complicated terms sometimes. I think a lot of us lately are playing these mad aggressive games to counter each other's TAG style, and what ends up happening is we are spewing chips with draws. At least that's what I've noticed about my own play lately. Too aggressive with draws in TAG-heavy games. The line in this post is actually kind of refreshing.

I would always call a PF raise with a middle suited connector like this one in a heads up game, so I can see someone looking at this situation the same way, as it's folded to you in the BB, but the only difference is that it was raised from early position. In a heads up game someone's position doesn't give info about the nature of their raise. But that's all obvious so why am I writing this.. uhm, back to the tv.

p.s. Sorry about my "where does it say villian is in EP" post. That was the donk post of the week (hopefully).

[private joker]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Svar på:</font><hr />


What's FPS mean?

[/ QUOTE ]

Fancy Play Syndrome. It's what you adequately described in the rest of the body of your post.

[dark_horse]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


What's FPS mean?

[/ QUOTE ]

Fancy Play Syndrome. It's what you adequately described in the rest of the body of your post.

[/ QUOTE ]

[img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img] you guys love to gang up on me. i always thought i looked at hands in a straightforward manner. when i see people with "FPS" i internally make fun of them, and knew that a while ago i played like that as well. i didn't realize that my plays were fancy only for the sake of being fancy. i did describe the logic behind each action in my suggestions. but perhaps the logic exists only to rationalize the fancy play. inconceivable!

[chesspain]

[ QUOTE ]
...it's folded to you in the BB, but the only difference is that it was raised from early position. In a heads up game someone's position doesn't give info about the nature of their raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

Huh???...Opponent didn't know that everyone was going to fold when he raised in EP. I think his raise means that he has a real hand.


[ QUOTE ]
p.s. Sorry about my "where does it say villian is in EP" post. That was the donk post of the week (hopefully).

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that your more recent post with the top quote is actually more donkeyesque. [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

[dark_horse]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
...it's folded to you in the BB, but the only difference is that it was raised from early position. In a heads up game someone's position doesn't give info about the nature of their raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

Huh???...Opponent didn't know that everyone was going to fold when he raised in EP. I think his raise means that he has a real hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

But that's exactly what i'm saying. You must be misreading it. When someone raises from EP in a full ring, it indicates way more strength than when someone raises in a heads up game. It does indicate some strength when your opponent raises you PF from the BB in a heads up game (only two players sitting at the table, NOT folded around in a full ring), but not as much as when someone raises from EP in a full ring.

[Aces McGee]

[ QUOTE ]
This seems like overly FPS. You have 9-high, and the pot isn't big on the flop -- yet. Just check and call the flop *snip*

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that if you can't win at least some of the time unimproved, then preflop this becomes a lot closer to a fold than a call. I'm semibluffing the flop, sure, but I'm perfectly content to have him fold there.

-McGee

[jstewsmole]

[ QUOTE ]
This seems like overly FPS. You have 9-high, and the pot isn't big on the flop -- yet. Just check and call the flop and turn (your pair outs might be as good as the straight outs), and fold the river UI.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is the best line IMO. This line is completely correct and its WAY less complicated than the others mentioned.

The bettor is going to bet like 110% of the time after hero checks the flop and if he checks behind u get a free card.

Why make this hand way more complicated then it is? U dont always have to fight fire with fire and win with out SD's unless u love more variance.

Though i think all the lines mentionded were good for the most part, i just think taking the simple +EV line if its available is better. Save the Fancy plays when the simlple stuff isnt going to get the job done.

out

[mterry]

I still can't decide whether the chosen line or the straightforward check/call line is best. However, I don't agree that a line shouldn't be taken because it is complicated. I'll take greater EV over less complicated any day.

Also, against a 2+2er there may be a need to mix things up if he/she may be picking up on your tendencies, espeically for the sake of future shorthanded battles. This may sway the argument toward or away from a more straightforward play.

[nolanfan34]

OK, this is a good hand, I like it. Some thoughts, after reading the responses so far.

I don't care if villain was UTG+1, I still call this a blind defense. Live, the best way to do it is to scream "I DEFEND MY BLIND!" as you throw the chips into the middle.

Seriously though, getting 3.5-1, it's a very easy call from the BB. Especially since against a possible 2+2er, it's going to be a little bit easier to play post-flop based on the likely range of hands he's raising from UTG+1.

On the flop, I think I kind of like betting out better. Some of this though is influenced by already knowing the turn card. With two hearts on board, I think if you bet and he raises as expected, that you're setting yourself up better for a big semi-bluff on the turn if another T, or any heart comes on the turn.

Against a better player, you may take it down with a check-raise more often than just the bet out on the turn. That T is an awesome card, and if you check-raise, he's going to have a very hard time continuing if he just has overcards. I think you have to be willing to fire again on the river though if a 4th heart, A or K doesn't hit.

Conversely, since the turn is now somewhat scary, you may get a free card by checking, if the villain "avoids" the check-raise.

Anyway, on this board, when top pair doubles up, and the flush hits, I think a turn check-raise has a better chance of taking it down right there. Since by betting out you're often going to get raised again by an overpair anyway, and you can't fold really, I'd rather be the aggressor when putting in 2-bets. If he 3-bets, I guess I hold on for dear life and click call.

[Aces McGee]

Hi nolanfan

[ QUOTE ]
On the flop, I think I kind of like betting out better. Some of this though is influenced by already knowing the turn card. With two hearts on board, I think if you bet and he raises as expected, that you're setting yourself up better for a big semi-bluff on the turn if another T, or any heart comes on the turn

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't like betting out because he's autoraising whatever he has there and it doesn't help to define his hand any. I was obviously hoping he'd simply call the checkraise and then fold to my turn lead.

I had planned on check calling the turn, but the perfect bluffing card came. My thoughts on why I bet: I figured that I was putting a bet in on the turn anyway, and with both the hearts coming and the board pairing I had picked up some fold equity. I felt I was unlikely to get raised because of the dangerous board.

[ QUOTE ]
Against a better player, you may take it down with a check-raise more often than just the bet out on the turn. That T is an awesome card, and if you check-raise, he's going to have a very hard time continuing if he just has overcards. I think you have to be willing to fire again on the river though if a 4th heart, A or K doesn't hit.


[/ QUOTE ]

A checkraise didn't occur to me much at the time, to be honest. As I think about it now, there a couple of things that stand out to me:

1)Checkraising and then leading the river costs me 3 bets. Betting both the turn and the river costs me 2. I think both lines accomplish the same results roughly the same percentage of the time. Perhaps I am underestimating how often he folds to the checkraise, though.

2)I actually think the checkraise looks really suspicious. He has to know that the board got super dangerous on the turn and I'd be risking a checkthrough -- which would be pretty bad, in my opinion, giving infinite odds to a high heart. I see him calling BS on the checkraise a good portion of the time and calling down.

-McGee