Two Plus Two Older Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Older Archives > Limit Texas Hold'em > Small Stakes Hold'em

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 11-24-2005, 06:38 AM
Nick Royale Nick Royale is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Sweden
Posts: 270
Default Re: Empire 2/4. Playing TPTK vs. passive PF-3 bettor

[ QUOTE ]
Perhaps we have different views, but I don't think .80s 3-bet with QQ/JJ/TT. Everytime we're 3-bet after we check-raise, we are beat.

[/ QUOTE ]
Huh? 80%? It doesn't matter if we're beat. What matters is the pot size and the number of outs. I think QQ will 3-bet most often here (~80%). I think JJ 3-bets often too (~70%). TT will some of the time (~50%).

Yes, if we weight our outs against AK we still don't have enough outs to call. But folding a pot of 11.25BB after wasting 2BB having on average ~3 outs is bad when we could have seen a river for 1BB. It would be absolutely ridiculous to put in 2BB in a pot we already know we're behind in at least 90% of the time. And the only hands we'll fold is hands we're ahead of and has 2 outs.

You really have to explain your logic. We won't even get a free sd.

[ QUOTE ]
Come on guys, who does this calc [censored] on the run?


[/ QUOTE ]
Are you giving bad advice by purpose just because you know you wouldn't manage to make the correct decision on the run? I agree it's hard to, but doing some of these calcs afterwards will eventually result in the capacity of doing it on the run.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 11-24-2005, 07:01 AM
ArturiusX ArturiusX is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 82
Default Re: Empire 2/4. Playing TPTK vs. passive PF-3 bettor

On a second, more open eyed observation, I think the turn call is close. The reason I suggested a turn check-raise was based upon my vision that his 3-bet range was wider, but on closer inspection, its pretty clear it isn't.

Another assumption was that this guy would fold better hands, but silly old me neglected to think what kind of hands he'd fold. I don't see it [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

Also, I thought, 'free showdown if he calls'. Woops, OOP. Duh.

Calling the turn/folding the river is probably best.

Oh, how I shouldnt post after a few drinks [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 11-24-2005, 08:27 AM
SNOWBALL138 SNOWBALL138 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: LA
Posts: 518
Default results

Villain shows AA. Big surprise.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 11-24-2005, 08:49 AM
SNOWBALL138 SNOWBALL138 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: LA
Posts: 518
Default Re: Empire 2/4. Playing TPTK vs. passive PF-3 bettor


[ QUOTE ]
I feel it's either fold on the flop or call the whole way. If you want to be really solid you'll see that you might only have 3 outs to the nut straight and only against QQ do you have more outs.

In reality I would probably check/call all the way but in theory i would fold...


[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is never ever ever a fold on the flop. I have good odds for a gutshot and a backdoor flush draw. Also, my ace might be good if it hits on the turn. I didn't really consider the Q as an out, so when it hit, I was far from overjoyed. I think its a fold on the turn though, for reasons that were already discussed. Basically, my odds on the turn look a lot better than they are, because my theoretical outs are in my opponents hand, and I am beat more than 90 percent of the time on the turn, so its hard to say "I have outs if I'm behind, and maybe I'm ahead." People with 7.7 PFR over 168 hands don't 3 bet AQ or 99.
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 09:10 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.