200/400 NL - Overbet = Nuts?
 

Rate these bluffs:

First against NicholasJ, second against an unknown:

------------------
HAND #1
------------------

Full Tilt Poker, $1/$2 NL Hold'em Cash Game, 6 Players
LegoPoker Hand History Converter

Hero (BTN): $304
SB: $149.80
BB: $81.50
UTG: $261.35
MP: $477.35
CO: $244.20

Pre-Flop: 5[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 3[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] dealt to Hero (BTN)
UTG raises to $7, 2 folds, Hero calls $7, SB calls $6, BB folds

Flop: ($23) 6[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] A[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 7[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] (3 Players)
SB checks, UTG bets $18, Hero calls $18, SB folds

Turn: ($59) 7[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] (2 Players)
UTG checks, Hero bets $40, UTG calls $40

River: ($139) 8[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] (2 Players)
UTG checks, Hero bets $239 and is All-In




------------------
HAND #2
------------------

Full Tilt Poker, $2/$4 NL Hold'em Cash Game, 6 Players
LegoPoker Hand History Converter

MP: $125
CO: $400
BTN: $463
SB: $676.50
Hero (BB): $400
UTG: $865

Pre-Flop: 5[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 6[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] dealt to Hero (BB)
3 folds, BTN raises to $14, SB folds, Hero raises to $44, BTN calls $30

Flop: ($90) 2[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 9[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] A[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] (2 Players)
Hero bets $60, BTN calls $60

Turn: ($210) K[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] (2 Players)
Hero bets $296 and is All-In

Re: 200/400 NL - Overbet = Nuts?
 

I have played a few hundred hands with NicholasJ, no history.

Re: 200/400 NL - Overbet = Nuts?
 

dont like any of this unless u do it with the nuts aswell.

majority of the time you arent betting a FH like this etc especially hand 2

Re: 200/400 NL - Overbet = Nuts?
 

They don't know if I do this with the nuts or trips in the first hand, something like AK/AA/KK in the second. I'd rather not say if I do.

Re: 200/400 NL - Overbet = Nuts?
 

Well in hand 2 the overbet facet of the hand doesn't really matter that much, since most bets you make are committing you. If you just potted it and left yourself 80 back it wouldn't make a ton of sense. This seems kind of dicey against a total unknown to me, but maybe I'm being nitty.

In hand 1 I don't really know your opponent, so I don't have great insight - but I wouldn't expect him to c/c the turn to c/f the river on a blank given the board and action, etc. I don't know, though - maybe the overbet will freak him out.

Re: 200/400 NL - Overbet = Nuts?
 

Hand 2 I think the turn a great card to do this. Obv because of equity but also because of how it doesn't help his range/helps what I'm repping. Agree/disagree?

Re: 200/400 NL - Overbet = Nuts?
 

hand 1 no

hand 2 bet bigger flop so you have closer to pot on turn. Villian dependent also.

Re: 200/400 NL - Overbet = Nuts?
 

[ QUOTE ]
hand 1 no

hand 2 bet bigger flop so you have closer to pot on turn. Villian dependent also.

[/ QUOTE ]

What range do you put villain on in hand 1, and against a TAG, how much of it do you think he'll call with?

Re: 200/400 NL - Overbet = Nuts?
 

Hand 1 looks like a bluff. You're really only representing 66 or air, but you'd probably try to actually get some value with 66.

The bluff looks much better on hand 2, but there doesn't seem to be any reason to shove the turn. Betting $140 accomplishes exactly the same thing since there's almost no hands that call $140 but fold to the shove. If he has top pair then he's stacking, if he has QQ or whatever then he's folding for $140 or the shove. Nice to give him a chance to make a big mistake and just call with AQ or whatever.

Re: 200/400 NL - Overbet = Nuts?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Hand 1 looks like a bluff. You're really only representing 66 or air, but you'd probably try to actually get some value with 66.

