Early Gambool to set an image - Page 3

Emon96 · #21 08-23-2006, 05:23 PM

and i ran Ace-King of diamonds twice...the third was a AA, KK range which you were a slight favorite. Like I said, i probably call with a sigh knowing I have to, but I certainly don't love it.

Spee · #22 08-23-2006, 05:30 PM

I don't see any relevance to the title and the post.

First off, to try and "set an image" you have to know that your opponents are smart enough to "see" what you are trying to do.

Second, how does playing baby suited connectors OOP "set an image" unless you are planning on showing it down at the river, or showing it as you fold?

For the circumstances as explained, you appear to be only setting an image in your own mind.

RichC. · #23 08-23-2006, 05:37 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I don't see any relevance to the title and the post.

First off, to try and "set an image" you have to know that your opponents are smart enough to "see" what you are trying to do.

Second, how does playing baby suited connectors OOP "set an image" unless you are planning on showing it down at the river, or showing it as you fold?

For the circumstances as explained, you appear to be only setting an image in your own mind.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, I was planning on showing and I dont know, maybe repop a standard reraise by villian but he took that away from me. In other words, I was going to 3 bet push. Maybe I titled it wrong, OOPS, my bad. No need to get all pissy about it.

seke2 · #24 08-23-2006, 05:40 PM

I think the reason some of us have focused on the image thing is because that is how you framed your post, in the title, and we are just trying to make sure you aren't making this call BECAUSE of image implications, but rather primarily for the odds offered with image as a minor, minor factor. No need to get all pissy about it.

Spee · #25 08-23-2006, 05:48 PM

Not getting pissy about, just stating my honest opinion.

If you were planning on showing the hand for image-building at a later state, then it's a straightforward shove or fold situation.

If the intention is to set image for a later state, then it's an obvious fold and show, because your flush draw may be no good and your only outs are the OESD and two of those may flush the opponent.

Now we're at the root of the real issue, IMHO. Why try to "build an image" by donking off 20% of your stack early with a poor hand OOP?

Why not "build an image" by just playing solid poker: making sound and properly sized value bets, showing down good hands, making strategically sound semi-bluffs, making the occasional deceptive move, etc?

RichC. · #26 08-23-2006, 06:45 PM

Ok, forget the image building for a bit. This was an obviously easy call, to most anyway. I also think that my OESD and FD are very good here since most players are not willing to gamble with an all in this early with just a FD. Villians bet is also a pretty straight forward attempt to price out the FD and if that was the only thing i had going for me, easy fold. All the combo draws dictated a call.

Back to the image. I posted it like that because of the chat that was going on. Couple of players gave the "VNH" and "WP" while others, villian especially went off on some wild standard "youre an idiot, cant believe you called that" rant when he got knocked out. So maybe I should have titled it "Early Gambool to build a Stack"

Spee,
I'm with you all the way here on playing Solid, Aggresive poker and building a stack that way. I like to build an image one way, then change gears. Standard right? I think so.