|
|
|
|
#1
12-20-2005, 01:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: River the underfull
[ QUOTE ]
no one likes check/call? The guy called 2 cold on the flop here, I doubt it was with ace rag, and any baby pair or 6 is counterfeited. What else is he calling with? There are lots of draws he could be chasing, I dont think hell bluff the busted draw that often, but you never know, and the pot is big enough I dont want to fold, and i dont want to have to put 2 bets in either. also, how close is this PF? I fold here a lot, is that a leak? [/ QUOTE ] Imo folding PF would be a clear error for anyone who is competent postflop. I'd call with any two suited (not that I'm advocating that for everyone) and J8s is waay better than any two suited. J8s is quite strong hand three way in 6-max--at 5:1 a no brainer.. I'd even defend it HU vs. UTG, but I defend a lot. River you and Grisgra make good points but an unknown 10/20 player just figures to be sooo bad that bet/call is correct imo. He is paying off with so many hands there. A-high, K-high, Q-high, the 22 bluff call, whatever. Can't give up that kind of value. With a read obviously this can easily change. 
|
|
#2
12-20-2005, 01:46 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: River the underfull
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] no one likes check/call? The guy called 2 cold on the flop here, I doubt it was with ace rag, and any baby pair or 6 is counterfeited. What else is he calling with? There are lots of draws he could be chasing, I dont think hell bluff the busted draw that often, but you never know, and the pot is big enough I dont want to fold, and i dont want to have to put 2 bets in either. also, how close is this PF? I fold here a lot, is that a leak? [/ QUOTE ] He is paying off with so many hands there. A-high, K-high, Q-high, the 22 bluff call, whatever. [/ QUOTE ] No, he's not. There *are* players that will do this, but absent a read, the typical 10/20 player will not call here with 22, K-high, or Q-high.
|
|
#3
12-20-2005, 01:53 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: River the underfull
That doesn't make sense. If there ARE players who will pay off with those hands and this guy is unknown, then there is a certain percentage chance he will be one of these players who pays off. It's like the range of opponents/range of hands that Josh mentioned the other day. Against an unknown it must be taken into account (so must the fact that unknowns figure to be worse players if you datamine or play a lot). In this case I think the opponent range and corresponding hand range is favorable to a bet/call.
|
|
#4
12-20-2005, 02:35 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: River the underfull
[ QUOTE ]
That doesn't make sense. If there ARE players who will pay off with those hands and this guy is unknown, then there is a certain percentage chance he will be one of these players who pays off. It's like the range of opponents/range of hands that Josh mentioned the other day. Against an unknown it must be taken into account (so must the fact that unknowns figure to be worse players if you datamine or play a lot). In this case I think the opponent range and corresponding hand range is favorable to a bet/call. [/ QUOTE ] What doesn't make sense? That I think this 'certain percentage' is low? I agree that there is a certain percentage that will pay off with 22 or Q-high. But in my opinion the number that will pay off a bet is not even half the number that will be ahead of you here and raise your sorry butt.
|
|
#5
12-20-2005, 03:00 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: River the underfull
It makes sense if you say the percentage is too low (and that may well be true). It didn't make sense when you said the typical player doesn't pay off. Because if he does it some percentage then of course he does pay off, just not always. But whatever, seems we are arguing semantics. Important thing is to decide if this percentage is adequate or not. Thought it was quite close from the beginning so perhaps I should rethink.
|
|
#6
12-20-2005, 03:05 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: River the underfull
[ QUOTE ]
It makes sense if you say the percentage is too low (and that may well be true). It didn't make sense when you said the typical player doesn't pay off. Because if he does it some percentage then of course he does pay off, just not always. But whatever, seems we are arguing semantics. Important thing is to decide if this percentage is adequate or not. Thought it was quite close from the beginning so perhaps I should rethink. [/ QUOTE ] I don't mind arguing semantics [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]. Just because the typical player doesn't pay off doesn't mean that *other*, atypical players won't. I just doubt there's sufficient numbers of of them.
|
|
#7
12-20-2005, 01:54 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: River the underfull
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] no one likes check/call? The guy called 2 cold on the flop here, I doubt it was with ace rag, and any baby pair or 6 is counterfeited. What else is he calling with? There are lots of draws he could be chasing, I dont think hell bluff the busted draw that often, but you never know, and the pot is big enough I dont want to fold, and i dont want to have to put 2 bets in either. also, how close is this PF? I fold here a lot, is that a leak? [/ QUOTE ] He is paying off with so many hands there. A-high, K-high, Q-high, the 22 bluff call, whatever. [/ QUOTE ] No, he's not. There *are* players that will do this, but absent a read, the typical 10/20 player will not call here with 22, K-high, or Q-high. [/ QUOTE ] yeah, I agree with my fellow wussy here [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
