|
|
#31
12-02-2005, 05:53 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: AA
I've thought about this for a while and I really don't agree with your guy's reads. I don't think she has AQ here often enough for a bet to show any profit, but if you guys do, bet-fold away.
Rob 
|
|
#32
12-02-2005, 05:59 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: AA
[ QUOTE ]
She would play AQ the same against me, maybe even AsKs. At least until the river. [/ QUOTE ] The goal posts are shifting. This passive person playing higher than usual 4 bets preflop and 4 bets the flop with AQ? Can she have KQ? Once the river hits you can rule out AsKs, so that's not relevant. Anyway, I guess you've answered the question what you put her on before betting the river: AA, KK, or AQ... But one more question: Since you know that she will never raise a worse hand, and will call or check with some hands that you beat, why do you post this hand which you played so perfectly?
|
|
#33
12-02-2005, 06:14 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: AA
[ QUOTE ]
I agree with Dave, AA or KK is too narrow. There are a few other hands she could have. It is difficult for me to explain why I feel this way, but the combination of factors, (her position and image, Dave's position and image, the flop action, the turn action, and the board) leads me to believe there are a few worse hands she will call with but never bet (very few, e.g. AQ, AK). [/ QUOTE ] Yes. If you fully ignore the player profile and the preflop/flop action, sure. There just aren't that 'few more worse hands' she'd play that way all the way through, imo. AK? only spades. AQ? Not preflop. What other hands do you really think she'd play this way? It looks alot like KK. Easy check and call if you're planning on putting another bet in. Unless you can think of something she might actually fold here for a single bet. I can't. b
|
|
#35
12-02-2005, 06:21 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: AA
[ QUOTE ]
She is too passive. I 5-bet the flop, and I don't think that 4-betting AQ in a stealish situation is a litmus test for proper aggression. [/ QUOTE ] Passive players generally aren't that aggressive with steals either. b
|
|
#38
12-02-2005, 10:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: AA
[ QUOTE ]
He never said she was passive. He said she was a little too passive. Maybe he should explain what that means. To me it means she plays aggressively, but misses a lot of bets. [/ QUOTE ] I know what you are getting at, and yet I think you are contorting the language here. Aggressivity is a continuum, where "too passive" indicates a tendency in one direction, which is imperfectly, but fairly, abbreviated as "passive" -- beyond that, I agree the original speaker has to say. Note that you are arguing on a different front than the OP, whose opinion is not that she isn't passive, but that her behaviour in the hand with AQ isn't particularly aggressive.
|
|
#40
12-02-2005, 11:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: AA
[ QUOTE ]
Given that there's $1,320 in the pot, that she thinks she's playing against a crazy person, and that the others would see a fold in an ubermegapot for one more bet on the river, I'd have called. [/ QUOTE ] Andy, certainly you must have a number of players you see again and again where you know they aren't raising the river without a hand that beats Aces, regardless of how crazy/dumb/aggressive their opponent is.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
