Two Plus Two Older Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Older Archives > Limit Texas Hold'em > Mid- and High-Stakes Hold'em
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-05-2005, 11:58 PM
shemp shemp is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 401
Default Re: three hands against one maniac

Maybe this is weak tight thinking, but if she'd go 12 bets with a single overcard on a 632 board, doesn't that make her call of your flop 4 bet pretty scary?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-06-2005, 12:07 AM
mike l. mike l. is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: oceanside, california
Posts: 2,212
Default Re: three hands against one maniac

"but if she'd go 12 bets with a single overcard on a 632 board"

how can someone know for sure if she would, but im saying that she might. as much as some of you will try to insist otherwise, my read of this player was solid and if she kept going i wouldve kept going and i wouldve been right to.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-06-2005, 12:30 AM
shemp shemp is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 401
Default Re: three hands against one maniac

[ QUOTE ]
my read of this player was solid and if she kept going i wouldve kept going and i wouldve been right to.


[/ QUOTE ] I guess that explains why you posted the hand.

The contrarian point (which isn't valid, of course) is that you aren't that far ahead of a random hand that someone exercising even a wee bit of judgment (like stopping after 4 bets with a random hand) isn't doing badly if you'll go 12 bets when they are even just a bit stronger.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-06-2005, 01:09 AM
mike l. mike l. is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: oceanside, california
Posts: 2,212
Default Re: three hands against one maniac

"you aren't that far ahead of a random hand"

so on a board of 632 with 64 against a random hand im not far enough ahead to want to get a lot of money in? can you show your work please?
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 12-06-2005, 01:16 AM
shemp shemp is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 401
Default Re: three hands against one maniac

Your editing destroys what I said.

You are nearly 7:3 against a random hand, ie, better than 2:1.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 12-06-2005, 01:22 AM
mike l. mike l. is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: oceanside, california
Posts: 2,212
Default Re: three hands against one maniac

ok let's start over then. i didnt understand what you said.

for starters you said:

"The contrarian point (which isn't valid, of course)"

and i assumed you were being sarcastic. were you?
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-06-2005, 01:31 AM
shemp shemp is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 401
Default Re: three hands against one maniac

Maybe sarcastic is the right word because of the "of course." I'm not sure. My point was to introduce something you hadn't thought about, even though it is effectively irrelevant -- by which I mean, either in point of fact or at least for the point of this discussion, my observation has no weight, because you know what you know. So before introducing that fact, I was conceding, "this doesn't matter."

Given that she is 2+:1 dog with a random hand. If she gives you 4 bets with such a hand, and goes to 12 when she's better, well, you aren't doing so well. And if she pops you legitimately on the turn, you've lost the profit from the flop. I kind of assume that she either rivered you with Q5o or you won the hand and are kicking yourself for not trying to get more value by re-popping her meaningless turn raise.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:15 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.