Two Plus Two Older Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Older Archives > Limit Texas Hold'em > Small Stakes Shorthanded

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-11-2005, 03:41 AM
scotty34 scotty34 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Vancouver BC
Posts: 686
Default Yuck

Villain here is generally pretty LAG, and overall a bad player. Gets overaggressive in spots that he shouldn't.

Party Poker 5/10 Hold'em (6 max, 6 handed) FTR converter on zerodivide.cx

Preflop: Hero is SB with K[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], A[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img].
<font color="#666666">2 folds</font>, <font color="#CC3333">CO raises</font>, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Hero 3-bets</font>, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, CO calls.

Flop: (7 SB) 7[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], T[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], A[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">Hero bets</font>, CO calls.

Turn: (4.50 BB) 8[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">Hero bets</font>, CO calls.

River: (6.50 BB) 9[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
Hero...

What's our plan here?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-11-2005, 03:46 AM
StellarWind StellarWind is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 704
Default Re: Yuck

Bet-call the river.

There is plenty of money to be made off of one-pair hands. Against two-pair you often avoid the raise and don't lose anything compared to checkcalling. Once in a while you make an extra bet off a bluff raise.

Sometimes you lose an extra bet to a straight. Price of doing business; on to the next hand.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-11-2005, 03:49 AM
imported_leader imported_leader is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Around Boston
Posts: 510
Default Re: Yuck

[ QUOTE ]
Villain here is generally pretty LAG, and overall a bad player. Gets overaggressive in spots that he shouldn't.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is he checking though a worse hand? If not, c/c. Otherwise b/c.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-11-2005, 03:50 AM
yellowjack yellowjack is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 263
Default Re: Yuck

We are definitely not folding, so bet/call or check/call.
I like bet/call. Since I'm assuming we're ahead on the turn, the 9 puts us behind A6, A9, and AJ now. We're still ahead of AQ, A5-A2, not to mention any PP.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 12-11-2005, 03:51 AM
LoaferGee12 LoaferGee12 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Dreading my first downswing
Posts: 478
Default Re: Yuck

Yeah bet call looks good. If he bets a big majority of the time when checked to, then I wouldn't mind a check-call. That way you save yourself against the two-pair / straight raise. Otherwise, yeah I'm just bet-calling it.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 12-11-2005, 03:54 AM
scotty34 scotty34 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Vancouver BC
Posts: 686
Default Re: Yuck

[ QUOTE ]
Bet-call the river.

There is plenty of money to be made off of one-pair hands. Against two-pair you often avoid the raise and don't lose anything compared to checkcalling. Once in a while you make an extra bet off a bluff raise.

Sometimes you lose an extra bet to a straight. Price of doing business; on to the next hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

Given his aggressive tendencies, I'm fairly sure he would bet the river with a good portion of the hands that he would call with when checked to. He would also probably bet quite a few hands that he would fold to a bet. Does that change anything?
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-11-2005, 04:13 AM
TTChamp TTChamp is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Job Hunting
Posts: 517
Default Re: Yuck

It seems like the responses have generally been advocating b/c so far. I disagree. To me this is a c/c.

What are you putting villian on that we beat right now? Are we better off betting into him given the holdings we beat? Here is my list of possibilities (remember, he did raise pf):

-KK or QQ are possible, but not probable. Wouldn't he have capped pf? Seems likely that he would have capped given OP description. Even if he tried to get tricky pf, there is a chance he has the discipline to laydown here (more info needed i guess).
-AQ, A2-A5
-Spades: but we probably want to check to him if he has spades. The exception would be if he has something like KTs.
-22-55: He can't be this horrible can he? If so your plan doesn't really matter because you will have all of his money shortly anyway.
-KT or QT.
-Other random crap like KQ: again we would want to check in this case.

I know that OP said he was LAG, but look at the board and think about his range from the CO. Almost everything hit, right down to 67.

So to me the only likely holdings where betting helps us are AQ, A2-A5, KT, QT. These holdings are made even less likely by the fact that there are 2 aces already accounted for.

There are many more hands that beat us, and he often will make us pay two bets to verify we are beat. B/F seems wrong here given OP's description.

Conclusion=c/c
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 12-11-2005, 04:23 AM
yellowjack yellowjack is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 263
Default Re: Yuck

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Bet-call the river.

There is plenty of money to be made off of one-pair hands. Against two-pair you often avoid the raise and don't lose anything compared to checkcalling. Once in a while you make an extra bet off a bluff raise.

Sometimes you lose an extra bet to a straight. Price of doing business; on to the next hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

Given his aggressive tendencies, I'm fairly sure he would bet the river with a good portion of the hands that he would call with when checked to. He would also probably bet quite a few hands that he would fold to a bet. Does that change anything?

[/ QUOTE ]

We're betting to extract money from hands that wouldn't bet when checked to, but since he's betting a few we're more inclined to check/call, but you know this..
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 12-11-2005, 07:14 AM
Peter Harris Peter Harris is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Edinburgh, UK
Posts: 113
Default Re: Yuck

[ QUOTE ]
Given his aggressive tendencies, I'm fairly sure he would bet the river with a good portion of the hands that he would call with when checked to. He would also probably bet quite a few hands that he would fold to a bet. Does that change anything?

[/ QUOTE ]

as i told adsman this morning, read the Theory of Poker section pages 209-213 (i think). If player bets more hands than they call with, check-call is best. If player calls more hands than they bet with, bet-call is best.

I like c/c here against an overaggressive, poor player.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 12-11-2005, 07:19 AM
POKhER POKhER is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: .50/1 At Stars - LONDON, UK.
Posts: 590
Default Re: Yuck

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Bet-call the river.

There is plenty of money to be made off of one-pair hands. Against two-pair you often avoid the raise and don't lose anything compared to checkcalling. Once in a while you make an extra bet off a bluff raise.

Sometimes you lose an extra bet to a straight. Price of doing business; on to the next hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

Given his aggressive tendencies, I'm fairly sure he would bet the river with a good portion of the hands that he would call with when checked to. He would also probably bet quite a few hands that he would fold to a bet. Does that change anything?

[/ QUOTE ]

C/C - Use your read to make cash.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:53 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.