|
|
#53
10-05-2005, 04:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: I stereotyped...and I was wrong.
[ QUOTE ]
it's actually known as polish big slick. each country has it's own big slick. for instance T9 is cambodian big slick. [/ QUOTE ] In New York Cambodian Slick is 73 s00ted and is best tabled by saying, "CAMBODIAN!!!" 
|
|
#54
10-05-2005, 05:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I stereotyped...and I was wrong.
[ QUOTE ]
In New York Cambodian Slick is 73 s00ted and is best tabled by saying, "CAMBODIAN!!!" [/ QUOTE ] Do you have to say the zero's in "s00ted"? And this turn should've been reraised, whether live, online, or in your dreams. Or at least raise the river. Barron Vangor Toth BarronVangorToth.com
|
|
#55
10-05-2005, 05:57 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I stereotyped...and I was wrong.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] In New York Cambodian Slick is 73 s00ted and is best tabled by saying, "CAMBODIAN!!!" [/ QUOTE ] Do you have to say the zero's in "s00ted"? And this turn should've been reraised, whether live, online, or in your dreams. Or at least raise the river. Barron Vangor Toth BarronVangorToth.com [/ QUOTE ] Wrong. I'd say "I'll let others elaborate", but, well, I already have elaborated. It's simple math. Really simple math. Josh
|
|
#56
10-05-2005, 06:01 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I stereotyped...and I was wrong.
[ QUOTE ]
I'd say "I'll let others elaborate", but, well, I already have elaborated. It's simple math. Really simple math. [/ QUOTE ] I saw what you wrote; I saw what others wrote; I didn't see the simple math in the situation. There are quite a few hands that a player would check-raise the turn with that are bested by your trip 3's. I can see a fun discussion regarding whether to three-bet the turn OR wait to simply raise the river, but the guy could have AK / KQ (someone above in the thread said that the KQ will fold - not always) not to mention KJ. Or Ace-Jack and he doesn't think you have anything at all. Or Queens or Aces. Etc etc. Lots of hands will pay you off that extra bet; few will beat you. Barron Vangor Toth BarronVangorToth.com
|
|
#57
10-05-2005, 06:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I stereotyped...and I was wrong.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I'd say "I'll let others elaborate", but, well, I already have elaborated. It's simple math. Really simple math. [/ QUOTE ] I saw what you wrote; I saw what others wrote; I didn't see the simple math in the situation. There are quite a few hands that a player would check-raise the turn with that are bested by your trip 3's. I can see a fun discussion regarding whether to three-bet the turn OR wait to simply raise the river, but the guy could have AK / KQ (someone above in the thread said that the KQ will fold - not always) not to mention KJ. Or Ace-Jack and he doesn't think you have anything at all. Or Queens or Aces. Etc etc. Lots of hands will pay you off that extra bet; few will beat you. Barron Vangor Toth BarronVangorToth.com [/ QUOTE ] You obviously didn't see what I've written. My opponent has KJ, AA, or a naked bluff. That, or they beat me. They are a tight passive opponent. They fold KQ on the flop. They don't checkraise AJ, AQ, QQ, etc. This is not debatable. KJ, AA, naked bluff, or I'm beat. If they have a naked bluff, I make more by calling, then calling the river. And it's more likely I'm behind than they have KJ or AA. Threebetting the turn or raising the river is -EV, pure and simple. That doesn't mean it's never right, it means that the expectation is negative. Saying I should put in another bet anywhere is only results oriented thinking, ignoring math and the situation. Josh
|
|
#58
10-05-2005, 06:16 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Simplified....
[ QUOTE ]
This probably doesn't belong in this forum. Oh well. I was playing in a tight 25-50 game, but a good game. Most people couldn't play very well from the blinds, which becomes key in tight games. My opponent in this hand fit a certain stereotype. Let me clarify. Based on their appearance, age, gender, race, discussion topics, etc, I thought that they would explode at a bad beat. I had never played with this person before, but knew that they were decent, probably about break-even post-rake (which is an above average player, of course). But I knew that they were a time bomb inside. They played tight, and never seemed to bluff in a few hours of play. Well, I openraise one off the button w/ 23d. Villain called in the SB, heads up. Flop came J33, two hearts. Check, bet, call. Turn is Kh. Check, bet, checkraise, call. River was an offsuit 9. Bet, call. Villain tabled black aces, and I tabled my monster (or is it monstrosity?). Villain, stuck about 4 racks, calmly turned their cards over, and gently mucked. I was amazed. But then, I was saddened that I was amazed. I didn't think I stereotyped people, but it seems I do. Maybe this was the last time. Still saddened. Josh [/ QUOTE ] Some of you still are missing the forest for the trees, and think that this post is about poker. For you guys... The turn checkraise means they beat AK. Period. As in, over 99% of the time. AK IS NO GOOD HERE. As such, it's KJ, AA, or a hand that beats 32. Tight passive players are rare these days. They exist though. If you are only used to playing with LAGs, that's fine. But don't be so narrowminded as to think that only LAGs exist in the poker world. If you don't have the ability to adjust to different playing styles, you have things to learn about poker. Every day on here there are posts about "the games aren't Laggy enough anymore", and I laugh. I make much more in tight passive games than in Laggy games. And I make a lot in Laggy games. Seriously, if you think that 3betting the turn or raising the river is right, you don't know how to play against tight passive players. Learn how to play against them. Then, play against them. Then buy a new house in LA with your money. That's what I did. Josh
|
|
#59
10-05-2005, 07:00 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I stereotyped...and I was wrong.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] was your raise preflop for meta-game reasons (to tilt sb if u won)? Or do u consider this +EV b/c bb,sb played so bad? just curious [/ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Most people couldn't play very well from the blinds, which becomes key in tight games. [/ QUOTE ] [/ QUOTE ] Victor is right, but I'm still not bold enough to go out on a limb and say it's +EV. So, there's some metagame considerations being thrown in there... Josh [/ QUOTE ] earlier in the thread you said he folds kq on this flop. if thats how he plays kq then i think this is +ev.
|
|
#60
10-05-2005, 07:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I stereotyped...and I was wrong.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] was your raise preflop for meta-game reasons (to tilt sb if u won)? Or do u consider this +EV b/c bb,sb played so bad? just curious [/ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Most people couldn't play very well from the blinds, which becomes key in tight games. [/ QUOTE ] [/ QUOTE ] Victor is right, but I'm still not bold enough to go out on a limb and say it's +EV. So, there's some metagame considerations being thrown in there... Josh [/ QUOTE ] earlier in the thread you said he folds kq on this flop. if thats how he plays kq then i think this is +ev. [/ QUOTE ] You may be right. However, I may end up losing too much when I lose to compensate for it. It may be +EV, but my gut (and nothing else) tells me it's -EV. Also, the BB wasn't as tight/passive as the SB. Plus the button was a player. If I get it HU w/ the SB everytime, that's one thing. Unfortunately, that won't always be the case. Josh
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
