WCOOP ME, Table chip leader in a tricky (?) spot UTG - Page 3

PrayingMantis · #21 10-04-2007, 12:09 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I can't figure out why you're upset at the replies.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah well ok... I really shouldn't be upset at the replies. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Sorry about that.

I guess it looks simply like a huge spew by me, nothing more. I managed to pick up by far my most donkish hand from the entire tournament, just to openly think here if it's really THAT donkish. I am actually quite proud of being able to play like a real hardcore donk now and then, but I also enjoy analyzing my donkishness and I do it a lot privately and also learn from it some surprising things sometimes...

Not entirely sure if this is the case. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

PrayingMantis · #22 10-04-2007, 12:18 AM

[ QUOTE ]
You're also not counting the times the caller now shoves after you call and you don't even see a flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this happens v rarely, but still a possibility none the less. I'm not worried about it tho, as he called raises no matter what position I raised from. His UTG+2 call is not too suspicious. I actually think he cold-calls way more often than reraises over my call.

TheNewf · #23 10-04-2007, 01:20 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You're also not counting the times the caller now shoves after you call and you don't even see a flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this happens v rarely, but still a possibility none the less. I'm not worried about it tho, as he called raises no matter what position I raised from. His UTG+2 call is not too suspicious. I actually think he cold-calls way more often than reraises over my call.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree, but it's just one more thing that can go wrong. I mean we're talking about if your read is correct you might be able to play the hand marginally profitably so these little things add up against you.

Pudge714 · #24 10-04-2007, 01:56 AM

If you are calling you are calling for set value. I'm too lazy to do the math, but whether you call here is entirely a factor of UTG+1 calling range especially since UTG+3 might not cbet AK three way when he misses. Trying to bluff an unknown of an overpair in a three bet pot with two bets behind is really fpsy and bad.

Mr.WeakTight · #25 10-04-2007, 04:06 AM

yash licha JJ vi atah chosev sheh villian yash QQ+ o AK = gamarnoo. key lo yash ha odds.

yasher coach bi shalosh.

bivakasha, consider posting more hands from the event or even placing the whole HH in pokerXfactor.

Shalom

ImNotSoGood · #26 10-04-2007, 04:29 AM

He's never folding an overpair here, maybe he folds an overpair like 3% of the time or something like that.

His betting patterns were def. very strong too. He raised to 24k with 124k behind. He then bet 30k with 100k behind, he was trying to tell you that you have FE.

overthaline · #27 10-04-2007, 06:43 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
you can't call for set value, so why the hell would you possibly stick it in, especially since you already said that he might even fold AK if you stick it in?

[/ QUOTE ]

I actually wouldn't stick it in (Exitonly would...), However I can't see why you can't get away from a 832 board if you have such a strong read on him? I agree that if you can't get away from 832 board most of the time calling pf is bad.

[/ QUOTE ]

Since you couldn't get away from this flop... isn't the pf call bad? Seems like the only hand you beat is AK.

registrar · #28 10-04-2007, 06:53 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

edit: trying to bluff people off big pairs is just really bad tournament poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank you for enlightening me.

OK if all other replies are going to be in this spirit, there's not much that I can add. Not sure if you are aware of it, but a lot of specific things some (let's say strong) players do in very specific spots are very bad poker in ALL other v similar spots. IMHO, being able to see some v small differences in circumstances can make a huge difference.

Also I can assure you people folded overpairs to me before in "tournament poker".

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem with getting the guy to fold an overpair by repping a set, even on a rainbow board, is that you're not deep enough. The most plausible way to play a set here, in his mind, is to check-raise, which is to say that you're expecting him to fold after putting half his stack in when other overpairs are in your range.

PrayingMantis · #29 10-04-2007, 07:02 AM

[ QUOTE ]
He's never folding an overpair here, maybe he folds an overpair like 3% of the time or something like that.

His betting patterns were def. very strong too. He raised to 24k with 124k behind. He then bet 30k with 100k behind, he was trying to tell you that you have FE.

[/ QUOTE ]

Villain was definitely very unhappy with my check-raise. He certainly considered folding and took a long time before callling. His 30K bet's timing was weak, he was worried and didn't want to bust. He wasn't trapping me for sure.

That still doesn't mean that my move was any good. Perhaps it was total garbage. But your 3% figure is wrong imo.

Suppose I posted the hand and after my c/r it goes like this: he tanks for v long time, types some gibberish into chat ("fasafsdjkkga") than types "KK", takes another 20 seconds and folds (of course I wouldn't post such a hand, because in a way it's less interesting).

Then, what would you say were the odds of him folding? 8%? 100%?

I think people keep forgetting the context of this hand. My move here is very very strong. I didn't make any such moves post flop. It's a super deep tournament, with the biggest money ever. The player definitely played scared, and bad-weak. And I'm positive he considered folding and leaving himself with 70K (blinds are only at 2500/1500). I v rarely do this stuff as I said. I'm ready to admit it's awful (as I thought to begin with), but I still feel that it's actually a rare spot where such a move could work almost enough % of the time.

Also it's possible that no real interesting discussion can develope, as it's too specific read dependent, and maybe just too donkish to speak about intelligently... That is: simply a gross, LOL, play.

PrayingMantis · #30 10-04-2007, 07:19 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

edit: trying to bluff people off big pairs is just really bad tournament poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank you for enlightening me.

OK if all other replies are going to be in this spirit, there's not much that I can add. Not sure if you are aware of it, but a lot of specific things some (let's say strong) players do in very specific spots are very bad poker in ALL other v similar spots. IMHO, being able to see some v small differences in circumstances can make a huge difference.

Also I can assure you people folded overpairs to me before in "tournament poker".

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem with getting the guy to fold an overpair by repping a set, even on a rainbow board, is that you're not deep enough. The most plausible way to play a set here, in his mind, is to check-raise, which is to say that you're expecting him to fold after putting half his stack in when other overpairs are in your range.

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't know if he thinks this way, but since I'm raising quite a lot pf, my range here (even tho it's UTG), is not really big-pairs-heavy. Putting me very roughly on "a pair" is v plausible I think when I make the pf call. Of course I raise any pair UTG and perhaps calling his RR with some of them (although it should of course be a standard fold as we learn now).