|
|
#1
03-11-2007, 06:44 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Back to Back #2... 2nd nuts vs. heavy aggression
I think all streets are questionable here...
BT is lagtard from hand #1. complete LAG. main villain is 30/6/.6 over 50, no other reads. I'm at $40, both villains have me covered (I'm reloading from the previous hand) This may be standard, but I just want to make sure. Absolute Poker No Limit Holdem Ring game Blinds: $0.10/$0.25 5 players Converter Pre-flop: (5 players) noob is BB with 6[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] K[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] UTG folds, CO calls, Button calls, SB folds, noob checks. Flop: 4[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 9[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 6[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] ($0.85, 3 players) <font color="#cc0000">noob bets $1</font>, CO calls, Button calls. Turn: 8[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] ($3.85, 3 players) <font color="#cc0000">noob bets $3</font>, <font color="#cc0000">CO raises to $8</font>, Button calls, noob calls. River: K[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] ($27.85, 3 players) <font color="#cc0000">noob bets $9</font>, <font color="#cc0000">CO raises all-in $30.5</font>, Button folds, noob calls. Results: Final pot: $88.85 
|
|
#2
03-11-2007, 07:46 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Back to Back #2... 2nd nuts vs. heavy aggression
Why overbet the flop with a non-nut draw?? I would probably lead for ~$0.7 there instead.
Considering CO is so passive and button cold-called I would 3bet the turn to avoid giving a free card to a set/As, button could well have sometime like As6. It also looks like CO has a good hand and probably isn't folding so I would just try and get it all-in on the turn. As played I assume you are trying to induce a push with your small river bet?? Personally I would just put in a normal sized bet or push.
|
|
#4
03-11-2007, 02:43 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Back to Back #2... 2nd nuts vs. heavy aggression
[ QUOTE ]
Why overbet the flop with a non-nut draw?? I would probably lead for ~$0.7 there instead. [/ QUOTE ] Yeah, that would be ideal, but damn Absolute requires you to enter in "0.7" instead of ".7" which really annoys me. lazy... i know
|
|
#6
03-11-2007, 02:48 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Back to Back #2... 2nd nuts vs. heavy aggression
Just type the .7 after the 0 that's already given.
Yes, bet smaller on the flop but you do have to bet it. Reraise turn, get your money in there. Bet more on the river.
|
|
#7
03-11-2007, 02:56 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Back to Back #2... 2nd nuts vs. heavy aggression
[ QUOTE ]
Just type the .7 after the 0 that's already given. Yes, bet smaller on the flop but you do have to bet it. Reraise turn, get your money in there. Bet more on the river. [/ QUOTE ] Oh... I'm a genius, I've been overbetting .85 cent flops for the past two weeks for nothing!!!
|
|
#8
03-11-2007, 03:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Back to Back #2... 2nd nuts vs. heavy aggression
[ QUOTE ]
Why overbet the flop with a non-nut draw?? I would probably lead for ~$0.7 there instead. [/ QUOTE ] you're wrong for two reasons: 1. with a NON-nut draw, we should be more willing to bet the flop because we get more folding equity vs the nut draw. with the nut draw, we might want to reduce our FE in order to get other worse draws to come along. 2. i don't think it makes much difference either way TBH. reraise the turn: you're getting called by all worse flushes, and prob sets too. there's nothing to gain from waiting until the river and you would hate to see another flush card fall or the board to pair.
|
|
#9
03-11-2007, 03:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Back to Back #2... 2nd nuts vs. heavy aggression
Get it in on the turn, and no you shouldn't worry too much about the nut flush here.
As for overbetting the flop, it isn't a big overbet I do this alot myself when the pot is small.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
