[Sunny Mehta]

Hi Bobbo,

Okay...


Hand 2: You make good points, and perhaps if the value of getting that second barrel was high (i.e. - your opponent's range was light and he was a known spewer when you let him, etc.) your line might be better. Although, that should also be countered by the fact that there are hands which he might call with now but fold later. i.e. - if he'll fold a pair on the turn if a one-card straight card comes, or if he'll call on the flop with overcards but fold the turn, etc.

Hand 3: I discussed this hand in detail in another thread - here's what said there:

[ QUOTE ]
If we actually assign these players ranges, hero probably has even less equity than we give credit for in the example!

First off, AP's range is way wider than AA/KK/AcKc. He's aggressive, and most of the time his flop bet is just a c-bet. I think it's far too optimistic to think that he's gonna stick his chips in with anything but a very strong hand after he bets the flop, gets raised by a tight player, and then sees an all-in from hero after that. What do you estimate is the probability that AP has a hand he's willing to commit to? It's pretty low.

Secondly, tight player's range alone is scary. If he has any pocket pair from jacks down to fours, hero is actually about a 2-to-1 dog against that range. Then even if you add in the fact that hero will get 2-to-1 on his money when (and that "when" is rare) AP comes along, the problem is that by adding AP's [strong] range into the equation hero's equity actually ends up being more like 25 percent (3-to-1).

Hero's draw is a weak non-nut straight draw on a flush draw board, his SPR is in the double digits, there's a bet and a raise in front of him, and he has zero f-equity. This is a fold.


[/ QUOTE ]


Hand 4: I like your line. Perhaps a bit advanced for that point in the book though. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Hand 5: Again, your line has merit. The only thing I don't like about the installment plan in this scenario is that the board is SO draw heavy. He's likely to have hands that will call now but fold later (without improvement) as opposed to slightly weaker made hands that are calling regardless.

Hand 6: I don't think we give a "definitive" answer on this hand because, as we mention, you have a few different options here. Not sure if I'd *always* bet here, but I do see your point.

Hand 10: Not sure if you misread or if I am misunderstanding you, but note that we do NOT have position in this hand. I agree that perhaps against certain wily players I might 4-bet, but for the most part I'd fold here a lot.

Thanks for the great comments. Glad you liked the book - can't wait for you to read Volume Two.

-S