|
|
#1
06-20-2005, 06:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Adjusting to the SoCal LAG
Villian is drinking and gambling. After studying him for 2 hours, I am quite impressed with his postflop play - he reads hands and players well and is picking up far more pots than he should be. He is the prototypical SoCal "fish" - he loses, but on any given night he can send a weak-tight player home broke and crying to his mama. At the moment this hand came up, he was on a tear, playing 75% of his hands for a raise PF.
Villian open-raises from MP - this indicates he has anything except unsuited unconnectors. 2 tight-predictable coldcallers, SB (unknown) calls, I make a bad call in the BB with QTo. Got caught up in gambling fever, I guess. Flop is QsTs3s. SB checks, I bet, villian raises, folded back to me and I just call, with the intention of checkraising a blank turn. Turn is a blank. I checkraise. He 3-bets. It is the first time he has 3-bet a big-bet street since I've been at the table. I call. River is a blank. I check. He bets and says, "you call, you lose." I called. My flop and turn play were quite different than what would be considered standard, but I wanted to get the most out of him if he held absolute crap, which was likely. There was virtually no chance of him checking behind the turn - he had not done it since I'd been there, and my line on the flop looked very much like I was drawing, or could be pushed off the hand, or both. The river decision was also not clear. I am looking at top 2 pair, and he could have 3-bet the turn with AsQx. But I called because he had bet or raised at every opportunity, and I thought the risk that a 3-bet (that I would have to pay off) was too great. Did I overthink this hand, or are these adjustments reasonable? 
|
|
#2
06-20-2005, 07:00 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Adjusting to the SoCal LAG
"Villian is drinking and gambling. After studying him for 2 hours . . ."
-His drinking, or his gambling? [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] "are these adjustments reasonable?" -I think so. If he's never going to check the turn, that should figure into one's strategy on the flop and turn. "The river decision was also not clear." -You say he's playing well post-flop. That being the case, he might fold to a check-raise with As-Qx (or a worse hand), or 3-bet with a set. I think those possibilities outweigh the chances that he's still pushing Q-3s or T-3s.
|
|
#5
06-20-2005, 07:39 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
BTW
Anybody have experience with "you call you lose?" I'm trying to think; seems to me that when guys have said to me "if you can only call, you can't win," they have as advertised--a pretty good hand, but not the nuts. Which would mean it's probably pretty close between Ryno and his opponent.
|
|
#6
06-20-2005, 07:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: BTW
I've been thinking about that too. Assuming he's not completely irrational, he's gonna want your call if he's got an extremely strong hand. But he doesnt want to look like a fool (edit: if you do call him), so he probably doesn't have nothing . This might be an interesting post in the Psychology forum.
|
|
#8
06-20-2005, 08:27 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: BTW
In this situation I read it that his made hand held up. I agree with you that the word "only", which was not spoken, was implied - if you can *only* call, you can't win.
What's interesting is that in a later hand, he said "you can't call", and in that case he was stone bluffing.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
