Did I Get Pwned by Sklansky? - Strange 2-4 Hand

[DcifrThs]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
well, one thing i haven't seen mentioned is the following:

how do you think kevin and others will react to david when he does show even mild aggression in similar spots (that tend to occur quite often)

imo they'll either give too much action (thinking "well he doesn't bet w/ the goods so he probably doesn't have 'em here") or too little action (thinking "jeez, if he doesn't even play 2pr strong he must have a monster now")

these are hyperboles but basically it can be possible that the bets he makes up in determining which opponents are thinking which way against him likely far outweight the one or two bet cost of playing this hand as slow as he did.

Barron

[/ QUOTE ]

i dont see how you could possibly say w/ any degree of certainty that DS will somehow gain bets that 'far outweigh' those he may have lost here. i guess he indeed may simply be trying to mix up his play and make himself tough to read in similar future situations. your hypothesis seems very vague, nebulous, and speculative though, and there doesnt seem to be any way to really know for sure that you will somehow make up these lost bets b/c you checked three times w/ 2pair and never raised. maybe you are correct, but i dont think the benefits of playing 2pair like this 'far outweigh' bets he lost. perhaps he had a completely different rationale here (i.e. he saw OP as superaggro)

[/ QUOTE ]

i was just entertaining a possibility. what do you think "mixing up his play" is meant to accomplish? makes him tougher to read...i.e. he'll pick up pots (too little action) where he otherwise couldn't have or get too much action (too much action) where he again otherwise shouldn't based on the way some opponents may react to his playing a hand like this. of course my hypothesis is vague and nebulous...there is no way to know for sure thats what he was thinking. he gave up a (to many people) obvious big bet or so in the hand (namely not c'ring the river) and the only way that this is interesting is if he is logically thinking about why.

thats the assumption we're under so unless DS played an unthinking or totally uncaring hand, then there must be some reason as to why he chose the line he did. i was putting forth a hypothesis where ONE picked up small pot would already more than make up for the expectation of bets in a blind battle w/ A7o in the sb. i dont have the #s but im sure somebody has the expectation of A7o HU OOP in the sb. it's probably just under 1bb. saying he thought the OP was very agro makes even less sense though in terms of giving up expectation.

do you see why? [img]/images/graemlins/shocked.gif[/img]

Barron