80-160 hand - Page 4

J.A.Sucker · #31 10-10-2005, 09:19 PM

You might be correct. I like this plan, actually.

J.A.Sucker · #32 10-10-2005, 09:19 PM

Sorry. I'll do better next time, chief.

J.A.Sucker · #33 10-10-2005, 09:23 PM

Good story. I've had one go down like that (kind of) before too. I bet on the river, with a flush showing on board. I got called, and turned over my hand (I had a set or something). My opponent pushed his cards face down toward the muck, and they were mucked. I got the pot.

Boris · #34 10-10-2005, 09:29 PM

The meaningless insults are better left in OOT. If you don't like the thread then ignore it or harsh on how the OP played the hand or how someone responded.

astroglide · #35 10-10-2005, 09:46 PM

[ QUOTE ]
The meaningless insults are better left in OOT. If you don't like the thread then ignore it or harsh on how the OP played the hand or how someone responded.

[/ QUOTE ]

come on, man. it's harmless fun. ja knows i like him.

Paluka · #36 10-10-2005, 10:04 PM

[ QUOTE ]
He checkraised me with K6, no draw on the flop and lead on the turn. Most of the time, this is a bad course of action if I have a good hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

I meant what made you think that BEFORE YOU SAW HIS HAND. I'm not real interested in your results oriented retroactive analysis of the hand.

Victor · #37 10-10-2005, 10:04 PM

[ QUOTE ]
He thinks I am a maniac at times. He open raises. I 3 bet with Ah7h.

[/ QUOTE ]

Boris · #38 10-11-2005, 12:18 AM

To clarify, I think calling is the correct play. But if you're thinking of raising, I'd be more inclined to raise when the board pairs.

Ulysses · #39 10-11-2005, 01:11 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Are you just needling me now?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I just think your plan and analysis are muddled on this one, and seem a little results-oriented.

J.A.Sucker · #40 10-11-2005, 01:32 AM

I am merely using the results to prove my point that he thought I was in light. I was correct in my read, and my plan is good, IMO. That's all.