200/400 bellagio vs liz lieu

[Steve Giufre]

[ QUOTE ]
You would have played 77 the same way? So what? How is that a justification for your play? How about the fact that A-5 is about the worst hand your gonna see from her? And that even if you did have 77, she would play her stronger hands the same way and you would be paying off like a slot machine with your 77 as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

I dont really agree Boris. Im fairly sure she is betting AQ and AK A10 way more often than she is checking it on the turn. Also I really think she is raising this river to get BK to fold a better hand, not to get him to call with a worse one. If it were for value then she rubbernecked and saw his cards, cause thats 44 is one of the few hands he can (maybe) pay her with. So, I also have to assume she does this with hands he beats, like AQ AK etc. Thats a good thing too. She is very aggro and isnt just checking behind every turn just because she doesnt have a pair.

[Boris]

I've been acting rediculously? You're too sensitive. I kinda ripped you a little bit in this thread but not really. You gave, imo, a weak justification for your play in the hand and I called you on it. Other than one post in this thread I've been polite. And I've always given you honest, thoughtful feedback.

I still think you got owned on the hand. You played the turn and river poorly. You should have bet the turn if you think you had the best hand. You will get called by many hands you beat. The only reason to check is if you think the player will bluff raise a fair percentage of the time. The river is a clear check and, IMO, not very debateable. The more interesting question is whether to call or fold to a river bet. Since you were there I'd defer to your judgement on this decision. Given the action pre-flop, on the flop and on the turn, you have to give her credit for better than 44 more than 50% of the time. S&M think you need to have the best hand 60% of the time for a river bet but you already know that.

[Mempho]

[ QUOTE ]

I know a lot of you think it's crazy...please re-evaluate.


[/ QUOTE ]

Without reading the other replies, I don't think this a crazy analysis. That said, I still think check-call is first followed by a bet-reraise line. I just think the bet-reraise line is too high variance for too little value. I think the 3-bet has little in the way of metagame benefits unless you lose...and that is too much to pay IMHO. I know a lot of people will not like going with check-call because of its low variance, but I stand by that in this situation. That said, I think your analysis is good.

[gopnik]

she extracted the max amount from you in this hand.

[hogger]

Agree 100% - She raised on the end b/c she thinks her hand is good and doesn't care if BK happens to have a hand that can call. She would expect to win the hand without showing most of the time and keep pushing BK around.
Yes he could have 77 but alot of hands that beat hers would have come to life earlier and she is aware of this.
Shnields: he is capable of playing a Jack like this but we are talking about the long run.
Someone said she would have just called with TT - wow it was nothing but a donk bet and she would have raised with all made hands above A5 IMO.
In the long run she gets paid with the best hand regardless if it's A5 vs 44 or TT vs 77
Mike

[Steve Giufre]

[ QUOTE ]
Agree 100% - She raised on the end b/c she thinks her hand is good and doesn't care if BK happens to have a hand that can call. She would expect to win the hand without showing most of the time and keep pushing BK around.
Yes he could have 77 but alot of hands that beat hers would have come to life earlier and she is aware of this.
Shnields: he is capable of playing a Jack like this but we are talking about the long run.
Someone said she would have just called with TT - wow it was nothing but a donk bet and she would have raised with all made hands above A5 IMO.
In the long run she gets paid with the best hand regardless if it's A5 vs 44 or TT vs 77
Mike

[/ QUOTE ]

She thinks she has a better hand and doesnt care if he can call or not? That makes no sense. Give BK a range of hands, and come back and tell me how many of those hands he can call her raise with that she beats. Thats assuming that he actually pays of her river raise with hands like 33 and 44, which BTW seem like the only hands he (might) be able to pay her with. She also has no reason to put him on either of these hands since he would probably almost always folds them from UTG+1 and Im sure she knows this. The rest of the hands in his range are just busted draws or hands she doesnt beat.

So please explain why she raised the river for value when like 90 percent of BK's hands are either busted draws or hands that beat A5.

[Jive Dadson]

He would have lost more if he had re-raised on the end, right?

[oreogod]

I think a turn bet is lame. You are getting raised a ton on that turn. I dont like the river bet though.

[roy_miami]

[ QUOTE ]
I think a turn bet is lame. You are getting raised a ton on that turn. I don't like the river bet though.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've been trying to work this line into my game against some of my more astute opponents, I think this game and situation would have been a good spot for it

Bet, 3-bet the turn and don't put any more bets in. You like?

[hogger]

You never raise on the end knowing your opponent won't call? There is a benefit to not showing your hand right?
What does bk have that she doesn't beat? 66-88 and a Jack on the 2nd Sunday of the month. (Maybe not that rare but you get the point).
Yes this hand was close but I was agreeing with Boris that in the long run Bike's 44-88 will be crushed when he gets raised on the river in this situation.
I honestly don't think she was desperately trying to get him to fold 77. She just thought her hand was good the way it played.
Also she was sending a message: don't try donking around with me!
Mike