Two Plus Two Older Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Older Archives > PL/NL Texas Hold'em > Small Stakes Pot-, No-Limit Hold'em

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 12-29-2005, 03:39 AM
Fallen Hero Fallen Hero is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 34
Default Re: Caesars Palace 1-2: Deep stacks, Maniacal Bettor, 66 on a K,4,3 fl

[ QUOTE ]
Before reading others responses, I'd say raise min to 140$. Granted this is a sucker move, but your image right now is a weak-tight one. If is is like you said, a thinking player, he'll probably analyse that the weak tight player (you) just hit trip king. I think you win it right there every time he does'nt have a K or better.

Also, he'll push only when you are obviously beaten so you save money compared to a bigger (or all-in) raise, witch would have the same effect as a min raise if he does'nt have a K or better but would cost you more when he does have it.

BTW, I totally hate the min raise move, I can count on two hands the number of time I do it a year... But right now, I think it as some good value

-Happy [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

you only adressed the times you're behind
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 12-29-2005, 04:00 AM
happyjaypee happyjaypee is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Quebec, Canada
Posts: 517
Default Re: Caesars Palace 1-2: Deep stacks, Maniacal Bettor, 66 on a K,4,3 fl

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Before reading others responses, I'd say raise min to 140$. Granted this is a sucker move, but your image right now is a weak-tight one. If is is like you said, a thinking player, he'll probably analyse that the weak tight player (you) just hit trip king. I think you win it right there every time he does'nt have a K or better.

Also, he'll push only when you are obviously beaten so you save money compared to a bigger (or all-in) raise, witch would have the same effect as a min raise if he does'nt have a K or better but would cost you more when he does have it.

BTW, I totally hate the min raise move, I can count on two hands the number of time I do it a year... But right now, I think it as some good value

-Happy [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

you only adressed the times you're behind

[/ QUOTE ]

no I did'nt:
[ QUOTE ]

I think you win it right there every time he does'nt have a K or better


[/ QUOTE ]
and I have edited my original post (before reading yours) whit:
[ QUOTE ]

, plus he might fold a bigger pp.


[/ QUOTE ]
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 12-29-2005, 04:05 AM
Fallen Hero Fallen Hero is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 34
Default Re: Caesars Palace 1-2: Deep stacks, Maniacal Bettor, 66 on a K,4,3 fl

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Before reading others responses, I'd say raise min to 140$. Granted this is a sucker move, but your image right now is a weak-tight one. If is is like you said, a thinking player, he'll probably analyse that the weak tight player (you) just hit trip king. I think you win it right there every time he does'nt have a K or better.

Also, he'll push only when you are obviously beaten so you save money compared to a bigger (or all-in) raise, witch would have the same effect as a min raise if he does'nt have a K or better but would cost you more when he does have it.

BTW, I totally hate the min raise move, I can count on two hands the number of time I do it a year... But right now, I think it as some good value

-Happy [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

you only adressed the times you're behind

[/ QUOTE ]

no I did'nt:
[ QUOTE ]

I think you win it right there every time he does'nt have a K or better


[/ QUOTE ]
and I have edited my original post (before reading yours) whit:
[ QUOTE ]

, plus he might fold a bigger pp.


[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

that's not a very indepth analyses of the times we're ahead [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img] wich isn't good since we're ahead here most of the time
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 12-29-2005, 04:07 AM
happyjaypee happyjaypee is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Quebec, Canada
Posts: 517
Default Re: Caesars Palace 1-2: Deep stacks, Maniacal Bettor, 66 on a K,4,3 fl

After going throw the thread, the discution seems to have diverge too calling down whit TPTK. On that matter, I agree whit TWP.

-Happy [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 12-29-2005, 04:43 AM
happyjaypee happyjaypee is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Quebec, Canada
Posts: 517
Default Re: Caesars Palace 1-2: Deep stacks, Maniacal Bettor, 66 on a K,4,3 fl

[ QUOTE ]

that's not a very indepth analyses of the times we're ahead wich isn't good since we're ahead here most of the time


[/ QUOTE ]

The poster stated that the vilan is a maniac but thinking player. That he go out of his way to make continuation play but, he also is capable of folding when the pot gets big and it is obvious he is behind.

As I said before, raising more then min does'nt acomplish anyting more then just raising min, and calling him down will cost more then the min raise to find out if we are beat, plus it will often give him 6 live overcard outs, twice, to beat us.

Those overcard outs are the big diference between calling him down whit TPTK and a small pocket pair. compare AT whit 66 on T54r flop, whit AT, he need to have KQ, KJ or KJ to have 6 outs twice. VS 66, any two 7 or above will do.

That's why I stick to TWP opinion on calling down whit TPTK but would try to whit it right there whit minimum risk whit a small pp when I got a high % of chance to be ahead but my opponenet must have redraws. Also keep in mind that our image and our perception of the vilan are crucial in this specific hand. I repeat That I don't advocate this move as a standar play, but I still think it as some value here, vs him.


