|
|
#21
10-12-2005, 07:48 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: I play A6o aggressively
I understand what you saying. Good points. I guess I am feeling so shitty about our hand on the turn that I feel I want to fold, but have just enough doubt not to. This uncertainty leads me to not play it optimally. Thanks. I'll be working on this in the future
|
|
#22
10-12-2005, 07:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I play A6o aggressively
[ QUOTE ]
I'm tired of seeing people who have the ability to be a decent poker player say "cuz calling sucks right here." [/ QUOTE ] Thanks for implying I have the ability to one day be decent. Maybe some day... maybe some day. A boy can dream. [ QUOTE ] There are advantages and disadvantages to each, but 2+2's raise or fold mantra gets into so many people's heads that they think that raising has to be better than calling for no particular reason. [/ QUOTE ] With the amount of calling I advocate on this board (considered by many to be one of the more passive 2+2 SSers) and the amount of scorn I direct at the overaggro donks here, placing me in the other category is kind of silly, but whatever. It's not a major point. [ QUOTE ] I'm curious what range you put SB on after his check-call and then bet into a passive calling station and into the PFR when the Ace fell on the turn. [/ QUOTE ] I was thinking Ax of spades, or a J with a decent kicker, something like KJ/QJ. I've made some laydowns on this table that other people don't make, so maybe she thought I'd be scared of the ace and fold QQ. If I were her, I'd probably lead with Ax of spades here, where x >< my 6. If it's <6, then my raise is good. If it's >6, then my raise is neutral if I can take a free showdown as opposed to calling a spade river. If she has KJ, then my raise is for value. Either way, I need to exploit the calling station and charge him more if he has some straight draw (I put him on a hand like 98 or T5 or any sort of gutshot or gutshot + pair combo). I think she'd checkraise or lead the flop with AJ, and possibly checkraise the turn with A9/A7. Either way, I didn't put her on a much bigger hand than I had. But I didn't want to miss out on an extra BB from the calling station. Plus, there is some fold equity here to consider. SB could fold a hand I'm chopping with or a hand with outs to beat me/chop with me. [ QUOTE ] I mostly love the fact that you said 'calling here sucks,' when in fact, it doesn't suck. [/ QUOTE ] Do you love it, Rob? Maybe I'm wrong that calling sucks. But I don't have the arrogance to laugh at anyone who says differently. Laughing your ass off at a line you disagree with implies an arrogance that is just as bad or worse than what you're accusing 2+2ers of when they want to raise or fold in situations where you feel a call is justified. Maybe some humility is in order for a player who I feel also has the ability to be decent -- both at moderating and at playing poker.
|
|
#23
10-12-2005, 09:25 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I play A6o aggressively
[ QUOTE ]
Do you love it, Rob? Maybe I'm wrong that calling sucks. But I don't have the arrogance to laugh at anyone who says differently. Laughing your ass off at a line you disagree with implies an arrogance that is just as bad or worse than what you're accusing 2+2ers of when they want to raise or fold in situations where you feel a call is justified. Maybe some humility is in order for a player who I feel also has the ability to be decent -- both at moderating and at playing poker. [/ QUOTE ] Step off of my boy.
|
|
#24
10-12-2005, 09:40 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I play A6o aggressively
[ QUOTE ]
Step off of my boy. [/ QUOTE ] [img]/images/graemlins/ooo.gif[/img] JT [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]
|
|
#25
10-12-2005, 09:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I play A6o aggressively
[ QUOTE ]
If it's >6, then my raise is neutral if I can take a free showdown as opposed to calling a spade river. [/ QUOTE ] I'm not sure what you mean. On this turn, you're at best neutral EV on a raise if your opponent has exactly A2ss, A3ss, A4ss, or A5ss, all of which I would expect to hear from on the flop, no? Your opponent's play makes very little sense with KJ/QJ, so I think those have to be discounted quite a bit, but if you want to include them, that's fine. Charging the calling station is fine when you think you've got more than 33% equity in the pot with which to do it. But against our provided range here -- AT (gutshot+over on flop), A9s, A7s, QJs, KJs, and AsXs where X < 6, you're sitting just under "fair share" of turn equity (you're at about 32.8%). If your opponent plays solidly, it diminishes the chances that he'd go for a c/r with A9/A7s on the turn, since he doesn't want you to check your wide range of hands through here. It also diminishes the possibility that he has KJo/QJo or the possibility that he plays QJs/KJs that way. His hand range, if he is solid, is weighted such that he's most likely on a made hand that is better than yours here. If he's not solid, I don't mind the raise at all, but your read coupled with this board and his preflop/flop/turn play lead me to want to call rather than raise. Effectively, since the calling station is not folding, you need to have more than 33% equity for a raise to be +EV. For calling to be +EV, you don't need nearly as much equity. That's the simple reason for why calling does not suck, and why this may be a call/fold/raise situation rather than a fold/raise situation. I have the arrogance -- and I'll admit it -- to laugh when someone dogmatically states that "calling sucks." I will also take the time to explain why I think that, if pressed, even when someone tries to belittle me as much as possible. Maybe LMAO wasn't the right term. I think it was a bit more of a "LOL" moment. I wasn't trying to be a jackass, but I can see how I came across that way -- I often do. Anyway. Hope my reasoning came across a bit more clearly now. Rob
|
|
#26
10-12-2005, 09:59 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I play A6o aggressively
Rob,
I think we don't need 33% equity to raise here. If we're going to showdown, and since we can fold to a three-bet pretty easily, all we need is enough to cover putting two bets in to try to win the pot. I really think that we can raise here without that raise being for value in the strictest sense; we're raising as an alternate way to get to showdown, and for that we don't need 33% equity. I do agree though that this is not a raise/fold situation. It's raise/call/fold, and calling in my opinion is only very slightly worse than raising.
|
|
#27
10-12-2005, 10:02 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re:sults
This thread provoked some good discussion as well as some good ol' fashioned bitchiness. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
SB turned over A[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 2[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]. We chopped the pot and BB mucked without showing. I doubt a river bet would have inspired a fold, so I pretty much needed to just dodge a spade and a 2 to keep half the pot, or spike a 6 to win it all.
|
|
#28
10-12-2005, 10:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I play A6o aggressively
I don't really have too much to say about the hand other then I would plan on betting the river if I raised the turn. What is far more interesting imo is the concept behind the turn play. If in fact raising is the best play on 4th, there is no way that folding can be better then calling in this case. Having said that, I would probably just calldown here.
Brad
|
|
#30
10-12-2005, 10:13 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I play A6o aggressively
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Maybe LMAO wasn't the right term. I think it was a bit more of a "LOL" moment. [/ QUOTE ] [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] Is the dog in your avatar supposed to look like Darth Vader?
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
