|
|
#11
06-19-2007, 03:25 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: stars 200/400 hand I observered????
One thing that is key here is understanding omfg and why perp did what he did. They for sure have a history and I am guessing that history includes a fair amount of light turn raises from omfg. This is also just a really good read on OMFG's part because he knows perp doesn/t have a K.
|
|
#12
06-19-2007, 03:41 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: stars 200/400 hand I observered????
This isn't even a really good read..The board got even better for OMFG on the river, so why not pop the donk twice?
|
|
#13
06-19-2007, 03:53 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: stars 200/400 hand I observered????
I think you guys are overanalyzing this. It's 3 handed. A lot of hands would have taken Perp's line. Any pair calls the river raise, ace high good kicker calls the river raise (low probability of winning, but back to poker fundamental 101 aka pot odds). This is pretty standard. New2NL explained it well.
~andy
|
|
#14
06-20-2007, 03:15 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: stars 200/400 hand I observered????
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I honestly feel that this hand is standard at something like 3-6 online. [/ QUOTE ] Mostly true. However, you almost certainly won't see a b/c on the river with a hand that can't beat J7 at a 3-6 game. [/ QUOTE ] Sixes will call, AQ might [/ QUOTE ] c/c yes, b/c no.
|
|
#15
06-20-2007, 06:48 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: stars 200/400 hand I observered????
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I honestly feel that this hand is standard at something like 3-6 online. [/ QUOTE ] Mostly true. However, you almost certainly won't see a b/c on the river with a hand that can't beat J7 at a 3-6 game. [/ QUOTE ] Sixes will call, AQ might [/ QUOTE ] c/c yes, b/c no. [/ QUOTE ] You are wrong.
|
|
#16
06-21-2007, 10:35 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: stars 200/400 hand I observered????
Yeah I tend to agree with the tiger here. I don' think it is unreasonable or even bad for Perp to play 66 or 8,7 like this. OMFG used to be my mentor a year back so I have some insight into how he plays so this hand is really not that surprising from both player's perspective.
|
|
#17
06-21-2007, 10:39 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: stars 200/400 hand I observered????
[ QUOTE ]
This isn't even a really good read..The board got even better for OMFG on the river, so why not pop the donk twice? [/ QUOTE ] Ok, well I guess in my book it is a pretty solid read to get that much value out of J,7. Apparently you don't think so. Making these thinner raises is an area I am definately working on so I guess it confirms I am definatley not there yet.
|
|
#18
06-21-2007, 02:18 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: stars 200/400 hand I observered????
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I honestly feel that this hand is standard at something like 3-6 online. [/ QUOTE ] Mostly true. However, you almost certainly won't see a b/c on the river with a hand that can't beat J7 at a 3-6 game. [/ QUOTE ] Sixes will call, AQ might [/ QUOTE ] c/c yes, b/c no. [/ QUOTE ] You are wrong. [/ QUOTE ] If this is STANDARD for 3/6, then beating 3/6 (6 max) without rakeback is impossible. At 200/400, I'm not questioning any of this.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
