|
|
|
|
#1
12-29-2005, 03:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Why did you checkraise?
[ QUOTE ]
stealing with small pocket pairs can't be profitable in the party 20 game, although i would love to see some numbers to refute or backup my statement. [/ QUOTE ] So you'll raise 77+ in that spot? 
|
|
#2
12-29-2005, 04:01 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Why did you checkraise?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] stealing with small pocket pairs can't be profitable in the party 20 game, although i would love to see some numbers to refute or backup my statement. [/ QUOTE ] So you'll raise 77+ in that spot? [/ QUOTE ] I'd go as low as 55+ if the numbers of the blinds showed enough possibility of fold equity. I hope my post didn't sound condescending, I definately didn't mean it to be that way. I just have found that 22-44 was not a stealing hand in this game. I do think you played the hand quite well after the flop.
|
|
#3
12-29-2005, 07:13 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Why did you checkraise?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] stealing with small pocket pairs can't be profitable in the party 20 game, although i would love to see some numbers to refute or backup my statement. [/ QUOTE ] So you'll raise 77+ in that spot? [/ QUOTE ] I'd go as low as 55+ if the numbers of the blinds showed enough possibility of fold equity. I hope my post didn't sound condescending, I definately didn't mean it to be that way. I just have found that 22-44 was not a stealing hand in this game. I do think you played the hand quite well after the flop. [/ QUOTE ] Hmmm, that's interesting. I am raising any playable hand here and most crappy hands as well. With position, the extra SB, and seeing that the CO has cheese I'm looking for excuses to get involved.
|
|
#4
12-29-2005, 07:31 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Why did you checkraise?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] stealing with small pocket pairs can't be profitable in the party 20 game, although i would love to see some numbers to refute or backup my statement. [/ QUOTE ] So you'll raise 77+ in that spot? [/ QUOTE ] I'd go as low as 55+ if the numbers of the blinds showed enough possibility of fold equity. I hope my post didn't sound condescending, I definately didn't mean it to be that way. I just have found that 22-44 was not a stealing hand in this game. I do think you played the hand quite well after the flop. [/ QUOTE ] Hmmm, that's interesting. I am raising any playable hand here and most crappy hands as well. With position, the extra SB, and seeing that the CO has cheese I'm looking for excuses to get involved. [/ QUOTE ] okay, fair enough. my problem with those hands is probably I don't play them well enough postflop in all honesty.
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
