|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
RAZZ, shame on reraising with worst hand?
OK I start with (A5)3 and get called by a guy showing a 6. 4th street I catch a deuce for A235, he catches a 5 and calls. 5th street I catch a King, he a 9. so it's (A5)23K vs. 659. he bets, I decide to reraise. Bad play in the long run???
OK, I'm still gonna submit this, even though I just kind of answered my question. I just did the percentages on it....if he has the best possible combo in the hole (A2)(which is very unlikely with the way he's played it) then it's pretty much a coin toss. If he's holding anything else, I'm the favorite. OK, anyway...I guess this turned into more of a comment than a question, but if there is anymore thoughts on it then I'd love to hear them. P.S. I LOVE HORSE ON POKER STARS |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: RAZZ, shame on reraising with worst hand?
at low limits its an easy raise. most people seem to still play with a bad hole card or two.
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: RAZZ, shame on reraising with worst hand?
Smooth draws to something are generally a favorite over a rough 9 unless the dead cards are really in your opponent's favor. Most people playing Razz don't know this, so jamming here is not only profitable because you are making money, it also makes your less than expert opponents think you're a stupid maniac fish.
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Re: RAZZ, shame on reraising with worst hand?
Assuming your opponent is clean (and likely he isn't)-
<font class="small">Code:</font><hr /><pre> Ad Kd 5d 3d 2d 246937 49.39 243981 48.80 9082 1.82 0.503 Ac 9c 6c 5c 2c 243981 48.80 246937 49.39 9082 1.82 0.497 </pre><hr /> But I still would not raise with your K because 1) if your opponent is aggressive enough he will re-raise you, and thats something that would not be pleasant 2) If your opponent is like many of the Razz players in the HORSE game he probably isn't clean, you want him to continue to make the error of betting each following round. Play possum, let your opponent do the work for you. And when he least expects it pop him one good! This is an important concept about pot size manipulation (from page 118) from Sklansky on Poker. TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Re: RAZZ, shame on reraising with worst hand?
[ QUOTE ]
A But I still would not raise with your K because 1) if your opponent is aggressive enough he will re-raise you, and thats something that would not be pleasant [/ QUOTE ] It would be very pleasant to get more money in with you having the better equity. I think u've lost something in ur reasoning somewhere. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Re: RAZZ, shame on re-raising with worst hand?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] A But I still would not raise with your K because 1) if your opponent is aggressive enough he will re-raise you, and thats something that would not be pleasant [/ QUOTE ] It would be very pleasant to get more money in with you having the better equity. I think u've lost something in ur reasoning somewhere. [/ QUOTE ] See point #2, it goes hand in hand with point #1. Also read the pages on pot size manipulation, its better to play possum and get him on a later street if you improve. TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Re: RAZZ, shame on re-raising with worst hand?
I wouldnt say its better to play possum if ur opp is willing ot jam it now. You can miss a bunch of bets playing passively.
edit; mosta these guys will call to teh bitter end w some ugly rough stuff. If they wanna put $$ in in a bad spot, I dont wanna be teh one slowing em down. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Re: RAZZ, shame on re-raising with worst hand?
[ QUOTE ]
I wouldnt say its better to play possum if ur opp is willing ot jam it now. You can miss a bunch of bets playing passively. [/ QUOTE ] I'd venture to think that Mr Sklansky is right. I don't have the free time at the moment to go into detail, read the book and we can revisit the discussion in 2 weeks when I return. TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Re: RAZZ, shame on re-raising with worst hand?
TT, you are wrong imo.
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Re: RAZZ, shame on reraising with worst hand?
dead cards matter quite a bit here.
|
|
|