|
|
#22
10-05-2005, 06:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 99, a maniac, and some interesting turn action
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] was there a particular reason not to check raise the flop? i think thats what i would have done. as you played it i think i call it down too and hate it the whole way. [/ QUOTE ] I think check/raising this flop is a very poor choice. I think that a c/r would bear a strong resemblence to what not to do in SSH's section on waiting to the turn. However, I think I may have missed an opportunity to protect my hand by not betting and letting the maniac raise. I made up for it by scoring a boatload of Sklansky bucks with the turn c/r and what is probably a much larger equity edge. I'm still not sure exactly which is right, but I'm leaning towards the flop bet at this point. [/ QUOTE ] duh of course you are right. leading the flop is much better. 
|
|
#23
10-05-2005, 06:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 99, a maniac, and some interesting turn action
[ QUOTE ]
I think that this hand becomes tons easier to play after 3-betting preflop. Or, alternatively we could call pf, and then bet into the pfr (since he's wicked aggro post-flop: 2.3 with a 75/33 is definetly not the same as 20/12/2.3), forcing 5.5:1 to any callers. [/ QUOTE ] Shut up, you don't even play poker. Still, I heart a PF 3-bet and leading out the flop.
|
|
#24
10-05-2005, 07:04 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 99, a maniac, and some interesting turn action
im going with leading the flop. he's almost guaranteed to raise the flop with whatever he raised preflop.
i would 3-bet TT preflop but not 99. why? i don't know, but i think TT is worth it and 99 is not.
|
|
#26
10-05-2005, 07:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 99, a maniac, and some interesting turn action
I like leading out on this flop. Given your read, there is a pretty good chance that CO will raise you with a weaker hand, forcing BTN and SB to call two cold.
With 8 SB in the pot, increasing your winning chances sounds more profitable than going for the "safe turn card" value raise. The rest looks fine.
|
|
#27
10-05-2005, 07:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 99, a maniac, and some interesting turn action
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I considered 3betting preflop, but I decided against it because it was 4 ways, and I was OOP. HU with the maniac is an automatic 3bet, and 3 ways, I probably still would have done it. Four handed, though, is not a great situation for 99. My fold equity is much smaller, and a single overcard is more likely to doom me. It's worth considering, however. Anyone else 3bet here preflop? [/ QUOTE ] 4 handed OOP I don't like a raise. Would like to hear Shadow's thoughts on it. [/ QUOTE ] I think that 99 has an equity edge four handed. I want the initiative on this hand if we get a good flop. There are some flops that totally sink us, thus we really won't have an edge on the flop, and I'd like to take advantage of our edge right now. I think that 3-betting gives you more fold equity. Oh and mainly cuz these guys suck.
|
|
#28
10-05-2005, 09:53 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 99, a maniac, and some interesting turn action
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I considered 3betting preflop, but I decided against it because it was 4 ways, and I was OOP. HU with the maniac is an automatic 3bet, and 3 ways, I probably still would have done it. Four handed, though, is not a great situation for 99. My fold equity is much smaller, and a single overcard is more likely to doom me. It's worth considering, however. Anyone else 3bet here preflop? [/ QUOTE ] 4 handed OOP I don't like a raise. Would like to hear Shadow's thoughts on it. [/ QUOTE ] I think that 99 has an equity edge four handed. I want the initiative on this hand if we get a good flop. There are some flops that totally sink us, thus we really won't have an edge on the flop, and I'd like to take advantage of our edge right now. I think that 3-betting gives you more fold equity. Oh and mainly cuz these guys suck. [/ QUOTE ] You make good points. The main reason I like just calling preflop is that CO is more likely to bet/raise the flop. So if we hit this type of flop, CO will raise, which is pretty huge as it's 4 handed. If we hit a set, we can trap the whole field for 2-bets by letting CO bet it for us and then c/r. If CO was a bigger maniac that wouldn't matter, but Wookie said that the guy did slow down when showed strength.
|
|
#29
10-05-2005, 10:46 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 99, a maniac, and some interesting turn action
Flop: You're against a maniac, you have a vulnerable overpair, and if (when) he raises you can face the rest of the field with two bets cold... and you check? This is not a situation to "wait for the turn" since there is an easy way to protect your hand here.
Turn: Button's play was most unusual, I can only figure him for a monster. Perhaps a straight, perhaps a slow-played set? Either way, you have to call the re-raise with your gutshot (and maybe your 9s are clean). River: I'm pretty sure you lost here to something better than two-pair. It is a huge pot though so you only have to be right something like 6% of the time.
|
|
#30
10-05-2005, 11:26 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 99, a maniac, and some interesting turn action
Thanks for the feedback, guys. It looks like I screwed up the flop by not betting out. One of the weaknesses I know is in my game is that I hardly ever have used a "wait for the turn" play, and this looked to be a textbook situation. I'm not in the habit of betting into the preflop raiser since they typically only raise hands that beat me, but with this maniac, I should have been more aware. I am happy with myself, though, that I recognized that a flop c/r would be far from optimal.
The turn call/3bet from the loose passive player really set off alarms in my head, but given how large my play had made the pot, I couldn't bring myself to fold for one more bet with a decent hand on the off chance that his unusual play was utter donking. Button showed Q8o. Who knew?
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
