|
|
#343
08-14-2007, 04:56 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: * * * * AUGUST LOW CONTENT THREAD * * * *
Second hand's a cooler, and it's funny that you lost to quad 7s twice, but you played the first hand really bad. First off, you should be leading the flop, rather than letting weak trips check behind, and the turn raise is terrible. You're behind way more than 50% and a good player will lay down AA easy there.
|
|
#344
08-14-2007, 05:00 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: * * * * AUGUST LOW CONTENT THREAD * * * *
[ QUOTE ]
First off, you should be leading the flop, [/ QUOTE ] probably. [ QUOTE ] the turn raise is terrible. You're behind way more than 50% [/ QUOTE ] This is HU against a bad aggro opponent and one card beats me. How am I behind way more than 50%? [ QUOTE ] a good player will lay down AA easy there. [/ QUOTE ] This guy DEFINITELY wouldn't have.
|
|
#347
08-14-2007, 07:16 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: * * * * AUGUST LOW CONTENT THREAD * * * *
Well, in the first place, according to my quick calculations, there are 15 times as many combinations of 7xxx as there are combinations of AAxx in this spot. And the turn bet size is more consistent with a 7 than with AA anyway.
Against a standard opponent, check/fold > bet/fold > check/call >>>>>>>>>> check/raise. If you want to argue for check/call or bet/fold against a total donk fine, but C/Ring's still ridiculous.
|
|
#348
08-14-2007, 07:23 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: * * * * AUGUST LOW CONTENT THREAD * * * *
mostly i just wanted to complain about losing to quad 7's two hands in a row. I'm not at all saying I played the hand well. But, his betting / calling range is much wider than 7xxx or AAxx without question.
|
|
#349
08-14-2007, 07:53 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: * * * * AUGUST LOW CONTENT THREAD * * * *
|
|
#350
08-15-2007, 02:48 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: * * * * AUGUST LOW CONTENT THREAD * * * *
What's he doing calling re-raises with hands containing Jack-Five?
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
