Re: channeling my inner TWP
 

If they're good, it shouldn't matter whether they have 66 or QQ. But since they're likely not quite that good, I'm going to say that MP just has to tighten up his range and will almost always lay down QQ here IMO, simply because of the strength of your line and the button left to act.

Re: channeling my inner TWP
 

Preflop - I like a PSB, $90?

Flop - insane spew

Re: channeling my inner TWP
 

you people don't like to bluff

Re: channeling my inner TWP
 

[ QUOTE ]
you people don't like to bluff

[/ QUOTE ]

because nobody ever folds

Re: channeling my inner TWP
 

I thought it was horrible at first, but now I like it.

Gets a little thinner if bb is very very bad since now button could be raising just enough to get it hu with donk if he would call with anything. Rest of the time button never has a hand that can stand a push.

Re: channeling my inner TWP
 

phil:

You are representing no hand at all. I can't think of any hand that plays it the way you did except 46c. Now most TAGs at this level, myself included, will see this bet while playing 8 tables and just auto-muck - but if Villain stops to think about the hand and realizes you're representing no hand, you might get looked up with more than you think. Thing is, a bluff here is just so insane that I doubt you get looked up.

EDIT - oh, and I'd never post this hand. I can't help but think you're going to be doing this play with the nuts in the coming days, too. Thing is, it's such a rare spot that advertising here won't make a difference.

Re: channeling my inner TWP
 

ehhhh. too expensive, and i wouldn't be too surprised if a big pair looked you up. The massive shove smells a lot like a draw too.

Re: channeling my inner TWP
 

gross

Re: channeling my inner TWP
 

[ QUOTE ]
If they're good, it shouldn't matter whether they have 66 or QQ. But since they're likely not quite that good, I'm going to say that MP just has to tighten up his range and will almost always lay down QQ here IMO, simply because of the strength of your line and the button left to act.

[/ QUOTE ]

keep in mind its tough making me fold, but I would insta-get all in with QQ. I would rationalize; bigger pairs wouldnt want a 4way pot, and since i open loose, definately rr/isolate, so if they're making a weird 3bet with AA/KK that they didnt reraise, good for them. as for 55, I think w/ a raiser and this board, EVERYONE just calls there, they give people with 2 outs (like me w/ an overpair) a chance to make a mistake, and they still will stack trips turn+. so, it leaves me fearing a 3, and since I only would credit A3 out there (for them calling pf, and it would have to be suited) I 'gamble' that they're semibluffing, pushing a weaker made hand, etc.

people fold overpairs to oeasily imo

the problems with OPs move is that its v possible he just shoved drawing dead (like trips or boat) even AA has him basically dead. so when he's called, he has no equity, and I just dont think people fold all that much

Re: channeling my inner TWP
 

http://www.fuzzyco.com/bare/nyif/Images/big/balls.jpg

I think this should work a lot, but it sure is expensive when it fails.

A quick look at equity:
Assuming we only get called by very strong hands, our equity when called:

Board: 5c 3c 3d
equity (%) win (%) tie (%)
Hand 1: 09.2424 % 08.95% 00.29% { AcQd }
Hand 2: 90.7576 % 90.47% 00.29% { KK+, 55, A3s, 43s }
I use A3s and 43s to represent all chances of a 3

If we add a few weaker hands, things still look pretty bad:
Board: 5c 3c 3d
equity (%) win (%) tie (%)
Hand 1: 17.4976 % 17.35% 00.15% { AcQd }
Hand 2: 82.5024 % 82.35% 00.15% { TT+, 55, A3s, 43s }

Your equity drops even more if MP ends up calling, and then button feels priced in with a draw:
Board: 5c 3c 3d
equity (%) win (%) tie (%)
Hand 1: 05.2946 % 05.16% 00.14% { AcQd }
Hand 2: 63.9649 % 63.76% 00.21% { KK+, 55, A3s, 43s }
Hand 3: 30.7404 % 30.64% 00.10% { KcJc, 6c4c }

Not to mention, there's still a guy left to act, which I will ignore, for simplicities sake.

Giving us a generous 12% equity:

We're betting $769 to win $300, laying 2.56:1.

When called, we lose:

88% * $769 = $677 when called by MP

and

88% * $579 = $510 when called by Button

Given that MP could easily be CBetting, and Button raised, and has more committed, we'll say button is twice as likely to call, giving us an average loss of:

($510*2 + $677)/3 = $566

when called.

Thus, the bluff needs to work:
$566 - 566X = 300X
$566 = 866X
X = 65%

If button is aggressive, but can make laydowns, I would say there's a decent chance that this would be profitable, but beware of donks, and people who have reason to be suspicious of you.