|
|
#51
07-17-2006, 07:04 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Did I Get Pwned by Sklansky? - Strange 2-4 Hand
i think the bold mighta been overkill mike...
|
|
#52
07-17-2006, 07:05 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
another super weakly played sklansky hand
David is posting dead in the co at $200/400 and the bad player in the game open raiese (he plays a lot of hands and is generally agressive and is a huge showdown monkey) david 3 bets, I call in the sb, bb calls, bad player calls.
Flop A83 with 2 diamonds. check check guy bets, DS raises, we fold in blinds, guy calls. Turn 5s check bet call. River 8h guy checks and david checks behind with AK! The table erupts. I can't imagine in a milion years not betting this river vs the villain in this hand. Neither could anyone else. Unbelievable.
|
|
#53
07-17-2006, 07:22 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: another super weakly played sklansky hand
[ QUOTE ]
David is posting dead in the co at $200/400 and the bad player in the game open raiese (he plays a lot of hands and is generally agressive and is a huge showdown monkey) david 3 bets, I call in the sb, bb calls, bad player calls. Flop A83 with 2 diamonds. check check guy bets, DS raises, we fold in blinds, guy calls. Turn 5s check bet call. River 8h guy checks and david checks behind with AK! The table erupts. I can't imagine in a milion years not betting this river vs the villain in this hand. Neither could anyone else. Unbelievable. [/ QUOTE ] Wow.
|
|
#54
07-17-2006, 07:40 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: another super weakly played sklansky hand
im starting to feel silly defending ds, but the criticisms people are making are over the top i think. im not saying ds played this hand right or wrong, for all i know he played both of them awful and the opponent here would have called with Q high on the river. but people are saying these hands are indefensible and unbelievable and they just arent. under reasonable assumptions checking this river is right. say for instance the bb caps pairs > 88 preflop, and will 3 bet the flop or raise the turn with top pair. if thats the case and david needs to call a river raise checking is better. if im way off please tell me a hand range for his opponent that indicates otherwise.
|
|
#55
07-17-2006, 08:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: another super weakly played sklansky hand
I'm sorry, but this thread has generated far too much useless discussion on a very insignificant hand that will just not come up very often in long term play. There is just not much useful strategic material here. Most good players dont include 9-5o in their overall strategy and probably this hand should have just been chopped. Who cares that DS was in the blind. He is a great poker writer and player, but this hand is stupid, and whether or not DS missed a value raise on the end is also stupid. I dont mean to sound patronizing, but I think this happens too often on here lately- too much clutter and effort put into something that isnt important. Am I wrong?
-J
|
|
#56
07-17-2006, 09:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: another super weakly played sklansky hand
[ QUOTE ]
Most good players dont include 9-5o in their overall strategy [/ QUOTE ] What does this mean?? [ QUOTE ] Who cares that DS was in the blind. He is a great poker writer and player, but this hand is stupid, and whether or not DS missed a value raise on the end is also stupid. [/ QUOTE ] Why is it stupid?? Missing river value bets is one mistake that high stakes players cannot afford to be making, IMO. I think this is a pretty important thread, and I want DS to address it.
|
|
#58
07-17-2006, 10:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: another super weakly played sklansky hand
Isn't is possible David felt his opponent would have bet the river with an ace, but would have checkraised with an 8 or check-folded a missed flush draw?
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
