|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 2/4 NL- If it weren\'t for luck, I\'d lose everytime
I'm raisng KJ in LP 10 handed. I'm also raising tons of other hands way worse than KJ. If the table is looser than usual, I'll tighten up.
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 2/4 NL- If it weren\'t for luck, I\'d lose everytime
My issue with raising with K/J is that it has reverse implied odds. I would much rather raise with 8/6 suited, though it is a much worse hand, at least I know where I am post flop.
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 2/4 NL- If it weren\'t for luck, I\'d lose everytime
Here's the thing. I expect people to raise with AK and note the people who don't. Then with KJ, I'm fearing KQ. I very rarely play hands that go, check, cbet, call, check, check, check, check (or bet call) on K high flops against the same opponent twice if they show KQ or AK the first time.
Also, I probably play more 2/4 NL full ring on Party then any other human on earth. So, people tend to recognize me. So if people notice I am raising with KJ in LP, they are paying me off a lot more when I have bigger hands. So few of my hands get past the flop anyway (2/4 is pretty tight a lot of the time), that I don't mind the advertising value. Also, I like hitting top pair. Most of the time when I hit top pair, I'm ahead. Even with K2, I don't get too nervous as long as I hit a k (and excersize pot control) |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 2/4 NL- If it weren\'t for luck, I\'d lose everytime
Yeah, see, this analysis right here exercises the game of poker as a living, changing thing, and not as a categorical analysis that exists in a vacuum.
|
|
|