K3 s0000ted... spewing chips or classic SSH?

[tytygoodnuts]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

backdoor flush draw and bottom pair, I'm continuing to the turn with this hand, and what's wrong with driving out people?

[/ QUOTE ]
Seriously, what's wrong with driving people out is that you have a backdoor flush draw and bottom pair.

[/ QUOTE ]

The pot is too small IMO.

[tytygoodnuts]

[ QUOTE ]
"... spewing chips or classic SSH?"

Basically one and the same.

[/ QUOTE ]

Dude, SSH gets my vote for best Hold'em book ever written.

[hate]

Ok, the pot is small and I don't quite have odds for my full 6.5 outs, but I see the same play with AJo on a KQx board, albeit the pot's going to be a bit bigger, and I'd value my K outs a ton more here than I would my A outs there. As for my response, whatever.

[Luv2DriveTT]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
"... spewing chips or classic SSH?"

Basically one and the same.

[/ QUOTE ]

Dude, SSH gets my vote for best Hold'em book ever written.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but it's theorys are often missapplied. Case in point.

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

[mtdoak]

IF your going to play this, with only UTG in the pot, its much better to raise. Your goal is to buy the button. Now, if CO and the button are both big calling stations this might not be possible. But if you've got some TAGs behind you, well, its a definite raise.

[MisterKing]

I'm glad to see commentary from so many distinguished posters (Evan, GoT, TT, et al), and appreciate all the input. The whole reason I posted the hand is that I thought I might be driving too fast, and had missaplied a few SSH concepts, though I didn't want to say so up front so as to prejudice the conversation. So anyhow, I don't think I'll be making this play in the future, ALTHOUGH against several thinking opponents who you're likely to face many times in the future I s'pose it might be ok to pull once in a blue moon for meta-game reasons. Of course that claim can be made of a whole array of horrible plays, so...

As for GreyWolf, you're gonna have to do more than just post what you think man. Say why or really don't bother -- editorial comments without a grounding in some kind of theory are pretty useless when contemplating similar situations in the future.

[MisterKing]

[ QUOTE ]
"... spewing chips or classic SSH?"

Basically one and the same.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you're saying Ed's recommendations are poor form? I'd be interested in the thinking that leads you to this opinion. We're talking about 2/4 hold'em here, not 30/60. And my posts above describing the game make it clear that we have exactly what SSH identifies as a "very loose" game on our hands. HEPFAP just ain't gonna cut it here, and FTOP won't apply in many of the multiway pots (see Morton's Theorem).

[hate]

1, you're in essentially EP regardless of how many limpers you might have later on, and 60% VP$IP for two players will have no limpers 16% of the time, and just one 48% of the time. OOP and with only one limper already, this is an easy fold.

[bobbyi]

[ QUOTE ]
Table average VP$IP was in excess of 40 at this point, and we were routinely seeing flops 6 handed. Still hate the limp?

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes.

[Luv2DriveTT]

I think GreyWolfNYC's point was that if you are missapplying SSHE concepts then you are spewing chips, and he is right. It is the classic missapplication that we have seen again and again on these boards, and countless times when playing against some players as well. When I forst got the book I missapplied the concepts just like you did here as well, so don't sweat it.... we all go through a learning curve. Hopefully you will come out on the top end of the curve over time.

I know him personally, and you are right that he leans to the side of HEPFAP, or even more accuratly Middle Limit Hold'em style. But it really is little different from SSHE, there are no new concepts or ideas presented in that book, its just better applied knowlege for the low limit player.

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]