|
|
#21
10-03-2007, 02:24 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Maximizing value with \"hidden monsters\" from OOP
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] 1) I'll check the set of 6's and let villain hang himself, especially if he has an overpair...QQ+. CC, CR turn AI. [/ QUOTE ] If your putting him on an overpair, our lead will only build the pot that much faster. [/ QUOTE ] If he has AK, he'll probably fold if he's passive or smart. A gambler will call. When checked, he may fire a Cbet which will build the pot. 
|
|
#22
10-03-2007, 05:53 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Maximizing value with \"hidden monsters\" from OOP
I think the HSMTTers in this thread are off with their frequencies. We get c-bet less, we get more credit when we check-raise and we get less credit when we makes large bets at these buyins.
|
|
#23
10-03-2007, 10:40 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Maximizing value with \"hidden monsters\" from OOP
[ QUOTE ]
I think the HSMTTers in this thread are off with their frequencies. We get c-bet less, we get more credit when we check-raise and we get less credit when we makes large bets at these buyins. [/ QUOTE ] Yes. This is all true. I was just thinking this morning about why I rarely check/raise this deep. There are a few reasons I don't, but first I'll talk about the times that I do check/raise. At times in SSMTTs, I do check/raise but usually b/c it is late in the MTT, the stacks are shallow, and villain's are sooooo likely to c-bet. Early on however, the play is quite different. For example, in both of these hands, we can reasonably expect to get a flop lead called by A high some non-trivial percentage of the time. Additionally, check/raises at this level lead to folds on the flop so often because villain's think everyone check/raises their sets, etc. I've found that bet, bet, bet lines are very valuable against these types of opponents (who expect you to slowplay your strong hands). Check/raise lines just tip them off and they get away. Sherman
|
|
#24
10-03-2007, 11:32 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Maximizing value with \"hidden monsters\" from OOP
[ QUOTE ]
I think the HSMTTers in this thread are off with their frequencies. We get c-bet less, we get more credit when we check-raise and we get less credit when we makes large bets at these buyins. [/ QUOTE ] Playing a lot of heads up over the past few weeks to get into the mind of the donk, it is utterly amazing what kind of [censored] they will call you down with on the flop. I think the best line that works with a "hidden monster" on dry boards is the bet, check, bet line. Basically, they will think that you hit a small piece of the board and that they can RR you off your hand even if they have air. Or, if they are passive, they think they can catch up or that your piece of the board is smaller than theirs and they will call you down. Or they will fold, but it's better than when they bet 80 into 240 and you are stuck with guessing whether they are on a draw and you are giving them 4:1 or if they are on a monster and your RR will get them to go AI/fold (most of them fold). Barry
|
|
#25
10-03-2007, 11:40 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Maximizing value with \"hidden monsters\" from OOP
Barry,
I think the big difference in maximizing these hands is the work you do prior to the hand coming up. I think about the times I just sit there doing nothing observationally, and then a hand like this comes up and I realize I don't have the slightest clue how the villain is going to respond to any move I make. As my game has become better, I realize that really paying attention can really pay off in these situations and that there's a big difference between kind of lazily identifying playing characteristics and really paying attention to hands. Of course, I play just live tournaments, so if we're talking online, I think that makes things harder. Anyway, virtually everything I've read advocates leading. I think it's only the size of the lead that needs consideration. That being said, I've had the CR work well, but it usually only works once against a good player.
|
|
#26
10-03-2007, 11:46 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Maximizing value with \"hidden monsters\" from OOP
if you are not bet bet betting these hands from the flop on, you are losing tons of value. build a big pot with big hands. big pots get built from the start. typical donk mtters can't ever fold TP or an overpair so why help them fold by doing anything other than leading the whole way?
late stages, yeah you need to adapt tot he circumstances and mix things up, look to c.r obvious cbets etc. but early you need to be thinking about value. early on with these hands, not betting with them and instead looking to c.r or plays sneaky to help villains make mistakes is your own mistake.
|
|
#27
10-03-2007, 11:48 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Maximizing value with \"hidden monsters\" from OOP
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Just looked over responses and I shocked that everyone is advocating a lead. Did I read OP wrong? Hand 1: Hero limp/calls, flop comes 763r, Hero is OOP Hand 2: Hero calls out of BB, flop comes KQ5 two tone, Hero is OOP If ^^^ is correct, wtf are you guys talking about. [/ QUOTE ] Well there are two considerations. Are you happy giving a free card in each hand? And remember, a free turn card is not just one which could strengthen villain's hand, it's also one that could scare villain enough so that you won't get a single bet out of him. Checking these hands is basically slowplaying. I would want to be pretty darn sure that a bet was coming or (in the case of #1, he himself was checking to slowplay AA or KK). What these posters (myself included) are saying is that against average players, value betting is the way to go not slowplaying. Personally, I think the checkraise is overused in NL and is a product of limit players coming to NL and trying to use the same strategies. [/ QUOTE ] I'm not sure if this is all true, but I am having a VERY big problem in these $20 tournaments with the check/raise because you never know if your opponent is going to make an appropriate c-bet OR value bet on a given hand. In other words, I'm seeing more and more bets of 40 into 300 or something absurd which makes my c-raise almost pointless since I know the next thing is gonna be a fold. But, the last thing I want to do now is give a gut shot / double ended / flush draw ~9:1 to the turn. And I'm OOP. It seems like I need to set the tone for what the bets sizing is gonna be so I don't risk this, since it seems to happen in about 40% of the hands I've been in recently. That's the advantage of leading, because so many of these opponents wil put you on god knows what - if they can't see your range, then they are going to call you much wider. None of this is relevant to HSMTT, IMO, but SSMTT, I think that leading OOP is better w/o reads. If you have a read your opponent is a lagfish, then please, check away. However, otherwise, establishing what the pot is going to be by leading 2/3rds to PSB in spots like this is profitable against an unknown. Barry [/ QUOTE ] c/ring these hands at these stakes at this point in MTT is GROTY!
|
|
#29
10-03-2007, 01:50 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Maximizing value with \"hidden monsters\" from OOP
[ QUOTE ]
Check/raise both, they need very little to stack off and you won't get more than a cbet if they won't stack off anyway. [/ QUOTE ] Gobbo, No offense, but you didn't read the thread at all. Arguments have been posed as to why c/r isn't ideal at these levels.
|
|
#30
10-03-2007, 02:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Maximizing value with \"hidden monsters\" from OOP
[ QUOTE ]
Check/raise both, they need very little to stack off and you won't get more than a cbet if they won't stack off anyway. [/ QUOTE ] At 15/30 you are advocating c.ring? Obviously, I totally disagree. Can someone link to the Strassa post of a couple weeks ago advocating SSMTT players trying to get away from c/ring everything and instead trying to play good poker and maximizing the value of their hands. c/r'ing in these spots does NOT maximize the value of our good hands.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
