|
|
#31
06-09-2005, 04:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: I limp-reraise.
[ QUOTE ]
So would you still have led if the flop came ace-high? [/ QUOTE ] Lead any flop. The LRR and protected pot makes it easy to get away from your hand if the villain comes alive. 
|
|
#32
06-09-2005, 04:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I limp-reraise.
I don't like.
Based on the information you gave, I tend to think MP2's folding tendencies with many of the hands he raises in that spot (after 1 limper) stays the same or goes down slightly with the all-in player. You also provide no information about the game in general that would lend credence to your LRR = AA and the like other than it's Party 2/4. By itself, I don't think that's enough to make it more believable. Maybe I'm having a hard time getting away from my biases. I think it's an extra bet paid by your for just about the same FE on the flop/turn. Edit to add: opponent will also play draws "strongly" and if that means you occasionally lay down the best hand on the flop, I think the LRR gets slightly worse.
|
|
#33
06-09-2005, 04:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I limp-reraise.
[ QUOTE ]
I'm just not at all sure you get anyone to fold on the flop here. Given your read, you'd know best, but I think it's very rare that someone raises PF and folds the flop for 1 bet UI, closing the action. -d [/ QUOTE ] You have TT, get LRR by a tight thinking player, the flop comes Q high. Are you planning on calling 2.5 BBs hoping that the TAG LRR is fullofshit in order to win 4.5 BBs in the pot that you absolutely must showdown because an all-in protects the pot?
|
|
#34
06-09-2005, 04:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I limp-reraise.
[ QUOTE ]
stays the same or goes down slightly with the all-in player [/ QUOTE ] That makes no sense. He's not less likely to fold because of the all-in player. Generally, he's more likely to fold. That's what protected pots are all about. [ QUOTE ] I think it's an extra bet paid by your for just about the same FE on the flop/turn. [/ QUOTE ] It's not an extra bet unless I was planning on check-calling or just betting out on the flop after calling preflop, neither of which give me any significant amount of folding equity. It costs me the same as calling preflop and c/r'ing any flop. Rob
|
|
#36
06-09-2005, 04:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I limp-reraise.
Are tight thinking players LRRing pairs bigger than your TT at Party 2/4? Not to debate the merits of LRR as a strategy, but it doesn't seem necessary in that game and the OP has no info to tell us otherwise.
|
|
#37
06-09-2005, 04:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I limp-reraise.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] stays the same or goes down slightly with the all-in player [/ QUOTE ] That makes no sense. He's not less likely to fold because of the all-in player. Generally, he's more likely to fold. That's what protected pots are all about. [/ QUOTE ] Didn't you say earlier that you figure to have the all-in beat with your 88? If you can see that the all-in isn't likely to have much, why can't MP2? How does *this* all-in opponent protect *this* pot?
|
|
#38
06-09-2005, 05:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I limp-reraise.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] stays the same or goes down slightly with the all-in player [/ QUOTE ] That makes no sense. He's not less likely to fold because of the all-in player. Generally, he's more likely to fold. That's what protected pots are all about. [/ QUOTE ] Didn't you say earlier that you figure to have the all-in beat with your 88? If you can see that the all-in isn't likely to have much, why can't MP2? How does *this* all-in opponent protect *this* pot? [/ QUOTE ] MP2 can try that by raising the flop or by 4-betting preflop and certainly that's a danger. But someone has clearly represented a monster and the pot is protected. It's not the best time to make a move with very little. He is likely showdown committed if he plays back aggressively and Entity can safely release his hand.
|
|
#39
06-09-2005, 05:04 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I limp-reraise.
[ QUOTE ]
Are tight thinking players LRRing pairs bigger than your TT at Party 2/4? Not to debate the merits of LRR as a strategy, but it doesn't seem necessary in that game and the OP has no info to tell us otherwise. [/ QUOTE ] That's not the point. The issue is how the villain perceives Entity's hand strength after that happens. Entity LRR'd in a pot that MUST GET TO SHOWDOWN. It's hard to interpret that action as a bluff.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
