hand4 vs supalagII

[wackjob]

just because I call someone a supalag or any other name, does not mean I don't respect their game, or that they are not good players and difficult opponents. 35/25 type of player is the most difficult for me to beat on a regular basis.

[captain_swing]

"Against a supaLAG, I'll often c/c the turn and river. My hand will be good too often to b/f the turn, but I don't want to pay 3BBs to see a showdown."

Here are my 2 cents on SteveL91's line. I don't think it is good here for the reason that some of the discussion of the definition of a LAG/superlag etc. casts light on. This opponent might not bet the turn for us--I find even aggressive players can freeze vs a steal re-raiser who checks the turn because they smell a sexy coming, and a free card here is very bad. A hand with a gutshot (KJ, KT, J8, T8) has 13 outs. Just overcards (to our 6s) have 9 outs. Even if he will bet the turn for us every time we would slightly prefer him folding overcards and would definately prefer him folding overcards + a gutshot then him paying a bet on the turn. And an opponent will frequently make these incorrect folds b/c he will not know he has so many outs.

So I prefer betting and taking the risk of getting raised and having to make a tough decision between folding and calling down 3 big bets. Even against a lag b/c might be the better line if we can get incorrect folds sometimes and if we can be confident that we will have odds on the call down because his bluff raising frequency is too high. A crucial factor for this decision would be how good the LAG is at reading our hand and turning off bluffs. If he will autobluff twice, the line has a lot of merit. But if his river bluffing frequency is closer to correct than this line let's us get exploited by value bets when behind. So we need a more refined read. But b/c, c/c [whether raised on the turn or not] might be a line to consider.