200 from 200 then 200 at 200

[Texas Pete]

[ QUOTE ]
What is lesson 6 here supposed to be? This hand you're quoting is abolutely not the norm at all for the $215s. Not the original raise, not the reraise, and not the call.

Perhaps along with your little trite cropped up hands, you could post what you're thinking more than "early aggression." citanul

[/ QUOTE ]

I was also thinking "hmm, let's see what folks have to say about this." Plus, "I'll bet AQos thought there was no way in hell he was going to get called." And finally, "Probably, 99 thought that AQos thought there was no way in hell he was going to get called."

[citanul]

You have a long, long way to go.

The guy with 99 thought "Hey, I'm a tool! I raise too much at early levels out of position with medium pairs!"

The AQ guy thought, (unless he had very specific notes on the other player) "Hey, I'm a tool! I reraise all in with AQo out of position with another player already having entered the pot with a raise! He couldn't possibly have AK, KK, QQ, or AA, nor could anyone behind me, those hands don't exist! I'm All In! Man, that's just as fun as it looks like it is to say on TV!"

Then the 99 guy thought "I'm a tool, but 99 is the 6th best hand in holdem, right? (I'm not saying it is, but this is how people will justify this, same as saying 33 is the 12th best hand in holdem, which they do.) And hell, There's no way he could have a bigger pair! Those don't exist! Why? 99 is the nuts, that's why! Booyah! I'm All In! Man, that's just as fun as it looks to say on TV!"

I'm betting my ad lib of their thought processes is closer to what actually happened in these players' brains than yours.

Give the actual 200s players some credit. And make sure that you know who the idiots are, when you come across them.

The play in this hand was nothing like what the norm for play of that hand would have been in a 200.

citanul

[Texas Pete]

Neither of those players thought that they were stupid.

[Texas Pete]

Also, what would you raise to 175 UTG with on Level 1, and would you call if MP went all-in with that hand?

[ChrisV]

I agree with citanul. Plus, you can't learn how to play the 200's by randomly picking hands as lessons. The 200's contain a bunch of poor players, otherwise they wouldn't be worth playing. If, as here, you aren't able to distinguish the poor players from the good ones, then the "lessons" you try to take away will often be wrong.

In answer to your question, there is no hand I would raise to 175 UTG. If I was away from the table and someone else raised to 175 for me, then I would call that reraise with AA, KK, QQ, AK.

[McMelchior]

Hey, you know you write REAL FUNNY monologues! I'd love to see some more from your pen (computer, whatever). Pretty much ROFLMAO, and that goes for my wife as well. Thank you.

Best,

McMelchior (Johan) [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[Texas Pete]

There's a lot of straw-house-blowing down going on here.

[UMTerp]

[ QUOTE ]
Also, what would you raise to 175 UTG with on Level 1, and would you call if MP went all-in with that hand?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll handle this one.

NOTHING!!

If I was forced to pick a hand to raise to 175 with every time I got it in Level 1, it'd either be AK or QQ. I would certainly be a lot better than the hands those two were playing.

[niin]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Because with 2 to 1 pot odds, any rag hand has 1/3 of a chance to win the pot (depending on the other hand, but the few times it's down more than that is made up for the other vast majority of the time that it isn't down near that much).

[/ QUOTE ]

Umm, pot odds don't affect the chance that a hand will win.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm pretty sure he meant that most rag hands will have a 1/3rd chance to win a hand pre-flop, and with 2:1 odds it's about an even money prospect. He didn't mean that the 2:1 pot odds makes the hand win 1/3rd of the time.

But in most cases, that's true. Unless you're dominated, overs against unders comes in around 65/35 to 60/40, which is better than 2:1 odds

[citanul]

[ QUOTE ]
Neither of those players thought that they were stupid.

[/ QUOTE ]

There's some sort of Catch 22 going on here, and it may not just be with the 2 players involved with the hand that you posted.

citanul