|
|
#41
08-30-2007, 04:54 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: KJs river flush vs Leatherass
Daut:
this post looks at this hand in a total vacuum, which is not the way to approach many poker hands. assuming leatherass and hero play often, by not raising here, he is playing completely transparent. If I did call here, I would be bluff-raising waay more flops, turns, and rivers over the next 200 hands against Villain. 
|
|
#43
08-30-2007, 04:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: KJs river flush vs Leatherass
[ QUOTE ]
i think its really close between raise and call given the texture of the board, but i suspect call is the correct play given your opponent. [/ QUOTE ] Even though its close i doubt that calling is our best option. He's definetely calling with worse. I think however that a really small raise size and fold to a shove may be more optimal than a shove. I think what the most interesting part of this hand is the fact that our hand is super transparent and it is very hard for us to balance our range here. What else can we call the flop with that we would bluff the river with? Nothing that I can think of, unless we decide to float air here because of such a "transparency." It would seem dumb to raise the river with a set or two pair because of the huge% of the time we have a flush.
|
|
#44
08-30-2007, 04:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: KJs river flush vs Leatherass
i dont think leatherass has those small flushes in his range nearly as often as the high ones. and i think hes very capable of folding them.
and the sets given the texture and how the hand played out are easy laydowns. and your argument for bluffing is true, but think about it this way: what are we bluffing with here? did we really float a 4 way 3/4 pot bet on the flop with total air and 2 players left to act behind us? it would be interesting if we are, but i seriously doubt jamie is ever doing this, and at least leatherass never thinks he is.
|
|
#46
08-30-2007, 04:57 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: KJs river flush vs Leatherass
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] this thread astonishes me, and the posters here need to think a little outside their own worlds and have an open mind about every situation they encounter. my guess would be that is why most of you are stuck in mid stakes, because you are stuck in paradigms preventing you from improving past a certain level. [/ QUOTE ] I think it's a little unfair you say this considering before you won a big tournament and were fortunate enough to win a contest to be TC's protege you were just a midstakes player. [/ QUOTE ] then maybe i can better see what keeps people in midstakes than others. and also, before TC i was beating 5/10 pretty hard and starting to move into 10/20. and besides, its not like he really helped me very much in anything other than heads up play.
|
|
#48
08-30-2007, 04:59 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: KJs river flush vs Leatherass
[ QUOTE ]
i dont think leatherass has those small flushes in his range nearly as often as the high ones. and i think hes very capable of folding them. and the sets given the texture and how the hand played out are easy laydowns. and your argument for bluffing is true, but think about it this way: what are we bluffing with here? did we really float a 4 way 3/4 pot bet on the flop with total air and 2 players left to act behind us? it would be interesting if we are, but i seriously doubt jamie is ever doing this, and at least leatherass never thinks he is. [/ QUOTE ] i would bluff AJ here in a second, apparently leatherass isn't calling anything except the absolute nuts.
|
|
#49
08-30-2007, 04:59 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: KJs river flush vs Leatherass
[ QUOTE ]
Daut: this post looks at this hand in a total vacuum, which is not the way to approach many poker hands. assuming leatherass and hero play often, by not raising here, he is playing completely transparent. If I did call here, I would be bluff-raising waay more flops, turns, and rivers over the next 200 hands against Villain. [/ QUOTE ] i disagree. look at the texture and the way the hand played out man, you have to understand that just because we play passive in the worst spot for a really good hand does not mean we are not being aggressive and value betting thin enough to get paid off. ill be honest. in the heat of the moment i would without a doubt shove here. but think about it clearly for about 2 or 3 minutes and you should see its really not obvious either way whether its better to raise or not and in fact is pretty close. yeah the metagame implications play a factor and really they are the most compelling argument to raise, but i dont think they counteract the other logical standpoints that its probably -ev to shove.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
