|
|
|
|
#1
12-29-2005, 01:46 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: $2/$5 NL ($300 max) hand at Turning Stone vs. 2+2er
Raising to $13 preflop every hand at 2/5 is standard? Planning to put in the third raise preflop with AK is standard? Calling a very big reraise preflop with AK in hopes of putting in as little money as possible postflop when you hit is standard?
|
|
#2
12-29-2005, 01:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: $2/$5 NL ($300 max) hand at Turning Stone vs. 2+2er
Opening to 13 is fine if not standard, the re-raise is pot-sized and the opponent could be playing back at him. Doesn't mean he has to go broke postflop if he's behind or stop opponent from bluffing if he's ahead.
|
|
#3
12-29-2005, 02:04 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: $2/$5 NL ($300 max) hand at Turning Stone vs. 2+2er
[ QUOTE ]
Opening to 13 is fine if not standard, the re-raise is pot-sized and the opponent could be playing back at him. Doesn't mean he has to go broke postflop if he's behind or stop opponent from bluffing if he's ahead. [/ QUOTE ] WOW 13?? When I was at the table it was really loose preflop. Were you there with the guy wearing the crazy pink striped shirt? Also, a guy called Bobbo's PFR to 35 with K3o and doubled through Mr. Fitos on a 5 6 7 board. Needless to say, this game was softer than the 100NL IMO, which is full of a bunch of under bankrolled weak-tight college kids. The 2/5 game players like to gamb0000l. You probably caught the game at its best, or I could have caught it at its worst.
|
|
#4
12-29-2005, 02:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: $2/$5 NL ($300 max) hand at Turning Stone vs. 2+2er
If he's going to be fearful of a set whenever some high cards hit the board then he has no business being in the pot... I don't really think it's a great thing to get people to "play back at me" with better hands than mine.
|
|
#5
12-29-2005, 02:15 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: $2/$5 NL ($300 max) hand at Turning Stone vs. 2+2er
What about with worse hands than yours?
|
|
#7
12-29-2005, 02:31 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: $2/$5 NL ($300 max) hand at Turning Stone vs. 2+2er
Allowing him to continue bluffing is not freaking out. And just because there may be a decent chance that he has a worse hand doesn't mean that we have to take a line that causes us to go broke the times that he has us beat, right?
Edit: What's your alternative line? And I think my comments are more directed towards a BobboFitos type of 2+2er or a TheWorstPlayer type of 2+2er and not necessarily a generic 2+2er. It would help to know who this guy is or a more specific read.
|
|
#9
12-29-2005, 03:01 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: $2/$5 NL ($300 max) hand at Turning Stone vs. 2+2er
I don't think the actual play of the hand ended up being terrible, but I hate the logic that was used throughout. Minraising preflop four hands in a row doesn't make sense, and with the exception of shortstack/all-in situations, I can honestly say that I have never raised preflop with AK with the plan of reraising anyone that comes over the top of me. AK is not a big hand and this is just LAG chip-spewing.
When the flop comes out the 2+2er is doing everything imaginable to telegraph a very marginal holding, yet our Hero is seeing monsters. There is virtually nothing given in the form of hand reading (other than "I think he might have a set") and all the decisions are based upon the thought process of "I have a marginal hand, and I have a couple of nut outs that I don't want to let go of, so I'll just try to hit them as cheap as possible." At the start of the hand Hero though he had a great image to play a big pot with AK with, but now suddenly there is no longer any consideration given to his image, and nothing at all is written about what his opponent might put him on at any point in the hand. He has hit an action board and he's just thinking about his own cards and using TPTK as a bluff catcher.
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
