|
|
#21
05-06-2003, 03:06 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: OK, here\'s the train wreck against majorkong
The preflop issue is kind of boring and not as important as the play of the hand on later streets given how it played out.
Well said HDPM. I'm not going to spend a lot of time defending the preflop call because I don't really care about that much. I think 93s on the button in this game is pretty marginal, probably playable, but still marginal. I was there to have a good time though. I picked that game exactly because I wanted to be able to play a lot of hands. I am very interested in opinions on the river play though. I think losing 3 bets on the river was pretty terrible. 
|
|
#22
05-06-2003, 03:14 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: OK, here\'s the train wreck against majorkong
No, he was betting a draw of some sort...
I agree, I was almost 100% sure he made a flush when he bet the river. Not much mystery there. Why does it have to be the nut or second nut flush though? I do have the third nut flush afterall. I think calling the 3-bet was a tougher decision than raising was. I seem to be in the minority though.
|
|
#23
05-06-2003, 03:18 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: OK, here\'s the train wreck against majorkong
Maybe I misunderstood his post, but I think Bob T was questioning the river raise, not the call of the 3-bet. I agree that when I get 3-bet there is a great chance majorkong has the nuts. Would you fold to the river 3-bet? Would you just call his bet instead of raising?
|
|
#24
05-06-2003, 03:26 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: OK, here\'s the train wreck against majorkong
The real question in the hand becomes a river raise. Which is dangerous.
I'm surprised how many people aren't sure they like the river rasie. I can't imagine not raising the 3rd nuts just because someone bet into me. Remember, he was in the SB. He could literally have any two suited cards. Couldn't he have just as easily played 8d7d this way, up until the river 3-bet anyway?
|
|
#25
05-06-2003, 03:33 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: OK, here\'s the train wreck against majorkong
Why did you play this hand so poorly? I'm not sure you did anything wrong...
|
|
#26
05-06-2003, 03:41 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: OK, here\'s the train wreck against majorkong
Exactly, I was thinking that when a good player plays a hand like a draw, then I have to consider that he might have a draw, and although I wouldn't fold for one bet, I would probably just make a meek call. Then if I won, I would claim I misread my hand. lol.
|
|
#28
05-06-2003, 03:46 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: OK, here\'s the train wreck against majorkong
I didn't mean to say or imply that it isn't worth discussing, just that I thought the river play was a lot more interesting.
Also, you did such a good job arguing why it's playable that I didn't really have anything to add. [img]/forums/images/icons/smile.gif[/img]
|
|
#29
05-06-2003, 03:50 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: OK, here\'s the train wreck against majorkong
Then if I won, I would claim I misread my hand. lol.
LOL, good one Bob. "Hey, how did that turn into 9 [img]/forums/images/icons/diamond.gif[/img] 3 [img]/forums/images/icons/diamond.gif[/img] ? I thought I had AJ!"
|
|
#30
05-06-2003, 03:55 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: OK, here\'s the train wreck against majorkong
I don't think I played it so poorly, I think I just said there were some debatable decisions.
I think not raising the flop was a mistake, but not a huge one. I wasn't happy about calling the river 3-bet, but I don't think it can ever be too wrong to call a single bet in a big pot with a flush using both of your hole cards on an unpaired board on the river.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
