|
|
#11
10-04-2005, 03:01 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Hands that can improve vs dead hands/ implied odds vs. rev implied odd
Notice I said folding JJ in a multiway pot only; I gave another example of where I would not fold a similiar hand in a two or three handed pot. I'm talking about JJ say in a 7 or 8 way pot, especially if there was no raise pre-flop.
I'm glad you aspire to be beyond good, I was just making the point that many otherwise sound players who do make playing adjustments based on this concept turn into fish. The difference between being good and bad I should I have said the difference between being successful and not being successful because that I was I meant. 
|
|
#12
10-04-2005, 09:11 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Hands that can improve vs dead hands/ implied odds vs. rev implied odd
[ QUOTE ]
Another example is when you raise with QQ, get called by two players, the flop comes K76 and the first player bets into you. You usually should check and call. You lose less when your opponent holds a K and win more when he is bluffing or semi-bluffing. [/ QUOTE ] I'm not sure I agree with this. You're advocating waiting until the expensive streets to establish whether you're up against a hand you are possibly way behind? It's not clear if your opponents in this 'example' are definitely in the blinds or not because you say they are pf callers but then they bet into you. In general if I have QQ in a K76 flop I will check-raise if possible, but if I'm last to act I'll be betting here as I don't want anyone else to get a free card. If I'm then check-raised it would depend on the player as to whether I called, reraised or folded. btw, I agree with you that if you take the trouble to post a detailed thought process on poker, you should expect mature responses.
|
|
#13
10-04-2005, 09:29 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Hands that can improve vs dead hands/ implied odds vs. rev implied odd
Justin. This looks more like something for the Magazine. The things you are explaining are fine, but you are preaching to the choire in this forum and not adding anything that most posters here don't know. Thus Astro's response; your post comes of as somebdoy wanting to show his skills.
|
|
#15
10-04-2005, 09:45 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Hands that can improve vs dead hands/ implied odds vs. rev implied
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Does your response indicate that you can't find a one sentence summary? I've learned a lot from people with much less training than I have, but they all managed to grab my attention in a line or two. If you have something interesting to say, you might look for an interesting way to say it. In the meantime, I'll never know... [/ QUOTE ] In case you don't know JJNJustin is a legend in the SS forum Playing Big Pairs JTs [/ QUOTE ] don't forget this recent gem: NL post
|
|
#16
10-04-2005, 10:06 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Hands that can improve vs dead hands/ implied odds vs. rev implied
The problem I have with your post is that you ignore the size of the pot. In multi-way pots the pot is often very big on the flop, making some of your suggested flop folds bad. The example of checking and folding JJ on a 678 flop, for instance. If you raised before the flop and the pot is multi-way, check-folding would be a mistake. If there are people who think like you, there is definitely merit to the concept of tryting to win the big pots with aggressive action. So it would be very correct for me to raise a bettor with 98 or A7 on that flop.
|
|
#17
10-04-2005, 10:40 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Hands that can improve vs dead hands/ implied odds vs. rev implied
[ QUOTE ]
Justin. This looks more like something for the Magazine. The things you are explaining are fine, but you are preaching to the choire in this forum and not adding anything that most posters here don't know. Thus Astro's response; your post comes of as somebdoy wanting to show his skills. [/ QUOTE ] To the OP: This is correct and put in a kind way. To a lot of these posters, what you're saying is just common poker sense. People who haven't learned these concepts a long time ago probably shouldn't be playing mid/high. For the sake of discussion, though, I'll add my own 2 cents. All of the situations you onlined are basically discussing how far you're ahead of the opponents' hands that you're beating and how far you're behind those that you aren't. Or, to put it in acronyms, WAWB/WASB/SAWB/SASB with A = ahead, B = behind, W = way, S = slightly. One classic WAWB situation is AA on a 922r board with a few opponents (maybe 3 others). Any of them that are behind are drawing to 2 outs, but if you're behind, then you're drawing to 2 outs. I'm not sure what you'd advocate doing, but I sure hope it isn't check/folding because of the possibility that you're behind to trips. Depending on the number of opponents and the opponents themselves, I may just be calling the whole way down, or I may be pumping the pot. One WASB situation is a set on a possible straight or flush board.I'd probably advocate pumping the pot, especially on the earlier streets. That way, if you're behind, you're not losing as much on each bet. With multiple opponents in the pot, even if you're behind, your equity may dicate that raising is +EV. For SAWB situations, I personally like to call down in HU pots and fold in large pots. Ie. the QQ situation you pointed out, except with more opponents. With only 2 opponents, that's a definite raise if the opponent isn't a super-passive type. An SASB hand might be 99 on a 876 flop. Against a large field, I'll just be calling unless I improve. Against a small field, I'll be betting/raising for equity and to push overs out. Also, it's nice to charge people with a 9 to draw for a chop. A lot of posters are probably going to dislike this post, because different hands vs different opponents should be played differently. I understand that reads and types of opponents change the correct play. I'm only discussing a basic, standard play against your average opponent or unknowns. A couple things I'd like to point out in your post. Check/folding JJ on a 876 flop is weak, as someone pointed out earlier, and bottom set is not a WAWB hand vs a possible straight, only a higher set.
|
|
#18
10-04-2005, 12:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Hands that can improve vs dead hands/ implied odds vs. rev implied odd
[ QUOTE ]
Notice I said folding JJ in a multiway pot only; I gave another example of where I would not fold a similiar hand in a two or three handed pot. I'm talking about JJ say in a 7 or 8 way pot, especially if there was no raise pre-flop. [/ QUOTE ] if you're in a 7 to 8 way pot w/ JJ and it went unraised you made a mistake. [/ QUOTE ] I'm glad you aspire to be beyond good, I was just making the point that many otherwise sound players who do make playing adjustments based on this concept turn into fish. The difference between being good and bad I should I have said the difference between being successful and not being successful because that I was I meant. [/ QUOTE ] IRregardless, there were a bunch of holes in your post ala the one i just pointed out...not going to go through them all. Barron
|
|
#19
10-04-2005, 03:09 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Hands that can improve vs dead hands/ implied odds vs. rev implied
Wow, you keep coming back for more! (page down and read, that's actually a different thread)
|
|
#20
10-04-2005, 05:02 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Hands that can improve vs dead hands/ implied odds vs. rev implied odd
tl;dr
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
