#11
|
|||
|
|||
Re: KK v tight-passive/passive, good river fold?
I have hundred of thousands of hands worth of full ring experience. This is an easy call.
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Re: KK v tight-passive/passive, good river fold?
What type of read would you have to have for it to be a fold?
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Re: KK v tight-passive/passive, good river fold?
I gave up, he made my head hurt [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Re: KK v tight-passive/passive, good river fold?
[ QUOTE ]
What type of read would you have to have for it to be a fold? [/ QUOTE ] My opponent flipping over the winning cards. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Re: KK v tight-passive/passive, good river fold?
Well I'm not trying to be a dick... just want as much input as possible. I have about 500k hands at 1/2 NL full ring at party and I usually make this call but after running into this situation 100s of times I thought I'd try something different.
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Re: KK v tight-passive/passive, good river fold?
Well... against some of the nits at party you'd honestly be chip spewing calling this. I wouldn't call this guy a nit but what reason do I have to call besides that calling is the "standard" play? Getting all-in with kk pre is "standard" but against certain players KK is an autofold if they try to get all-in, I think this is a similar sort of situation.
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Re: KK v tight-passive/passive, good river fold?
Maybe this was a dumb post I guess it's based mostly on reads, hard to ask other people for advice on reads
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Re: KK v tight-passive/passive, good river fold?
omfg call
tight players still like to draw to the nuts |
|
|