KJ with Ansky 10/20

[Jason Strasser (strassa2)]

[ QUOTE ]
he's prolly checkin behind the turn with KJ or KT

[/ QUOTE ]

this is definitely not going to always be the case

[VENGEANCE]

pretty standard fold against this type of player imo, he doesn't bet one pair hands here most of the time, there are many two pair+ hands here on this board which he has or he has nothing. And against this type of player, he doesn't have nothing

[AcTiOnJaCsOn]

fold, he has 10 j

[DJ Sensei]

yea i think this is a fold, too. though your hand does look weak, I don't think he'd be betting this turn too thinly, as a matter of pot control. and if he doesnt have a better made hand than you already, he's drawing live enough to check behind and try to get there rather than turn it into a semibluff and risk playing for stacks while pretty far behind.

also, if you just call, its really hard for you to do anything on the river most of the time, especially when oop. a little of the ol' implied threat, if you will. and you're not deep enough to bluff scare cards.

[Nielsio]

Maybe this will help:

Anksy aggression factors and vpip ranges:

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showth...page=0&vc=1

[king_of_drafts]

that doesn't tell me anything except that I'm jealous of ansky

[Isura]

[ QUOTE ]
that doesn't tell me anything except that I'm jealous of ansky

[/ QUOTE ]

[KingDan]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
this is sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo flow dependent

[/ QUOTE ]

Are any close decisions not flow or player dependent?

[/ QUOTE ]

Say you have one of these 'it depends' moments ( You feel dude is likely to be making a move etc)

Is there anyway to analyze it after the fact or is just a matter of being right or wrong THAT time?

[/ QUOTE ]

First of all, of course there are decisions that are not flow or player dependent. I mean, some are so clear cut that it would take ridiculous conditions to change the "correct" or "best" answer.

Of course you can analyze the hand afterwards. Sometimes, after looking at all the factors, you decide "this factor was stronger and I didn't make it contribute to my decision as much as it should have." Other times, you say "well, I still like my play, and I'm actually not sure how much I should have factored this in."

However, in almost all cases you will know the meta at the moment better at the exact time of the decisions. Hence, I could say that I would CF this vs Ansky sometimes, or CC the turn and CF the river sometimes, or lead-call the turn, or anything, based upon how I think he will react based on the hands in the immediate past.

I can definitely see a dynamic where I bet the turn for value and call a shove; or bet the turn for value and shove the river for value. I just don't think that metagame exists between these two.

[/ QUOTE ]

for the record I was thinking more along the line of calling river cr, or calling a 4 bet AIPF light or something.

Been on my mind and hadn't really seen a spot to post about it.

[jlocdog]

[ QUOTE ]
why'd you pussy out on the turn crablarrrrrrrrr?

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed

[BalugaWhale]

i dont really think if we bet the turn he plays with many hands that are worse than us, i think c/f or c/c are much better plays depending on how the game is going