The bluff looks much better on hand 2, but there doesn't seem to be any reason to shove the turn. Betting $140 accomplishes exactly the same thing since there's almost no hands that call $140 but fold to the shove. If he has top pair then he's stacking, if he has QQ or whatever then he's folding for $140 or the shove.

[/ QUOTE ]

In Hand 1, no [censored] way I'd check behind AK/AQ/random 7, and pushing is ok. His hand looks a hell of a lot like AT/AJ/etc.

In Hand 2, if I had some very good hand that I wanted to bet to protect/for value, I'd push as well; betting 2/3 or 3/4 leaves you with dumb stack sizes.

Whether or not villain knows this/thinks on this level is way more important any other read.

Re: 200/400 NL - Overbet = Nuts?
 

Hand 1: of course you would not check behind AK/AQ or a 7. On the same note, you also wouldn't typically overbet shove the pot for more than a buyin when looking for value. Don't forget to not only consider his range, but also what sort of range we are representing.

Hand 2: you are failing to understand the point of not shoving here. There are basically no hands that call a second barrel, but fold to a shove. Given the board texture, villain likely either has an ace or some pocket pair or nothing. He's stacking off with aces, and he's folding pocket pairs/air to a second barrel.

The point of not shoving is to allow your opponent to make a huge mistake. If he has a hand like AQ that he's willing to stack off with that just calls (instead of shoving) then we have induced a huge mistake. Since we save a quarter of a buyin (or more) when we don't hit, but we still earn the same when we do hit.

Re: 200/400 NL - Overbet = Nuts?
 

i dont know really anything about your game but for these bluffs to work especially in hand 1 you have to be able to value bet pretty thin against thinking players.

I rate your bluffs on first level as fine. As in, I dont think you have much therefore ill bet alot to make you fold. I dont think you can rep a strong repuable range

Re: 200/400 NL - Overbet = Nuts?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Hand 1: of course you would not check behind AK/AQ or a 7. On the same note, you also wouldn't typically overbet shove the pot for more than a buyin when looking for value. Don't forget to not only consider his range, but also what sort of range we are representing.



[/ QUOTE ]

if u dont like hand 1 its probably because you think hes going to call too much with AJ/AT because OP is not representing much. so why cant OP be shoving AK/AQ on river if you think villian will call with AJ/AT..

Re: 200/400 NL - Overbet = Nuts?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Hand 1: of course you would not check behind AK/AQ or a 7. On the same note, you also wouldn't typically overbet shove the pot for more than a buyin when looking for value. Don't forget to not only consider his range, but also what sort of range we are representing.

[/ QUOTE ]

if u dont like hand 1 its probably because you think hes going to call too much with AJ/AT because OP is not representing much. so why cant OP be shoving AK/AQ on river if you think villian will call with AJ/AT..

[/ QUOTE ]

It is a matter of percentages. When we're bluffing for 2x potsize, he doesn't have to call very often for it to be -EV for us. When we're value betting for 2x potsize, he has to call rather frequently to make it +EV compared to a normal 3/4-1x potsize bet we think he would usually call.

Re: 200/400 NL - Overbet = Nuts?
 

i give you 0 out of 10 for both [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

Re: 200/400 NL - Overbet = Nuts?
 

Hand 1 I'm not bluffing twice the pot size.

Re: 200/400 NL - Overbet = Nuts?
 

In hand 1 you represent 66 only. Like Bilbo said, no way you should check behind here with AQ, but he is not gonna belive you v-bet it this hard.

I don't like hand 2 that much. He is not folding an A, and he might just have made a set with KK.

Re: 200/400 NL - Overbet = Nuts?
 

hand 1 I dont think your turn bet size meshes with your river overbet.

hand 2 um yeah why not

Post deleted by Ryan Beal
 

Re: 200/400 NL - Overbet = Nuts?
 

hand 1 looks good
hand 2 looks bad