|
|
#11
09-26-2006, 03:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Blind defense hand
Tyler,
"i assume your sort of stuck calling a river raise?" I would probably make a crying call if he had raised the river but i doubt i am good very often against him. Brad, "Check/raise the turn." I can't or wont argue that this isn't correct. CoolWaTer, "maybe if u believed he was gonna fold to a check/raise but if u called he would call a river bet?" Right or wrong that is what i was thinking when i played the hand. Basically i thought i would extract more with the c/c, bet line than to c/r turn. Like i said i could be wrong. Matt, "KTs+ i 3-bet. K8s i muck." Pretty much me too. I certainly am not comfortable 3-betting here but so far(100 or so hands) i had not been out of line once and had only shown down very strong holdings. Button had been stealing at a pretty good clip and i felt this was a good time/decent enough hand to try it with. Clearly not something i do on a regular basis. This may be standard for better short handed players i have no idea. 
|
|
#12
09-26-2006, 03:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Blind defense hand
GRUNCHSTYLE
Something about the hand doesn't sit right with me. The three bet preflop seems unnecessary. The bet on the flop is pointless, (unless you're representing a set, overpair or 8-9?) and the check when you actually hit is pointless as well. Why not a c/r when the king hits? If the button reraises on the king, now you finally know where youre at. The bet on the river scares me a little too. Am i too weak in thinking a check call on the river is a better play? the bottom line: this guy has shown aggression since pre-flop. what's his range of hands? any pocket pair (6 of them beat us)? Big aces and big kings? There are eight king hands (not including varieties of suits) which beat us, and only three kings we can beat (K-6, K-4, K-3) . The button didn't slow down when the king hit, and the hero does nothing to find out where he's at. The only hand that calls the river bet likely has us badly beaten. This has got to be a -EV situation.
|
|
#13
09-26-2006, 04:05 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Blind defense hand
Puppernaut... please give me some pros and cons on why hero should not 3-bet it preflop if he is to continue with the hand. Once you're done with that, give me some pros and cons of why you would/would not continuation bet the flop after 3-betting preflop.
|
|
#15
09-26-2006, 04:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Blind defense hand
[ QUOTE ]
Puppernaut... please give me some pros and cons on why hero should not 3-bet it preflop if he is to continue with the hand. Once you're done with that, give me some pros and cons of why you would/would not continuation bet the flop after 3-betting preflop. [/ QUOTE ] Str8Fish: i should be more careful with my answers, no? I said "the three-bet seems unnecessary" because i'm not thrilled with K-8 suited in a tiny contested pot. If you wanna defend blinds against this guy, i'm positive there's a better hand with which it can be done. So, PRO: you don't LOSE MONEY with a MEDIOCRE HAND. CON: unlikely as it may seem, there are still other players in the hand, who could easily wake up with a hand that beats the hero and the villain. A three-bet MIGHT get us heads-up with the aggressive guy, but that's not a guarantee. I'd rather not get four sb into the pot against 2 others with K-8, out of position. As for post-flop, if you think this guy's on a steal, why not see a flop and outplay this guy? Yes, if we DO 3-bet pre flop, a continuation bet makes some sense, but again, we're investing money in a pot that we realistically shouldn't have built to begin with. I don't claim to be a pro player by any means, and my logic may be flawed, but i don't see why it is necessary to risk so much to gain so little. It sounds more like an ego play to protect a small blind when ultimately all you can beat is a bluff. This is a player who is described as "aggressive, solid". To me, it means he is in a position to win the most when he has us beat, and pay off less when he is behind. I prefer to concentrate on getting into hands with weaker player who will pay me off, not protecting a small blind against a solid player on a hunch. I may have way less experience than most of the posters on this site, so pardon me if my responses are ignorant-sounding. I appreciate people making me think about my logic in scenarios such as this. Also, i have zero experience in 6 max play. Perhaps this skews my logic significantly? Thanks for the homework assignment.
|
|
#16
09-26-2006, 05:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Blind defense hand
[ QUOTE ]
Party .5/1 6 max. Button is an aggressive solid short handed player. [/ QUOTE ] sounds like it's time for a table change. If he's been aggressively stealing my blinds I don't mind playing back here. Only thing I might have done different is save the 3bet for the flop. I like the turn c/c and the river bet.
|
|
#18
09-26-2006, 06:01 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Blind defense hand
[ QUOTE ]
to others: K8s is plenty good to defend against an aggressive stealer. if we're going to play here, we have to 3bet, though, because our hand is a lot stronger against 1 opponent than against 2. [/ QUOTE ] yep, i was thinking we were bb, if we're gonna play back, the flop is definate 3bet.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
