Open-Ended Versus Nath

[MLG]

I still say TT+ with a flush draw out there. I just dont see very many hands he calls the flop with and then folds no a blank turn, maybe like 88?

[Pudge714]

[ QUOTE ]
Fold preflop. Nath should've too, pretty much regardless of what he had.

[/ QUOTE ]
If Nath should be folding 88-99 here he should probably be flatting JJ/QQ AK.

[mastr]

mlg, that's exactly why check/fold flop is the way to go...

[Exitonly]

[ QUOTE ]
An utg raise with no money in the pot at a stars 9 handed table is usually quite strong, and I think raising T8s in this spot isn't very good at all... and with typical players I think calling with 88 in this spot is bad.

[/ QUOTE ]


if utg's range is typically strong, and t8s is uncommon here, how come we dont have the implied odds for sets? He'll stack off to us decently often, and we're not calling that much of our stack off.

560/8000 with antes, vs an utg raiser, with table to act behind (if table was squeezy fold, but often youll just get more callers), i think i call with a bunch of pairs here.

[gobboboy]

I've been playing a lot tighter in situations like this with small to mid pairs and I've stopped bleeding off a lot of chips in key parts of the tournament. The stuper gets a decent amount of reraises from behind with a lot of hands (which you can't call, ever).

You're not getting odds to play straight up for a set against a good player, and you can't play smallish pairs in position profitably after the flop when you expect there to be a big pot and a good player with the lead. What do you possibly expect, if he fires the flop and you call with middle pair and he jams the turn, whoopee, time for a hero call?

[Exitonly]

you keep saying we're not getting odds for a set, but we're pretty damn close, so if we can win the pot without a set some % of the time it should be profitable.

And like i said, if the table was squeezy i'd fold, but that's dependent on the table.

[gobboboy]

If we're going to be playing this pot without a set then the hand becomes less profitable imo because we're not going to be able to play profitably against Foucault's range on the array of flops that would occur. It's either set odds or nothing, and I think we need like 4k more for 88- to be profitable.

[nath]

Mike,

I think anyone who's paying attention at all should realize my range is pretty tight here, especially after the flop call. It seems however that I still get a share of people who see the screen name first and the action second and throw out logic and hand reading because they think I'm nuts.

[Pudge714]

Oh btw c/c the turn Nath is so crazy he could show up here with like 35

[mastr]

damn it everyone check fold the flop and don't raise this pre initially