|
|
#41
11-09-2007, 04:31 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: AA no good?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Shorty doesn't really concern me [/ QUOTE ] I stopped there. Thanks for the input. [/ QUOTE ] lol. Easy felt. With those stats, SB is repping 2 hands, 77 and TT. And worrying about drooling short-stackers having a 7 here is, again, lol. So, basically, I've got one guy (DJ) giving us advice based on concrete, actual [censored] READS, and advice from a bunch of other dudes going "12/9 zomg wtf fold". I'm gonna go with the guy who actually has a handle on how SB plays and felt this. [/ QUOTE ] Everybody say hello to the monday morning quarterback. 
|
|
#42
11-09-2007, 06:18 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: AA no good?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] bleh I think its possible he has JJ or a T that wants to see where he's at, but the thing is chances the cold caller has a fd, and at least a fd make your equity so bad i think i muck as well. [/ QUOTE ] I don't get how a flush draw makes it bad? Isn't better if they have flush draws? [/ QUOTE ] Well our equity is much better versus a Ten than a fd.
|
|
#45
11-09-2007, 06:27 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: AA no good?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Shorty doesn't really concern me [/ QUOTE ] I stopped there. Thanks for the input. [/ QUOTE ] lol. Easy felt. With those stats, SB is repping 2 hands, 77 and TT. And worrying about drooling short-stackers having a 7 here is, again, lol. So, basically, I've got one guy (DJ) giving us advice based on concrete, actual [censored] READS, and advice from a bunch of other dudes going "12/9 zomg wtf fold". I'm gonna go with the guy who actually has a handle on how SB plays and felt this. [/ QUOTE ] Everybody say hello to the monday morning quarterback. [/ QUOTE ] I'm a monday-morning quarterback because I am saying that the guy who has an actual read is providing better advice than all the others who don't? This is why games are good. 90% of TAGfish think that reads begin and end with the 3 statistics xx/yy/Z. DJ, on the other hand, has actually taken notes on how the guy plays certain types of hands. But whatever, GL just blindly doing what PAHUD tells ya to.
|
|
#46
11-09-2007, 06:41 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: AA no good?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Shorty doesn't really concern me [/ QUOTE ] I stopped there. Thanks for the input. [/ QUOTE ] lol. Easy felt. With those stats, SB is repping 2 hands, 77 and TT. And worrying about drooling short-stackers having a 7 here is, again, lol. So, basically, I've got one guy (DJ) giving us advice based on concrete, actual [censored] READS, and advice from a bunch of other dudes going "12/9 zomg wtf fold". I'm gonna go with the guy who actually has a handle on how SB plays and felt this. [/ QUOTE ] Everybody say hello to the monday morning quarterback. [/ QUOTE ] I'm a monday-morning quarterback because I am saying that the guy who has an actual read is providing better advice than all the others who don't? This is why games are good. 90% of TAGfish think that reads begin and end with the 3 statistics xx/yy/Z. DJ, on the other hand, has actually taken notes on how the guy plays certain types of hands. But whatever, GL just blindly doing what PAHUD tells ya to. [/ QUOTE ] I have four [censored] lines of notes on the guy. None which were relevant to this hand. Chances are you've never played with him.
|
|
#47
11-09-2007, 06:45 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: AA no good?
worth noting that he'd be more likely to isolate the fish (for value with a hand like Tx) if the fish had already called a flop bet. if he thinks {fish}<his hand<{jk3a} and you fold a high %, he can make a small checkraise with any slowplayed JJ/QQ and good Tx hand.
that is, this SHOULD be a hand that doesn't mind a ton between getting folds/calls (98, spades). although, 12/9s or whatever are typically not known for playing amazingly
|
|
#48
11-09-2007, 07:17 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: AA no good?
[ QUOTE ]
Djjj, Don't listen to pineapple... you give way better strat advice than he does. [/ QUOTE ] Thanks for your valuable contribution to this thread. Tool. Obviously detailed reads can change the strategy here. I don't recall seeing six lines of reads in the initial post. But if your read is that the nit rarely has you beat, and the shorty rarely has you beat, then WTF, get the money in, why the hell even post it? But if it worries you even a bit that an unknown is playing *exactly* like he has you beat... AND you realize that even if you have the nit beat, he's certainly putting in no more money in that case given this action... then why would you do anything but fold?
|
|
#49
11-09-2007, 07:21 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: AA no good?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Shorty doesn't really concern me [/ QUOTE ] I stopped there. Thanks for the input. [/ QUOTE ] lol. Easy felt. With those stats, SB is repping 2 hands, 77 and TT. And worrying about drooling short-stackers having a 7 here is, again, lol. So, basically, I've got one guy (DJ) giving us advice based on concrete, actual [censored] READS, and advice from a bunch of other dudes going "12/9 zomg wtf fold". I'm gonna go with the guy who actually has a handle on how SB plays and felt this. [/ QUOTE ] Everybody say hello to the monday morning quarterback. [/ QUOTE ] I'm a monday-morning quarterback because I am saying that the guy who has an actual read is providing better advice than all the others who don't? This is why games are good. 90% of TAGfish think that reads begin and end with the 3 statistics xx/yy/Z. DJ, on the other hand, has actually taken notes on how the guy plays certain types of hands. But whatever, GL just blindly doing what PAHUD tells ya to. [/ QUOTE ] I have four [censored] lines of notes on the guy. None which were relevant to this hand. Chances are you've never played with him. [/ QUOTE ] Again, WTF? When did I say I knew him? I'm referring to the plethera of posters who also do not know the guy, who read DJ's posts, which were based on very well-thought-out reads, and then proceeded to give you the opposite advice, based on zero reads. I think that kind of behavior is lol. I wasn't saying that you played this hand lol, especially since I don't KNOW how you played it. As played, readless, I push here, because a player with his stats rarely has a 7 here. So his range is TT+/77/big-suited-spades, most of which you beat, and no one ever has quads :P I'm sorry, but given how much I raise, and how often I cbet in spots like this, villain's going to get my stack nearly 100% of the time if he has TT here. And he's STILL going to be wrong to set-mine me. I'm not going to look for heroic folds with really strong hands like this.
|
|
#50
11-09-2007, 07:45 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: AA no good?
The problem is DJ's notes should have nothing to do with this hand as OP didn't have them when making his decision. Being results oriented we can say "Oh you should call because I have this read on him" but it doesn't matter since OP didn't have those reads at the time he had to make his decision.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
