Spew or Sexy: You decide!

[Plus1Plus1]

[ QUOTE ]

No offense, but it seems like you need to get over yourself...you made a bluff, he folded, congrats...some people seem to think that overall it's a losing play, others think it's kind of sexy, but more think spew...Don't post a hand as "sexy or spew?" if you're only interested in having your ego stroked by people saying it's sexy, and don't want to even contemplate the possibility that it is spew.

[/ QUOTE ]

[James00]

[ QUOTE ]

No offense, but it seems like you need to get over yourself...you made a bluff, he folded, congrats...some people seem to think that overall it's a losing play, others think it's kind of sexy, but more think spew...Don't post a hand as "sexy or spew?" if you're only interested in having your ego stroked by people saying it's sexy, and don't want to even contemplate the possibility that it is spew.

[/ QUOTE ]
Everyone who thinks its spew, arent giving any valid reasons. Put him on a range, etc.

Me get over myself? HAR HAR HAR!

[Keyser.]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

No offense, but it seems like you need to get over yourself...you made a bluff, he folded, congrats...some people seem to think that overall it's a losing play, others think it's kind of sexy, but more think spew...Don't post a hand as "sexy or spew?" if you're only interested in having your ego stroked by people saying it's sexy, and don't want to even contemplate the possibility that it is spew.

[/ QUOTE ]
Everyone who thinks its spew, arent giving any valid reasons. Put him on a range, etc.

Me get over myself? HAR HAR HAR!

[/ QUOTE ]

This is complete spew. What range are you assiging him? It seems to me that the only though process you could possibly have behind this hand is "well I'll go all-in, I hope he doesn't have anything." that is not good poker

What exactly about this spot makes you want to bluff? It's 3-handed, he's raising with someone left to act, etc. What range do you think he has to raise flop and then fold to a 3-bet when he could easily put you on a draw?

[wrschultz]

Ok, I'll say it again. This is a play that is good sometimes, and only against palyers who will fold 88-TT kind of hands... If he wont fold these, don't do it. If he will fold these, do it once in a while. Anyone who says it is complete spew and always spew is dead wrong...

EDIT: FWIW, AJ isn't really much better than A2 assuming we make the move, because have established that if we make the move, we think he is capable of folding at least 88-TT. We don't think he will fold JJ+ here, so A2 fairs basically the same against his calling range. Make this play with any ace against the right players with the right frequency and it IS +EV.

[James00]

keyser your questions have already been answered.someone who thinks its complete spew do you mind giving a reasonable explanation.

[James00]

Keyser and all other in "spew" camp:
Heres my logic...

[ QUOTE ]

This bet tells me he usually has one of three things:
1. the goods (pay me!),
2. a flush draw(slow down!)
3.a mid pair(do you have AA?, i'll go away).

[/ QUOTE ]

Also this play will get people to pay me off lighter if it does not work out. Its obviously not a standard line, and thats why most of you just deem it as spew. Honestly if I posted this in msnl most would say its- occasionally fine. I understand ssnl is different but given conditions this is not "complete spew". Just trying to encourage ssnl to think beyond the power of your own hand. I have played much higher which isnt a brag but just trying to show you a nonstandard line that is much more common at higher stakes but can still occasionally work in ssnl under right conditions. Food for thought.

Flame away.

[JimmyB13]

From one James to another,

I didn't mean to imply in my earlier post that you should never take this line. Used rarely and against the right opponent in the right situation, it is sexy indeed as part of an overall balanced strategy (I would obv note a play like this if you made it against me or at the table while I was paying attention) and thus could lead to overadjustment by observant opponents, which you could exploit to your advantage.

I was mainly just responding to the general tone of a few of your posts in this thread. They seemed to come off as a brag post, like "look at me, I'm such a badass, if you don't like this play you're a [censored] nit."

So, I guess I vote for sexy...if used sparingly against the right opponents.

--JimmyB13

[Jay Riall]

[ QUOTE ]
If you have AK here, it's slightly better since you have some real equity against opponent's range.

[/ QUOTE ]

???

[Keyser.]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you have AK here, it's slightly better since you have some real equity against opponent's range.

[/ QUOTE ]

???

[/ QUOTE ]

b/c you'd have two overs against QQ, etc etc

[Keyser.]

[ QUOTE ]
Keyser and all other in "spew" camp:
Heres my logic...

[ QUOTE ]

This bet tells me he usually has one of three things:
1. the goods (pay me!),
2. a flush draw(slow down!)
3.a mid pair(do you have AA?, i'll go away).

[/ QUOTE ]

Also this play will get people to pay me off lighter if it does not work out. Its obviously not a standard line, and thats why most of you just deem it as spew. Honestly if I posted this in msnl most would say its- occasionally fine. I understand ssnl is different but given conditions this is not "complete spew". Just trying to encourage ssnl to think beyond the power of your own hand. I have played much higher which isnt a brag but just trying to show you a nonstandard line that is much more common at higher stakes but can still occasionally work in ssnl under right conditions. Food for thought.

Flame away.

[/ QUOTE ]

sure, "sometimes" it's fine, like anything else in poker. When I say "complete spew" I don't necessarily mean that it is 100% a horrible play at all times.

ok, semantics aside, I think this is a poor spot to bluff because it's basically a dark-tunnel bluff. Like you really have no idea what your opponent has and you're just praying he doesn't have something. I'd prefer for a bluff to develop more organically is all I'm saying.