A really cool hand I played

[MYNAMEIZGREG]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Fishsticks -

I'm pretty sure greg made this thread expecting to be challenged. Also, you should never just take the advice of anyone, no matter how good they are. In fact, I'm the player I am today because I used to disagree with almost every dbitel (he used to post a lot here) post. I challenged (or before I was posting a lot, just disagreed with) him and gained a better understanding of poker in doing so. I still don't agree with some of dbitel's posts (but most obv [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] ), but I can think on the level I do now because of it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't make this to be challenged. I made it for educational purposes? I think I get what you are saying though, and I certainly expected people to reply "no, you're wrong."

[/ QUOTE ]

FMP??

[/ QUOTE ]

NH

[LouisCyphre]

Greg, I appreciate that you presented this concept and your reasoning. I don't think I'd be able to get as precise a read as you did in only 30 seconds while multi-tabling.
That being said I am still not fond of this play. Your read is based on several assumptions:
a) your opponent puts you on a squeeze
b) your opponent will bluff-push the flop with a wide range
c) your opponent does not have 99+
d) your opponent missed the flop with his other hands

You are committing almost a whole buy-in relying on the fact that you are not wrong on any of these assumptions. You are only allowed a tiny margin of error on your read. That's why I am comfortable with your call on this hand. Nevertheless the concept you described is certainly valuable but I just don't think this hand is good example.
(Just my noob-SSNL opinion)

[ikestoys]

LouisCyphre -

Making and acting correctly on these types of reads is what separates a big winner from mediocre winners in MSNL.

[gir]

So is he sitting with 87 spades (or one spade and one heart) like I said near the beginning of the thread?

Your c) point is the most crucial where I happened to say that he'll push TT+ and fold everything under that, but whatever, close enough.

It's a great thread, and I like the assumptions. Most villains aren't thinking on so many levels or playing in pots like this, but it'll definitely make transitioning up easier. Thanks.

[MYNAMEIZGREG]

[ QUOTE ]
Greg, I appreciate that you presented this concept and your reasoning. I don't think I'd be able to get as precise a read as you did in only 30 seconds while multi-tabling.
That being said I am still not fond of this play. Your read is based on several assumptions:
a) your opponent puts you on a squeeze
b) your opponent will bluff-push the flop with a wide range
c) your opponent does not have 99+
d) your opponent missed the flop with his other hands

You are committing almost a whole buy-in relying on the fact that you are not wrong on any of these assumptions. You are only allowed a tiny margin of error on your read. That's why I am comfortable with your call on this hand. Nevertheless the concept you described is certainly valuable but I just don't think this hand is good example.
(Just my noob-SSNL opinion)

[/ QUOTE ]

I have more than 30 seconds of history with this guy of course. You see, these aren't assumptions when I have logic and reasoning to back them up

1) I never said he thinks I'm squeezing, I said that my range is wider here because it's possible/probable I am squeezing
2) Again, this is not an assumption. I demonstrated the math behind his calling preflop with suited connectors and pocket pairs, and he MUST bluff the flop in order to make his preflop call +EV
3) I have explained this too many times already. Look through the other posts. It's not an assumption, it's a conclusion/read/whatever I made based on his play and mine, and the dynmaic of the game, and the specific situation.
4) I am not assuming he missed the flop. I'm saying it doesn't matter. If you look through my post where it talks about why you have to call, I even give %s of me expecting to be behind. I'm going to be crushed here sometimes (well, a small sometimes), but I will be ahead the great majority of the time. In fact, if I told you he had 55, you should not think of the hand any differently than if I told you he had 22.

I respect your opinion, but I think you underestimate how +EV the situation is. If he overbet shoved giving me ridiculous odds, like needing 49% equity to call, I would still call here. Remember that we are getting over 2.28:1, so we need to be good 30.5% of the time. This doesn't matter though since we are good well over 50% of the time.

[MYNAMEIZGREG]

I'm going to bed. Tomorrow I'll entertain any questions and eventually post the results.

[wdead]

Greg, I understand your play based on the reads and range you gave him, but I just dont see why he cant have a different hand than the range you gave him. Its a very specific and tight range that you are beating, but saying he can never show up with a pp here>88 is a little thin to me. Perhaps you have been playing with him alot and have a great read on him, if so kudos, nice hand. Posting a hand like this however is bound to cause some contention because it depends on a highly specific read which may or may not be unreasonable.

[pdoran10]

[ QUOTE ]
Greg, I understand your play based on the reads and range you gave him, but I just dont see why he cant have a different hand than the range you gave him. Its a very specific and tight range that you are beating, but saying he can never show up with a pp here>88 is a little thin to me. Perhaps you have been playing with him alot and have a great read on him, if so kudos, nice hand. Posting a hand like this however is bound to cause some contention because it depends on a highly specific read which may or may not be unreasonable.

[/ QUOTE ]

agree with this 100% and this is a concise version of my response.

[shpanko]

If the villain thinks Greg is squeezing with a large range, then there will be a large impetus for him to 4-bet or shove pf with 99+. Sure it's possible that he has 99-JJ here but the idea is that when the villain makes this call pf he basically never has QQ+ and furthermore he isn't getting correct odds to set mine. This means that he will have to take the pot away from us on favorable flops. Since this flop doesn't have an A/K it's a pretty good flop to shove over our c-bet since it's missed a large portion of our range and he believes he can get us to fold 88-JJ.

[jumbojacks]

Even if he were to have 99-JJ here I don't think it would affect the equity against his range by that much considering his call. His call of the 3bet is so crucial here. Good players only make this call with relatively a "tight" range. Also from the perspective of preposterous there's a ton of hands that Hero will be making this play with here. I also think the fear of 99-JJ is a bit overrated. Not sure how preposterous plays, but wouldn't a call be more likely from him since it has some value against Greg's range on a flop like this?

I think it's also reasonable to assume he would 4bet JJ here sometimes, which further strengthens Greg's argument. What's your calling range here, or more aptly, what's preposterous's perception of your calling range here on the flop (excluding the obvious hands)? (If you think his range is {air, monster} then the question above is irrelevant.)

Also, what would you do if preposterous were to just call the flop? Would he take such a situation in account as to how to react here?

I really appreciate these posts Greg. Please post more. Thank you.

Prediction: some combo draw hand like 8s7s or weak pair with little SD value as others have previously posted first came to mind