|
|
|||||||
| View Poll Results: MLB is how big a crapshoot (6 being most, 1 being least) | |||
| 6 |
   
|
22 | 28.21% |
| 5 |
  
|
24 | 30.77% |
| 4 |
  
|
20 | 25.64% |
| 3 |
  
|
7 | 8.97% |
| 2 |
  
|
2 | 2.56% |
| 1 |
  
|
3 | 3.85% |
| Voters: 78. You may not vote on this poll | |||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
10-10-2007, 10:32 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: $3/$6 interesting Razz hand.
[ QUOTE ]
No, I don't need to filter any of that out. What I said was I am winning defending the bring-in about 3.5 times in ten. I made no caveats. The poster I was responding to made a blanket statement about defending - not in the OP's specific position, but just doing it. It sounded like he copied the whole thing right out of a book and the premise is simply undemonstrable. [/ QUOTE ] Who are you referring to? The only posts about not defending here have to do with the fact that the villain raised from early position into a field of low cards, and how this is different than defending from someone in steal position. I've glanced through the thread and I didn't see anything leap out that said "fold this no matter what" 
|
|
#2
10-10-2007, 10:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: $3/$6 interesting Razz hand.
I would (almost) never fold this to an obvious steal. I would (almost) always fold this to the guy acting right after the bring in. Varying would take a very player specific read or an unusual up card scenario.
Third street here isnt a very complex a razz situation.
|
|
#3
10-11-2007, 12:51 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: $3/$6 interesting Razz hand.
[ QUOTE ]
Who are you referring to? [/ QUOTE ] Matthew82's post was initially in response to the HH here but then seems to segue into a blanket condemnation of defending bring-ins.
|
|
#4
10-11-2007, 01:02 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: $3/$6 interesting Razz hand.
Well, he said
[ QUOTE ] This approach of defending the bring in and only continuing when you do outflop him is a completely fallacious idea and is a serious leak because you know he has a 3 card hand and he knows you have a 2 card hand. [/ QUOTE ] (emphasis mine) So he's talking about non-steal situations here. I don't agree 100% with what he said, though, but there are some good points in there.
|
|
#5
10-11-2007, 01:17 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: $3/$6 interesting Razz hand.
[ QUOTE ]
Well, he said [ QUOTE ] This approach of defending the bring in and only continuing when you do outflop him is a completely fallacious idea and is a serious leak because you know he has a 3 card hand and he knows you have a 2 card hand. [/ QUOTE ] (emphasis mine) So he's talking about non-steal situations here. I don't agree 100% with what he said, though, but there are some good points in there. [/ QUOTE ] I don't think he is, I think he's talking about any time you defend HU against a raiser. He is making a false premise. His hypothesis depends on the raiser having three cards better than the bring-in. You know, some people steal from UTG, right? Some from the middle, some just always raise with two wheel cards and any J or better from any position. Some of these people are donkeys and some are pros. And sometimes, even if I assume three good cards, I will still defend the bring-in. And I think that's what he's saying is always a leak. But unless the post-er wants to come in here and tell us just exactly what he did mean, I guess it's all moot, anyway.
|
|
#6
10-11-2007, 01:29 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: $3/$6 interesting Razz hand.
If you know enough about a player to put him on a steal from early position, that's one thing. Against an unknown it's safe to assume he has a three card hand. Anyway I feel his math is based on the premise that the bettor has a 3 card hand - you can be much more liberal with your defense if there is a good chance he has paint or a pair in the hole, obviously.
|
|
#7
10-11-2007, 02:47 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: $3/$6 interesting Razz hand.
[ QUOTE ]
Anyway I feel his math is based on the premise that the bettor has a 3 card hand - [/ QUOTE ]Right! And this is his "always a bad idea a big leak don't do it" scenario. I disagree. With him, not you. I always assume they have three cards, anyway. Because as soon as I don't, they will.
|
|
#8
10-11-2007, 09:15 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: $3/$6 interesting Razz hand.
[ QUOTE ]
If you know enough about a player to put him on a steal from early position, that's one thing. Against an unknown it's safe to assume he has a three card hand. Anyway I feel his math is based on the premise that the bettor has a 3 card hand - you can be much more liberal with your defense if there is a good chance he has paint or a pair in the hole, obviously. [/ QUOTE ] You can't put a player on a steal in early position. A straight steal may be possible, but he usually has a real hand, so you can't call in the bringin, as you could someone in steal position.
|
|
#9
10-11-2007, 09:18 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: $3/$6 interesting Razz hand.
[ QUOTE ]
You know, some people steal from UTG, right? Some from the middle, some just always raise with two wheel cards and any J or better from any position. Some of these people are donkeys and some are pros. [/ QUOTE ] In razz, these categories are not mutually exclusive
|
|
#10
10-11-2007, 03:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: $3/$6 interesting Razz hand.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] You know, some people steal from UTG, right? Some from the middle, some just always raise with two wheel cards and any J or better from any position. Some of these people are donkeys and some are pros. [/ QUOTE ] In razz, these categories are not mutually exclusive [/ QUOTE ] stealing from UTG has been known to cause serious run-ins with guys named spike[e.g. A2 / 7 or 8 door card] [img]/images/graemlins/ooo.gif[/img]
|
|
|
|
Hybrid Mode
