|
|
#81
10-09-2007, 12:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Playing against a LAG with weak two pair on a paired board
Gurravasa I would need a read that he routinely bet every street with whatever he held and did not take free cards or free showdowns to not c/r.
|
|
#82
10-09-2007, 12:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Playing against a LAG with weak two pair on a paired board
[ QUOTE ]
Gurravasa I would need a read that he routinely bet every street with whatever he held and did not take free cards or free showdowns to not c/r. [/ QUOTE ] Giving a freecard is nothing to worry that much about on this board. There are no draws and he probably have 6 cards that improves his hand, while you have 5 card that improve your hand and 10 cards that gives you a FD.
|
|
#83
10-09-2007, 12:35 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Playing against a LAG with weak two pair on a paired board
Has anyone recommended c/r the flop yet? This would be my play.
|
|
#84
10-09-2007, 12:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Playing against a LAG with weak two pair on a paired board
this is another spot where I use a stop and go approach. I check raise the flop thinking my hand is best and villain is uncapable of folding. Turn I check in attempt to endure a bluff from inferior hands or pay the minimum
to superior hands. Then I lead the river for value knowing its almost impossible for him to raise unless I am beat. Using this strategy I am in complete control of the pot size
|
|
#85
10-09-2007, 12:45 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Playing against a LAG with weak two pair on a paired board
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] it should be noted that the higher you move up in limits, the more frequently c/r becomes significantly better than c/c. [/ QUOTE ] Why is that? And what limits are you talking about? [/ QUOTE ] I'm talking about mid limits, could be anywhere from 5/10 to 30/60. And it's a general observation; there are exceptions. But you basically don't have players giving as much unwarranted action in these games (typically) and so you need to frustrate your opponents into thinking you are overaggressive when you're not in reality. You can't take boards like TT4r and play raise if you have a big hand (Tx/44), call if you have a marginal hand (4x, small pair), fold if you have nothing. Even the fish in a 15/30 game can usually figure this strategy out pretty quickly. Obviously you are going to fold with nothing and hopefully you will be raising with your trips everytime. So your only balance is to play your marginal fairly strong. The only exception is someone who knows how to handle you by mixing it an appropriate amount of bluffing -- but almost all players either never bluff or bluff way too much, and it's not hard to spot which player is which pretty quickly. [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] In general, against opponents who are somewhat observant, it's pretty important to take an aggressive line with your marginal hands in these kind of spots. [/ QUOTE ] Why? [/ QUOTE ] See above. In addition, as you move up more players are capable of playing in position. They can extract the most value you out of your weak hands if that is all you check/call with and can take free cards when they know they are behind. Check/calling this flop is tantamount to screaming "I have 4x or a marginal A high!" and more players can hear this message as you move up the mid limits. [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] The keys here are that you are out of position and your decisions are not very easy when you turn passive. [/ QUOTE ] Why? I can't see how things get easier if we get agressive? [/ QUOTE ] When you check/raise, your decision is pretty easy -- keep betting most of the time*. The hard decisions come when you get raised, but you find this happens less frequently than you think and with experience it becomes reasonable to handle these situations fairly well. * There are some cards that could come that would induce me to check/call or check/fold depending on villain. Overall, your reasons for wanting to check/call down are reasonable and I'll take a passive line if I think I can get away with it without tipping my hand completely to my opponent. But you generally have to be willing to mix it up here because your equity is good enough that raising is not a spew and the metagame impact here is important. Using metagame to justify specific subtle lines is usually BS, but metagame does apply to flop decisions because even bad players can figure out your flop lines if you vary them based on the strength of your hand -- and there are still two streets of big bet poker left with your hand face up.
|
|
#86
10-09-2007, 01:32 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Playing against a LAG with weak two pair on a paired board
thanx for taking your time to explain your thought sweetjazz. As I moved up from 1/2 to 5/10 I have only got more and more unwarranted action. Maybe there is a actionpeak at 5/10 or something and the games calm down above 5/10?
Well it's true that c/r and keep betting is quite easy, but how difficult is it to c/c?
|
|
#87
10-09-2007, 02:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Playing against a LAG with weak two pair on a paired board
I like what SweetJazz said. I'd also add that there is more of a reason to play it aggro then straightforward EQ, and I think JBA and Oink have touched on it - if we want to get paid with Tx we have to play a wider range than Tx aggro here, and given that this is slightly positive EQ, this seems a good spot to mix it up a bit. We also now have some good information on this villain that he needs a monster to answer aggro with aggro post flop.
|
|
#88
10-09-2007, 04:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Playing against a LAG with weak two pair on a paired board
sweetjazz: nice stuff and you are total right
Gurravasa: the stuff jazz is talking about is sometimes referred to as "balance the lines" (dont have my books handy to look up how writes good stuff about it)
|
|
#89
10-09-2007, 04:26 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Playing against a LAG with weak two pair on a paired board
[ QUOTE ]
sweetjazz: nice stuff and you are total right Gurravasa: the stuff jazz is talking about is sometimes referred to as "balance the lines" (dont have my books handy to look up how writes good stuff about it) [/ QUOTE ] Yeah balancing is the main reason to c/r flop now, and that is reasonable. I don't think a call gives up your hand that much on a dry board like this. I would call a lot of unpaired hand on this board. Also I would sometimes call flop and raise turn with trips.
|
|
#90
10-09-2007, 05:53 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Playing against a LAG with weak two pair on a paired board
[ QUOTE ]
this is another spot where I use a stop and go approach. I check raise the flop thinking my hand is best and villain is uncapable of folding. Turn I check in attempt to endure a bluff from inferior hands or pay the minimum to superior hands. Then I lead the river for value knowing its almost impossible for him to raise unless I am beat. Using this strategy I am in complete control of the pot size [/ QUOTE ] wow, this is the worst strategy by far. the guy almost always has 9 outs but thinks he might be drawing dead. If you bet he will incorrectly fold a lot of the time. If you check the turn after c/r'ing the flop he's just gonna be confused and check behind a bunch of hands.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
