|
|
#11
03-26-2005, 02:36 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: too much for too little?
[ QUOTE ]
This is basically the question I was trying to ask. Not really small pots in general but situations like this where your hand may be best, but it is far more likely a small dog; however, the texture of the board allows for a number of powerful bluffs that your opponent would be hard-pressed to call down with A high unimproved or possibly a baby pair. [/ QUOTE ] This situation arises a fair amount and an ability to exploit it deifnitely adds to your winrate. Yes, your edge is small and plays like this will increase your fluctuations. But no, this isn't an example of going "apeshit." It's approaching "apeshit" moreso that say check-raising with top pair, but it's definitely a legitimate line. I may be biased, because playing short-handed is one of my favorite things and I savor pushing small edges. But hey, an edge is an edge is an edge, right? Small edges add up quickly, especially for multi-tablers. - Jags 
|
|
#12
03-26-2005, 02:49 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: too much for too little?
I just don't like to be in situations where I'm thinking more about how to get my opponent to fold a better hand, than I am about the quality of my own hand or potential outs.
If he has an ace, you're beat for now. Your hoping he has a Q,T, or 9 kicker, because you can now win by making a pair. Almost any other sidecard already gives him a pair or a straight draw which he almost can't fold no matter what you do. Not to mention a flush draw, some other pair/straight draw type hand or any other real hand. Personally, I think you went too far. I don't like the board for your hand. But I could certainly be wrong. I see good players mixing it up all the time on Party and they seem to do well. It could be I'm not getting in there and mixing it up enough with them. I'm interested to see what others say.
|
|
#13
03-26-2005, 03:10 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: too much for too little?
<font color="red"> I savor pushing small edges. </font>
As do I. <font color="red">But hey, an edge is an edge is an edge, right? </font> But KJ versus a steal is not always KJ versus a steal. I'm not saying you should ever throw this hand away here, but do you accept the bunching theory? In other words, KJo against a steal in a full game is not quite the same as in a short game. The edge is different both in value and in type. Would you agree with this? <font color="red"> Small edges add up quickly, especially for multi-tablers. </font> But so do small dogs. You must seize upon small edges in short games, because he who hesitates is lost. There simply isn't enough time to wait. But this isn't so much of a problem in a full game. But I wonder if I might be too patient for these 15 games? I don't think this would be my standard line.
|
|
#15
03-26-2005, 02:09 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: too much for too little?
[ QUOTE ]
But do you really think it's necessary to so heavily contest such a small pot in a full game? [/ QUOTE ] No. Against aggressive players (and typical Party 15/30 are aggressive) I think checking and calling will often win the most and lose the least. Plus wouldn't check/call, check/call, bet the river look really scary with this river card?
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
