|
|
#41
03-02-2006, 12:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 30/60 QTs
[ QUOTE ]
A turn checkraise is incredibly obvious as the hand he holds against a thinking player. He is always going to get tested with this action and a better hand will never fold. He should have just went ahead and bet out on the turn. [/ QUOTE ] This I don't agree with. UTG's range is wider than Button's. 
|
|
#42
03-02-2006, 12:13 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 30/60 QTs
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] So on the turn the pot was 3.5 BB and including the 3 BB that UTG put into the pot on the turn he spent 4 BB trying to win those 6.5 BB. [/ QUOTE ] I have a small problem with this part of the post because it is mathematically misleading. It ignores something I think of as "recovered equity". While I'm sure you understand what's going on here, I sometimes see this mistake for real on these forums in preflop reasoning. When contemplating the turn 3-bet, the button knows he has the option of checking the river if it is -EV. Therefore he must feel any river bet is +EV. So he is not spending 4 BB to win 3.5, he is spending 3. Actually he is spending even less than 3 on the turn, since he is recovering some of the equity on the river. [/ QUOTE ] Yes, and sometimes he improves and wins the pot. But the figure I gave is a rough approximation.
|
|
#43
03-02-2006, 01:02 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
WTF?
[ QUOTE ]
So Jason had to twist some details to make this hand postable, but it hardly matters. I was the button and I played this hand poorly. I should have bet the flop and since I didn't I should have just not tried to make a play for such a small pot. But when the UTG player checkraised the turn I think I played the hand great. I did not bet the river because the river was a heart, I checked behind and he won with a flush. I told him I had Ace high. His turn checkraise is abysmal. -DeathDonkey [/ QUOTE ] Wait a second, but Jason said: [ QUOTE ] The Button had 6 9 and UTG's Q-high took the pot. [/ QUOTE ] I don't understand the "twisting of details" when it comes to announcing the results. Typically, we don't post results, unless there is a very compelling reason after a full discussion has ensued (or there is some strong entertainment value). I think this is a hand where results did seem appropriate to post, but I'm confused as to why we're hearing to different sets of results - one where hero calls with Q high on the river and wins and then the other were hero makes a flush and checks (or whiffs on a check raise attempt). FWIW - I feel compelled to point out that I (as probably many here) greatly value Jason's posts, and I can understand changing the river card to spark more of a debate I suppose, but why falsify the results of a hand? Surely there is no need to "prove" anything to anyone here is there? The analysis of the play up until the river was pretty interesting on its own, no? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]
|
|
#44
03-05-2006, 05:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 30/60 QTs
[ QUOTE ]
The responses to this thread were pretty much what I expected them to be. I'm quite frustrated by that. The Button had 6 9 and UTG's Q-high took the pot. I think both players played this hand pretty thoughtfully [/ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] So Jason had to twist some details to make this hand postable, but it hardly matters. I was the button and I played this hand poorly. I should have bet the flop and since I didn't I should have just not tried to make a play for such a small pot. But when the UTG player checkraised the turn I think I played the hand great. I did not bet the river because the river was a heart, I checked behind and he won with a flush. I told him I had Ace high. His turn checkraise is abysmal. [/ QUOTE ] I go away to FW's for a couple of days and come back to fine out this thread has taken a strange twist. This is just great. You think both players played the hand thoughtfully, then we find out that you made up the river action and a button hand that UTG could beat. Do you really think that it is highly likely that DD would have bet the turn with total dust, knowing that in a game like this other A's or PP's better than 4's will likely call, given the action so far?
|
|
#45
03-05-2006, 05:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 30/60 QTs
Button is usually unpaired when he didn't bet the flop and the turn pairs the board. Especially when it is a TAG on the button. I [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]LOVE[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] the Q-high call on the river and am saddened that this is not what actually happened.
Death, while UTG may have been a donkey, in my opinion, he stumbled on to a correct line against a player like you (or myself) given the action. He DOES get better hands to fold. Namely, king-high. And occasionally some opponents will fold a PP or an ace. Additionally, a river ace or king would split the pot. A call-down line is also ok for him.
|
|
#46
03-05-2006, 06:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 30/60 QTs
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] The responses to this thread were pretty much what I expected them to be. I'm quite frustrated by that. The Button had 6 9 and UTG's Q-high took the pot. I think both players played this hand pretty thoughtfully [/ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] So Jason had to twist some details to make this hand postable, but it hardly matters. I was the button and I played this hand poorly. I should have bet the flop and since I didn't I should have just not tried to make a play for such a small pot. But when the UTG player checkraised the turn I think I played the hand great. I did not bet the river because the river was a heart, I checked behind and he won with a flush. I told him I had Ace high. His turn checkraise is abysmal. [/ QUOTE ] I go away to FW's for a couple of days and come back to fine out this thread has taken a strange twist. This is just great. You think both players played the hand thoughtfully, then we find out that you made up the river action and a button hand that UTG could beat. Do you really think that it is highly likely that DD would have bet the turn with total dust, knowing that in a game like this other A's or PP's better than 4's will likely call, given the action so far? [/ QUOTE ] DeathDonkey did NOT have A-high. He did bet the turn with total dust. He 3-bet the turn with total dust. He TOLD UTG he had A-high when, in fact, he did NOT.
|
|
#47
03-07-2006, 06:50 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 30/60 QTs
"A turn checkraise is incredibly obvious as the hand he holds against a thinking player."
I don't buy this at all. It looks like some dummy just got fancy with big pockets than decided to make a random turn checkraise, which, let's be honest, is pretty damn rare even in the Bellagio 30-60 in a pot where nobody has anything. -Michael
|
|
#48
03-07-2006, 04:14 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 30/60 QTs
[ QUOTE ]
A turn checkraise is incredibly obvious as the hand he holds against a thinking player. He is always going to get tested with this action and a better hand will never fold. He should have just went ahead and bet out on the turn. -DeathDonkey [/ QUOTE ] doesnt this mean he should checkraise when he mostly has it, and bet when he doesn't? but then shouldnt he balance? this is oversimplified IMO.
|
|
#50
03-07-2006, 09:17 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 30/60 QTs
[ QUOTE ]
In an amazing live Bellagio 30/60 game, Hero limps UTG with Q[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] T[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]. Three more limpers to a smart, thinking LAG who limps otb. The SB completes and the BB checks. Flop: J[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 4[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 4[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]. Checked around. Turn: J[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] Checked to the Button who bets, SB folds, BB folds, Hero check/raises, folded to Button who 3-bets, Hero calls. River: 5[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] Check, bet, call. [/ QUOTE ] i will say now what i said when we discussed this hand in Vegas; the smart, thinking LAG played this hand like a total jackass.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
