|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
NL100 (deep): Floaty-Bluffy McSpew, or gooot?
Villain is 42/20/3.5. I play with him a lot live, and despite his numbers, he is weak/tight when it comes to playing big pots. I have bluffed him a lot on prior occasions and made him lay down big hands against me. He has, however, started to adjust and call me down a little lighter. His image of me is loose, very aggro. Still, he's susceptible to bluffs. Also, he doesn't usually bet 2/3+ the pot on any street without a fairly strong hand.
The cutoff has been playing pretty snug and passive. PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $1.00 BB (6 handed) Poker Stars Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: 2+2 Forums) Button ($107.30) SB ($224.10) BB ($114.40) UTG ($31.10) Hero ($184.15) CO ($101.30) Preflop: Hero is MP with A[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], 5[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]. <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises to $4</font>, CO calls $4, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, <font color="#CC3333">SB raises to $10</font>, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, Hero calls $6, CO calls $6. Flop: ($31) 2[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], 6[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], 4[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(3 players)</font> <font color="#CC3333">SB bets $20</font>, Hero calls $20, CO folds. Turn: ($71) 5[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font> SB checks, <font color="#CC3333">Hero bets $45</font>, SB calls $45. River: ($161) Q[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font> SB checks, <font color="#CC3333">Hero bets $109.15 (All-In)</font> |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: NL100 (deep): Floaty-Bluffy McSpew, or gooot?
I should add that Villain would not likely call a large bet with just a draw. Thus, I put him on an overpair after he called my turn bet (I actually had him on an overpair after he bet the flop, but the turn call confirmed it in my mind).
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: NL100 (deep): Floaty-Bluffy McSpew, or gooot?
I think he mucks TT+ there often enough
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Re: NL100 (deep): Floaty-Bluffy McSpew, or gooot?
This is pretty read-based, so it's hard to really say. But it seems okay.
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Re: NL100 (deep): Floaty-Bluffy McSpew, or gooot?
what's with his weak 3-bet pre? cause it sure looks like AA/KK in a vacuum and if he's started to look you up this may not be a good spot to bluff.
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Re: NL100 (deep): Floaty-Bluffy McSpew, or gooot?
[ QUOTE ]
what's with his weak 3-bet pre? cause it sure looks like AA/KK in a vacuum and if he's started to look you up this may not be a good spot to bluff. [/ QUOTE ] He's habitually an extremely weak bettor. His standard pf raise is 2x-3x. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Re: NL100 (deep): Floaty-Bluffy McSpew, or gooot?
[ QUOTE ]
He has, however, started to adjust and call me down a little lighter. [/ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Also, he doesn't usually bet 2/3+ the pot on any street without a fairly strong hand. [/ QUOTE ] That's already enough information. Did you happen to notice that he mini 3-bet pf and made a CB into 2 players on the flop? I suppose not as you called with a player yet to act. You'll find better spots to float than this. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Re: NL100 (deep): Floaty-Bluffy McSpew, or gooot?
[ QUOTE ]
Did you happen to notice that he mini 3-bet pf and made a CB into 2 players on the flop? I suppose not as you called with a player yet to act. [/ QUOTE ] Yes, I noticed. As I said, after his flop bet I thought he had an overpair. I wasn't too worried about the player left to act here b/c he had been pretty passive, too, thus the likelihood of him raising behind was pretty small. If he calls, that's good for me with my pair + gs. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Re: NL100 (deep): Floaty-Bluffy McSpew, or gooot?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Did you happen to notice that he mini 3-bet pf and made a CB into 2 players on the flop? I suppose not as you called with a player yet to act. [/ QUOTE ] Yes, I noticed. As I said, after his flop bet I thought he had an overpair. I wasn't too worried about the player left to act here b/c he had been pretty passive, too, thus the likelihood of him raising behind was pretty small. If he calls, that's good for me with my pair + gs. [/ QUOTE ] How is it good if you have two players to bluff out of the hand? You only have a gutshot on the flop and no odds to draw. If the passive player calls, he may have a flush draw which makes things much worse. If the aces are outs for you, the main villain probably won't pay off with KK. People don't like to fold overpairs and you think he's started to call you down lighter, just fold the flop and wait for a hand. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Re: NL100 (deep): Floaty-Bluffy McSpew, or gooot?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Did you happen to notice that he mini 3-bet pf and made a CB into 2 players on the flop? I suppose not as you called with a player yet to act. [/ QUOTE ] Yes, I noticed. As I said, after his flop bet I thought he had an overpair. I wasn't too worried about the player left to act here b/c he had been pretty passive, too, thus the likelihood of him raising behind was pretty small. If he calls, that's good for me with my pair + gs. [/ QUOTE ] How is it good if you have two players to bluff out of the hand? You only have a gutshot on the flop and no odds to draw. If the passive player calls, he may have a flush draw which makes things much worse. [/ QUOTE ] If the passive player behind me calls, then I'm not going to try to bluff on the turn or the river. My only point was that if he calls, at least that's better for my 6 out draw to a gutshot or set (immediate pot odds would have been 4.5:1, and implieds arguably would make it +ev on its own -- although we do have to discount b/c of flush, but then again I didn't include any Ace outs). It would not, however, be good for a bluff attempt. Understand, again, I'm not calling here b/c I want the passive player behind me to call; just saying that if he does, it's not terrible for me -- a raise by him would be terrible, and I didn't think it was likely. Not arguing with your advice, by the way, because you make good points, but I just wanted to explain my thinking and possible effects of the different possible actions. |
|
|