Deep Stack: 22 - Page 4

jjberns · #31 03-15-2007, 11:40 AM

I snap fold this turn. You are calling to chop a $65 pot for the rest of your stack 150 BBs? No way is this profitable, and he is not bluffing off this much of his stack here. He has 67 90% here, and he does not go this nuts with a 2.

I used to make this call and lost 100% of the time against anybody but a huge donkey. I instafold in these situations anymore, its the most aggravating way to lose a stack, puts me on tilt, and i hate myself afterwards.

If you want to make this call, more power to ya.

scallop · #32 03-15-2007, 11:48 AM

Villian is 28/20/1.5 - now Im not that sure what this means, but doesn't it suggest a TAG ??? Does he really call OOP from the sb with 67?? Does he c-raise this flop? Doesn't two pair or set check raise flop more often that the guy who flopped the nuts on a rainbow?

Im not saying you never see 67, and if you do its just a total cooler, but I think 67 is less likely than two pair or a set.

Casper05 · #33 03-15-2007, 11:49 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Villian is 28/20/1.5 - now Im not that sure what this means, but doesn't it suggest a TAG ??? Does he really call OOP from the sb with 67?? Does he c-raise this flop? Doesn't two pair or set check raise flop more often that the guy who flopped the nuts on a rainbow?

Im not saying you never see 67, and if you do its just a total cooler, but I think 67 is less likely than two pair or a set.

[/ QUOTE ]winner

scallop · #34 03-15-2007, 11:51 AM

whats winner?

did i get a prize or am i now a massive donkey?

Casper05 · #35 03-15-2007, 11:52 AM

[ QUOTE ]
whats winner?

did i get a prize or am i now a massive donkey?

[/ QUOTE ]no, I completely agree with everything you said

MTSuper7 · #36 03-15-2007, 12:07 PM

Most TAGs don't bet $235 into a $65 pot if they have the nuts, do they? Does villain have reason to believe you are a donk? Maybe he thought you played the flop like AK or AQ would and expected you to see his overbet as a bluff. Generally speaking, I don't see how villain can put you on a 2 which is really the only card anyone could hold and feel comfortable calling this bet. 6-7 seems really unlikely to me. Again, why would he overbet with the nuts? Definitely call here.

MTSuper7 · #37 03-15-2007, 12:07 PM

Most TAGs don't bet $235 into a $65 pot if they have the nuts, do they? I'm thinking he did this so that it looks like a bluff attempt to steal the pot. Maybe he thought you played the flop like AK or AQ would. Generally speaking, I don't see how villain can put you on a 2 which is really the only card anyone could hold and feel comfortable calling this bet. 6-7 seems really unlikely to me. Why would he overbet with the nuts? Definitely call here.

vos · #38 03-15-2007, 12:40 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
many different opinions

please post outcome if you called

[/ QUOTE ]

no, posting results always makes people think about the whole hand super results orieted.

[/ QUOTE ]

i know dude, i mean afterwards the discussion! [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
would like to know the outcome...

suited77 · #39 03-15-2007, 12:56 PM

The more I look at it, the more I think villain wants you to snap call with AA.
I hate it and feel sick about it, but I think we have to fold

FishSticks · #40 03-15-2007, 01:15 PM

What a weird hand. I'd be shocked if villain was doing this on the come (although poker shocks me plenty). The only thing that makes sense to me here is that villain holds 67 or villain holds AA and is trapping. If he was prone to superoverbets with draws you'd think you would have noticed it by know, after being at the table for a while.

At first I felt it was an easy call and you'd see sets here often, but the more I think about the less and less confident I get in a call here and lean towards folding.