#11
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 66 hand - Standard or BBV material?
[ QUOTE ]
What on earth doesn't make sense? On the river, Hero is either betting for value or betting as a bluff. There's no in-between. Here, he's against two loose-passive opponents who have called down to the river, and he's got third pair. What the [censored] is going to call his river bet? K4o? K5o? [/ QUOTE ] i do not see why you wouldnt think at least one of them calls the river with a worse pair. If we are behind a better hand - so be it. I think we are ahead here pretty often though against hands that check behind on the river. Even many loose-passives raise the flop with a 9. So chances are that a caller holds a 7, 5, 3 or 2. With that many worse hands calling this looks like a not too close vb to me. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 66 hand - Standard or BBV material?
[ QUOTE ]
I like it all over. Hu I would c/c. [/ QUOTE ] |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 66 hand - Standard or BBV material?
[ QUOTE ]
I think this hand is fine, if we were button however I would check this river against 2. [/ QUOTE ] |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 66 hand - Standard or BBV material?
[ QUOTE ]
I'm so curious as to what worse hands you guys think will call a river bet. [/ QUOTE ] Why do you only consider K-hi? We also beat A-hi and a pair of 2s, 3s, 4s, 5s This is online poker. First you bet and then you ask what worse hands are calling. Just to add: As I said in my OP, villains are not too passive. Very passive players are unpredictable. These guys are agressive enough to be predictable but not too agressive to become unpredictable. So I think I would have heard from a 7 especially b/c it is a 3-way hand. In fact that's the only reason that pushed me to bet instead of checking the river. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 66 hand - Standard or BBV material?
[ QUOTE ]
... however I would check this river against 2. True [/ QUOTE ] That's a great addition to the analysis of the hand (No way do I claim that my play is the best) |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 66 hand - Standard or BBV material?
is raising 66 in the BB standard in s/h? Also, I would probably let go the aggression at the turn since I have 2 opponents and 2 overs on the flop. I'd either c/c the turn or c/f. I'm torn between the two of them.
Edited to add: yet again, I learn something new. I swear the more I read about 6-max here the more I see how important marginal situations are to you all. I gotta turn up my aggression a notch. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 66 hand - Standard or BBV material?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] What on earth doesn't make sense? On the river, Hero is either betting for value or betting as a bluff. There's no in-between. Here, he's against two loose-passive opponents who have called down to the river, and he's got third pair. What the [censored] is going to call his river bet? K4o? K5o? [/ QUOTE ] i do not see why you wouldnt think at least one of them calls the river with a worse pair. If we are behind a better hand - so be it. I think we are ahead here pretty often though against hands that check behind on the river. Even many loose-passives raise the flop with a 9. So chances are that a caller holds a 7, 5, 3 or 2. With that many worse hands calling this looks like a not too close vb to me. [/ QUOTE ] Right On. True |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 66 hand - Standard or BBV material?
I would've checked preflop, and then either checked or folded the flop depending on if there was a bet to me or not.
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 66 hand - Standard or BBV material?
[ QUOTE ]
I would've checked preflop, and then either checked or folded the flop depending on if there was a bet to me or not. [/ QUOTE ] if I hadn't raised PF, I would c/f the flop 80% of the time. True |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 66 hand - Standard or BBV material?
[ QUOTE ]
I'd check and wouldn't overcall. [/ QUOTE ] |
|
|