-Happy [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 12-29-2005, 10:04 PM
Dynasty Dynasty is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 4,044
Default Turn Results & a Strange River Situation

I make so few strategy posts these days that I forgot to come back to this last night.

For the most part, I was playing this 66 hand for set value against and over-aggressive bettor and two other opponents, all of which would commit lots of chips to the pot with top pair given the table dynamics.

However, the K,4,3 flop gave me the unexpected second pair and I quickly found myself heads-up on the flop where folding second pair for a relatively small $20 bet is a serious mistake against this guy.

I'm not sure my flop call was correct. But, knowing this guy is capable of betting and then re-raising a raise with no hand often has to have the effect of putting the brakes on you from raising marginal hands like second pair of 66. The problem with just calling on the flop is, of course, he keeps firing on the turn just like he did.

In response to my opponent's $70 turn bet into a $117 pot, I did consider folding. But, that's how this guy has been picking up pot after pot against most players at the table. He's betting with nothing and players with "no hand" are folding. When this happens, you've got to redefine what "no hand" is. I don't think 66 on a K,4,3,K board is "no hand" anymore. So, I eliminated folding.

When considering raising, I thought of making it $200 (leaving me with about $185). In my opponent's eyes, that should make me pot committed and probably pot commited in fact. I'm not sure I wanted to be pot commited for all my chips. So, after about 15 seconds of thought, I made the $70 call.

After making the call, I decided not to watch the river card being dealt. My opponent hadn't been giving off much for tells other than acting goofy/over-aggressive so I didn't watch him either. I stimply stared striaght down to avoid giving away any information myself before he acted first on the river. That turned out to be a mistake.

As I was staring down, there was a mini-commotion at the table with comments like "Hold on!" and "Wait!" being said. Without me seeing it, my opponent had apparently checked and turned over his cards. When I looked up, his right arm was extended and his cards apparently face-up in hand or just turned back over. The dealer had his hand extended to block my view of his cards. So, I didn't see anything.

My opponent chekced again for me to see.

The river is: K[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]4[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]3[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]K[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]8[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]

Your play?
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 12-29-2005, 10:07 PM
Dynasty Dynasty is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 4,044
Default Re: Caesars Palace 1-2: Deep stacks, Maniacal Bettor, 66 on a K,4,3 flop

[ QUOTE ]
I'd raise, fold to further agression.

[/ QUOTE ]

I addressed this somewhat in my turn results post. But, a raise has to be at least to a total of $140 (and I was considering a raise to $200 total). If I use your line, that means I'd be putting $180 into the pot and then folding to a guy who has been picking up lots of pot with over-aggressive play. That's not the way I want to play any hand against this type of opponent.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 12-29-2005, 10:09 PM
Dynasty Dynasty is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 4,044
Default Re: Caesars Palace 1-2: Deep stacks, Maniacal Bettor, 66 on a K,4,3 fl

[ QUOTE ]
I prefer a raise preflop. Since you know lag donk will bump it to $20 otherwise, just raise to $10-12 preflop. Has he been reraising people preflop with junk?


[/ QUOTE ]

I think this would have worked. He had reraised with junk but it was only once (maybe twice).
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 12-29-2005, 10:11 PM
Dynasty Dynasty is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 4,044
Default Re: Caesars Palace 1-2: Deep stacks, Maniacal Bettor, 66 on a K,4,3 fl

[ QUOTE ]

On the other hand, I don't really like 66 as the hand to call him down with, you'll surely get better spots.

[/ QUOTE ]

Whether I fold, call, or raise in this hand, that better spot is going to come anyway. So, if a non-folding play is best here, it should be made. Then, you can take advantage of the better spot as well.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 12-29-2005, 10:41 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Turn Results & a Strange River Situation



[/ QUOTE ] When I looked up, his right arm was extended and his cards apparently face-up in hand or just turned back over. The dealer had his hand extended to block my view of his cards. So, I didn't see anything.

My opponent chekced again for me to see.

The river is: K[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]4[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]3[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]K[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]8[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]

Your play?

[/ QUOTE ]

There is virtually no doubt now that your opponent does not have a K, given his two river checks and immediate desire to show it down. And he clearly has no monster hand. That doesn't mean that he does not have you beat, however.

You do not make it clear if villain was aware that you didn't see his hand. If villain thought you saw his hand as the rest of the table did, this is a pretty easy push. He will assume you saw his hand and you are trying to get more out of his worse hand. A push here forces him to fold an 8 or a higher PP.

If villain is aware you did not see his hand, um, push anyway? You have the luxury of knowing he has no monster, and is he going to risk getting nearly stacked with a marginal hand? Only if he senses that you're trying to buy it, but I still like the push.
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 03:36 PM.


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