#11
|
|||
|
|||
Re: NL25 K9o - Am I really that bad?
I don't think that range is unreasonable.
Propose another range for limp-call/donk. deuces and treys are a small quibble. take them out and you see no change. Here's a tighter range: Board: 6c 7c 8d equity win tie pots won pots tied Hand 0: 40.173% 34.86% 05.31% 106989 16302.00 { Kd9c } Hand 1: 59.827% 54.52% 05.31% 167307 16302.00 { 55+, AKs, A9s-A7s, K9s-K7s, Q9s-Q7s, J9s-J7s, T7s+, 96s+, 86s+, 76s, 65s, 54s, AKo, A9o-A7o, K9o-K7o, Q9o-Q7o, J9o-J7o, T7o+, 96o+, 86o+, 76o, 65o, 54o } |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Re: NL25 K9o - Am I really that bad?
We think villain limp calls k7o and other junk like that?
That range is way too wide |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Re: NL25 K9o - Am I really that bad?
[ QUOTE ]
We think villain limp calls k7o and other junk like that? That range is way too wide [/ QUOTE ] We must be playing different villains. I think his calling range is almost the same as his limping range. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Re: NL25 K9o - Am I really that bad?
generally when im donked into for a respectable bet on a very co-ordinated board it gets a lot more respect than your standard donk. as such, and notwithstanding the fact his limp call is fishy i think his range is significantly tighter than the one cited above.
i cant really be arsed to do a range myself here but i think its likely we are more than a toss behind here. |
|
|