|
|
#21
02-02-2007, 12:11 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: NL50 - muck FH ?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I certainly agree with that, but why would they check/minraise the turn? [/ QUOTE ] scared u have a queen? scared u have an over pair? scared to build a big pot with a vulnerable hand? Thinks minibetting is good? [/ QUOTE ] Raising for information? Yeah, could be, but why not on the flop where it's cheaper? Would make a lot more sense. Check/Minraising when they're scared of a better hand? No way, c/minraising isn't a scared move. On the turn, it's either air or very, very strong. A scared line would be bet/fold or check/call. He might believe his KK is strong, though. He doesn't want to build a big pot by raising instead of calling? And then pushing the river? You've got to be kidding me. [ QUOTE ] At these limits you cant always figure out why somebody does something...just realize it is far far +ev to call this river bet...generally people dont expect to see aces in this spot [/ QUOTE ] I disagree that it's "far far +ev" to call. I, too, think it's +EV, by definitely not by far. I've said I'd call this, but I really don't think it's easy at all. His whole line makes 20x more sense having a Q than a lower pocket pair. There are at least 12 Qx combos, each of which I can easily figure him play like this. AA/KK (7 combos) could have been played like this, but the turn and the flop would've normally been played differently by them. It's not unusual to see stupid play, especially with those hands, though. Add in a few percentages of "crazy play" with other hands and it may be +EV but not by "far far", sir. 
|
|
#22
02-02-2007, 12:16 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NL50 - muck FH ?
wow if u really think that this is correct then you are missing tons of ev...All these assumptions are correct when tlakin about knowledgeable players which for the most part we dont have at low limits...
You narrow down the nonqueen hand range way to much...jacks-5s probably play this very similar...heck if i had 8s or 7s id think i was probably head in this hand...so wehn u add in those ranges..now all of a sudden its becomes less likely that somebody has a queen...
|
|
#23
02-02-2007, 12:24 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NL50 - muck FH ?
[ QUOTE ]
All these assumptions are correct when tlakin about knowledgeable players which for the most part we dont have at low limits... [/ QUOTE ] If all your unknown players at 50NL suck this badly, I'm clearly playing at the wrong sites. You're talking like a player who's been running white-hot recently. All other players are donks, eh? Also, how can you possibly think that most players will check/raise that turn with a crappy low pocket pair? Please provide hand histories. I'd be delighted if I was wrong.
|
|
#24
02-02-2007, 01:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NL50 - muck FH ?
LOL, anyone who folds this here is burning equity on fire.
|
|
#25
02-02-2007, 03:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NL50 - muck FH ?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] All these assumptions are correct when tlakin about knowledgeable players which for the most part we dont have at low limits... [/ QUOTE ] If all your unknown players at 50NL suck this badly, I'm clearly playing at the wrong sites. You're talking like a player who's been running white-hot recently. All other players are donks, eh? Also, how can you possibly think that most players will check/raise that turn with a crappy low pocket pair? Please provide hand histories. I'd be delighted if I was wrong. [/ QUOTE ] see the problem is ur assuming that every 50nl player is a 2+2 who understand betting and so forth...the average player and thats just a wrong assumption...could this guy be a solid player...of course...its just not always likely. further after lookin at this hand we are left wondering a few things: why would someone with a queen: A. miniraise the turn if its a sign of extreme strength on this board? would make no sense to act this strong as u say against a person whose showing aggression the entire hand? B. Why would bet almost 50 on the river with a queen when the largest bet so far was a raise to 18...the push is only good agianst people who have aces, kings,jacks type hands and so far we have under represented our hand to some degree especially with the turn call of the raise.
|
|
#27
02-02-2007, 03:48 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NL50 - muck FH ?
I love how mattnxtc's post starts out with the premise that the level of play here is below the level of analysis on 2+2, which of course is true, but then proceeds to explain how everyone knows that a check/minraise is a sign of strength, therefore Villain can't possibly have the hand he's representing.
In fact I think most players are bad enough to slowplay at the wrong times, but not wild enough to c/r with 55 on a QQ4-Q board. Why would Villain bet 50 on the river? It's what's left in his stack, not to mention the pot size. And of course, replying to an earlier post, Villain's line makes no sense whatsoever for a bare nine. I probably couldn't make this fold at the table, but it's very hard to see Villain playing any other hand this way. Maybe you see TT-KK enough to offset the times you see the case queen, but not many Vs c/minraise KK on this turn. And if they played KK that way for information, they don't seem to be unhappy at the information they received!
|
|
#29
02-02-2007, 04:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NL50 - muck FH ?
I have no doubt that this POV is the conventional wisdom. But I learn a lot from questioning CW, regardless of whether the questioning reinforces it in my mind or not.
To make a convincing case that folding is wrong, you have to make the case that 55-KK play this way often enough to make the relative likelihood based on card combinations relevant. To make the case that folding is right, you have to argue that those hannds don't play like this. That's harder to do, because examples of people playing KK much more passively don't demonstrate that other people wouldn't play it more aggressively. The CW could be right here, but I don't see any clear cut reason to think that Qx is only a small part of your opponent's range.
|
|
#30
02-02-2007, 04:15 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NL50 - muck FH ?
broadway,
I highly agree with you about questioning CW. In this case, most villains think that any pocket pair, and any 4 are the stone cold nuts. If villain did have quads, he is more likely to check/raise the river than actually the turn, at least based on my experiences. Often on a paired flop, any PP, any 4 are looking you up on a CB. On the turn, they hit a full house, and from there, they can care less what you are holding. The chances of villain bluffing with air to having a hand you crush is about 95%.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
