![]() |
|
#41
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
"Don't you think he will raise 66+ here pretty much everytime on the turn." how about on the flop? [/ QUOTE ] he might, but i think commonly he will call and raise any non A or K turn and easily muck to schneids 3 town. |
|
#42
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] "Don't you think he will raise 66+ here pretty much everytime on the turn." how about on the flop? [/ QUOTE ] he might, but i think commonly he will call and raise any non A or K turn and easily muck to schneids 3 town. [/ QUOTE ] raise/folding turns in these games may bring the wolves to your door. |
|
#43
|
|||
|
|||
|
Your line is fine, but I like betting/3-betting the turn more. You know this guy is going to raise you a ton on the turn, right? This is what guys do to others when they are running bad. I can't see why you wouldn't want to gamble here. If you get 4 bet, call down.
|
|
#44
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
Your line is fine, but I like betting/3-betting the turn more. You know this guy is going to raise you a ton on the turn, right? This is what guys do to others when they are running bad. I can't see why you wouldn't want to gamble here. If you get 4 bet, you're dead. [/ QUOTE ] |
|
#45
|
|||
|
|||
|
I don't think so. I haven't (knowingly) played with this guy, but I stand by my original assessment. People pressure those they think are running bad. You have a great hand, and the JJ-flop isn't as scary as it seems when you have AA (is he cold calling with KJ? Unlikely.) Another line of merit is to bet the turn, get raised and bet the river out, calling a raise if it comes then. Depending on the player, this is better still. If the dude has quads, then so be it.
|
|
#46
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] "Don't you think he will raise 66+ here pretty much everytime on the turn." how about on the flop? [/ QUOTE ] he might, but i think commonly he will call and raise any non A or K turn and easily muck to schneids 3 town. [/ QUOTE ] raise/folding turns in these games may bring the wolves to your door. [/ QUOTE ] yes i understand this. But schneids said he was playing passively so i think folding to a 3bet here would atleast be the plan. |
|
#47
|
|||
|
|||
|
if ur running bad and ppl are taking a ton of shots at you i dont see why you wouldnt want to bet into them so they can go ahead and take a shot at you.
|
|
#48
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] The JJ flop just seems like it could be in the wheelhouse of JTs, QJs, KJs, hands that perhaps he would play for two cold feeling that headsup versus schneids is just fine, but hey, if i get action from around back I'm okay too. [/ QUOTE ] Why would he want to coldcall an UTG raise w/such a dominated hand? I feel it would be more likely for him to do it w/a mid pp. [/ QUOTE ] How does being dominated hurts you? It hurts you when your opponent puts you to tough decisions, either making you call some extra bets when you're probably losing, or perhaps occasionally playing back at you when he doesn't have much himself. Both of those things require aggressive play. If running bad turns someone into a calling station, then the domination is less of a concern. [/ QUOTE ] I was referring more to the preflop play. When a solid player opens UTG, calling w/hands is a mistake b/c unless you've got JJ, the inital raiser usually has you crushed. Unless villain did it for pure bluff value I.E. to push you off your hand if low cards hit, I don't see why he would want to cold call w/most hands that contain a J. |
|
#49
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
Your line is fine, but I like betting/3-betting the turn more. You know this guy is going to raise you a ton on the turn, right? This is what guys do to others when they are running bad. I can't see why you wouldn't want to gamble here. If you get 4 bet, call down. [/ QUOTE ] Isn't there some meta value to Schneid's line, as he stated in the OP "I've often meekly called down with whatever, and lost to their slightly better hands, and have been playing very passively postflop, as often happens when running not well...". By playing possum it also sets up future hands where his action will be misunderstood, thereby gaining an additional edge. Forgoing a little gamble now to gain in the future sounds like a good tradeoff provided he shows and the table is paying attention. If there wasn't the history Schneids sets up I'd of course prefer Sucker's line. TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] |
|
#50
|
|||
|
|||
|
I think you're mising Nate's point. Suppose there's a player playing very meekly and passively post-flop. He gets the minimum when he has a big hand because he's playing scared. Yet he will call down with his hands that are not quite as good as yours (as Schneids indicated he had been doing). Cold-calling such a player's pre-flop raises can be profitable because you're going to lose the minimum when you don't ouflop him and you're going to win more than you would against a player who is playing tougher.
Compare that to cold-calling against a player who is playing very aggresively and who is at his best. Now it's going to be a tough proposition for you since he's going to extract the maximum from you when you have a slightly worse hand and not pay you off when you have the goods. This is an oversimplification, but the point holds. Play more hands against weaker opponents, play fewer hands against tougher ones. |
![]() |
|
|