[Praxising]

[ QUOTE ]
As for this hand, if you're good at reading your opponents then a lot of times you have to go with your reads. Otherwise you're too easy to bluff and become easy to read yourself. Giving loose/bad players too much credit for a good hand can be just as costly as giving solid players too little credit.

[/ QUOTE ]
I completely agree and rarely do this, especially against two players. And only if I have a really good read - I was as close to certain as one can be without actually seeing the cards that I had the best hand here or a hand so close to best as to be a virtual tie. I don't generally play this way. I posted it for entertainment and wondering if everyone calls 6th - and also thought you'd appreciate it after the "strategy at .50/1" posts in the other thread.

Here's a fun fact, I ran the 4th street hands through the simulator along with the dead cards:

9K28 = 14.34%
QA67 = 43.11%
56QA = 42.55%

And, as we know, the 14% won! He owes us both some Sklansky bucks!

BTW, I did my November stats (by hand but I used a calculator) and I made 4.3 bb per hour on average. Is that good? Average? Crummy? I took your advice from another thread about limiting variance (I know, I know, this hand doesn't reflect it!) and I think it helped steady down my game quite a bit. Thanks for sharing!