|
|
#11
06-18-2007, 11:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: deep - even durrrr said call, fold, or push are all fine.
seems like everyone is giving this guy way to much credit - the whole analysis is based on a "huge moron fish" according to the hero. Push it all in - if it doesnt go in now, your putting it in on the river most likely, so you might as well shove it given that you could be ahead. a "huge moron" could have many hands that you're still ahead - 44, 88, QJ, or even AQ or worse.
|
|
#12
06-18-2007, 11:46 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: deep - even durrrr said call, fold, or push are all fine.
[ QUOTE ]
betting this turn without a plan is absolutely horrific and spewtard [/ QUOTE ] agree, checking prevents us from making a huge mistake here
|
|
#13
06-18-2007, 11:48 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: deep - even durrrr said call, fold, or push are all fine.
If you look at my reply, it is obviously worse to just call. But putting him on the flush is not credit, its common sense, he is just a huge tell box, he is not disguising his hand at all.
|
|
#14
06-18-2007, 11:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: deep - even durrrr said call, fold, or push are all fine.
wtf hes a tell box? all i said is he sucks. he could easily have a smaller set or even two pair. your calculations were based on a range that you assigned arbitrarily based on my read that hes a huge moron fish.
[ QUOTE ] agree, checking prevents us from making a huge mistake here [/ QUOTE ] this sounds good in retrospect. wouldyou be check calling a pot size bet here?
|
|
#15
06-18-2007, 11:54 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: deep - even durrrr said call, fold, or push are all fine.
most morons would raise you on the flop with something lik two pair or a set, part of being a moron is overvaluing hands, thats why i discounted those hands. Have you seen something to discount this theory?
|
|
#16
06-19-2007, 12:06 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: deep - even durrrr said call, fold, or push are all fine.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] betting this turn without a plan is absolutely horrific and spewtard [/ QUOTE ] agree, checking prevents us from making a huge mistake here [/ QUOTE ] This hand is so read dependable that without giving us a proper read (and huge fish is only a very partial one) nobody here can give you the 100% correct answer, obvious is tho that you should have known what you are gonna do about a raise before you bet. I could run down what the best line would be against every type of fish but I think we all know that. Anyway I would probly check here if your only read is fish.
|
|
#17
06-19-2007, 12:15 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: deep - even durrrr said call, fold, or push are all fine.
I don't see a point in the turn bet unless you are snap calling an all-in. That is, you or him have to have such an image that you want to play for stacks on that card.
|
|
#19
06-19-2007, 12:23 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: deep - even durrrr said call, fold, or push are all fine.
[ QUOTE ]
I don't see a point in the turn bet unless you are snap calling an all-in. That is, you or him have to have such an image that you want to play for stacks on that card. [/ QUOTE ] This is so spot on, vs villains you arent snap shoving a raise here you shouldnt have bet against in the first place
|
|
#20
06-19-2007, 12:58 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: deep - even durrrr said call, fold, or push are all fine.
Checking is so retardedly results oriented it's not even funny. The read is the guy is a fish. You have a set. You value bet (and protect your hand) because your hand is best the vast majority (although very easy to draw out on) of the time and he calls you with way worse the vast majority of the time. He raises you so this is obviously not the vast majority of the time, so you re-evaluate and make your decision.
Checking is disgusting given the read here.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
