|
|
#41
08-31-2005, 05:11 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 2+2 game
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Fair enough. But there is no way I'm raising the turn with a hand that can't call a 3-bet if you SNG me. More likely I'd just fold, unless I actually had a hand. That's why these games are tough. Anyways: ni han, sir. [/ QUOTE ] That's the point. You're not raising there with a made, but vulnerable hand, but you might raise a draw (will probably just fold) and will of course raise with your good hands. No way for me to know what % of the time you have what, but that's life. [/ QUOTE ] From this post, I don't understand why your plan was to bet/3-bet the turn. I don't think that's a good plan. I think bet/fold is a much better plan. [/ QUOTE ] It's probably not. I think maybe I was thinking of bet/3-betting certain cards, and bet-folding other cards. 
|
|
#42
08-31-2005, 05:27 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 2+2 game
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Fair enough. But there is no way I'm raising the turn with a hand that can't call a 3-bet if you SNG me. More likely I'd just fold, unless I actually had a hand. That's why these games are tough. Anyways: ni han, sir. [/ QUOTE ] That's the point. You're not raising there with a made, but vulnerable hand, but you might raise a draw (will probably just fold) and will of course raise with your good hands. No way for me to know what % of the time you have what, but that's life. [/ QUOTE ] From this post, I don't understand why your plan was to bet/3-bet the turn. I don't think that's a good plan. I think bet/fold is a much better plan. [/ QUOTE ] It's probably not. I think maybe I was thinking of bet/3-betting certain cards, and bet-folding other cards. [/ QUOTE ] OK, I'd be curious to know which ones you would think might merit bet/3-bet. You can assume deeper stacks if you want, if you think it makes a difference. Like, do you think a flush card might be something that I might raise with a made hand but then give you credit for flush if you 3-bet? Or do you think an ace? Or a K?
|
|
#44
08-31-2005, 09:21 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 2+2 game
[ QUOTE ]
Some crazy luckbox. He just wishes he had taken that luck out on the real tables in stead [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] Umm....STFU. That is all. Edit: OK, that is NOT all. Here. 
|
|
#45
08-31-2005, 09:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 2+2 game
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Fair enough. But there is no way I'm raising the turn with a hand that can't call a 3-bet if you SNG me. More likely I'd just fold, unless I actually had a hand. That's why these games are tough. Anyways: ni han, sir. [/ QUOTE ] That's the point. You're not raising there with a made, but vulnerable hand, but you might raise a draw (will probably just fold) and will of course raise with your good hands. No way for me to know what % of the time you have what, but that's life. [/ QUOTE ] From this post, I don't understand why your plan was to bet/3-bet the turn. I don't think that's a good plan. I think bet/fold is a much better plan. [/ QUOTE ] It's probably not. I think maybe I was thinking of bet/3-betting certain cards, and bet-folding other cards. [/ QUOTE ] OK, I'd be curious to know which ones you would think might merit bet/3-bet. You can assume deeper stacks if you want, if you think it makes a difference. Like, do you think a flush card might be something that I might raise with a made hand but then give you credit for flush if you 3-bet? Or do you think an ace? Or a K? [/ QUOTE ] If we were deep enough, board pairing spade would be fun to bet/3-bet. The problem with bet/3-betting an A is that I'm fully aware you are probably just calling with the NFD and TP on the turn here, precisely because a raise might induce a 3-bet (this is assuming we are deep). I'm also thinking that a bet/3-bet on an obvious straight making card could be good, because you now have some decent but not great made hands that you could lay down (say a middish two pair).
|
|
#48
08-31-2005, 11:25 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 2+2 game
This is very false. Do you see why? ABC poker will crush these games.
|
|
#49
08-31-2005, 11:57 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 2+2 game
[ QUOTE ]
This is very false. Do you see why? ABC poker will crush these games. [/ QUOTE ] ABC will also usually get you flamed in the post-game wrap-up in threads like this. So, given that ABC is sort of against the rules, what do you think of the mandatory bluffing post?
|
|
#50
09-01-2005, 01:28 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 2+2 game
No, I don't understand why. Pots are artifically inflated by weak hands, making big ones easier to steal.
Furthermore, everyone has PT, which makes it easy to fold when a 10% VPIPer comes into the pot. I'm also not suggesting that the act of bluffing in itself creates a positive expectation. I'm saying that when you bluff a reasonable amount of time, opponents are going to be more willing to pay off hands, which should be obvious.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
