![]() |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I love.
|
#42
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
JIM YOUR AVITAR MAKES ME LAOUGH
|
#43
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
He obviously has an overpair, it just depends on whether you think the guy will fold. If he's as nitty as you think he is then he can't call, NH, well played.
One thing I wonder though, why would you ever show when he folds? Isn't it better for him to go on thinking you had AJ so he continues in his nitty ways vs you? If he starts playing back at you when you still perceive him to be a nit, isn't that a bad thing? Or maybe he won't, but you think he might, and you could make some bad call downs or miss out on some bluff oppurtunities because of it? Maintaining the metagame status quo of him laying down without the goods seems better to me. |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
You got balls thiiiiisss big.
|
#45
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
allin, are you known to float in position? cuz this could be seen as a float double follow through [/ QUOTE ] Yeah, I float quite a bit, but IIRC I had not floated him before or gotten out of line vs. him. Besides how often do you really see people at $400nl and $600nl follow through on a float? And still even if he suspects it, do you think he can call? |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
One thing I wonder though, why would you ever show when he folds? Isn't it better for him to go on thinking you had AJ so he continues in his nitty ways vs you? [/ QUOTE ] Maybe. I'm not sure. [ QUOTE ] If he starts playing back at you when you still perceive him to be a nit, isn't that a bad thing? Or maybe he won't, but you think he might, and you could make some bad call downs or miss out on some bluff oppurtunities because of it? [/ QUOTE ] After showing such a bluff, I'd be very wary of any changes in his style of play. And I'd lay low vs. him for a while. And usually I think it's more profitable if people start making decisions they're not used to comfortable versus you. I doubt he can suddenly change his nitty ways and call down w/ TPNK versus me for a stack or something. So I think getting him off-balance, and ofcourse being careful to notice how (and if) he adjusts, is better. [ QUOTE ] Maintaining the metagame status quo of him laying down without the goods seems better to me. [/ QUOTE ] I'm not sure, I just don't find nits the most profitable to play against. Picking up uncontested blinds/winning small pots with continuation bets is good, but I want action on some of my hands as well. |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] If I had posted it from villians perspective which hands would you recommend calling the river with? [/ QUOTE ] This is not a good approach as it changes the whole character of the hand. I would beat some opponents into the pot with a hand as weak as QQ here and there are others against whom AJo is an easy muck. When I see a line like yours (which is rarely), I usually know the player well enough to know what to do. I also tend to go with my gut instinct in weird situations like this over logical analysis. Timing tells throughout the hand and general feel in the moment can swing me one way or the other. [/ QUOTE ] Yeah. What I was trying to get at is that even though your initial reaction is that "hmm... something isn't quite right", you'll have a very hard time calling because why couldn't this just as well be a boat that failed to extract enough money eariler and now wants to get max value? And while I probably should have bet more on the turn, I don't see why it's so unbelieveable I really have AJ+? If I really held 99 here what would you think of the river push? Would you say "nice extraction, he'll definitly looks you up with overpairs (his most likely hand), because this looks like a bluff"? EDIT: BTW, I doubt I would have pulled this bluff had the flop been 2-suited. |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I think it's fine, barring the fact that I'd bet a little more on turn, 180ish as someone said sounds fine. Other than that I like it as long as villain is fairly tight.
|
#49
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
What about a !DONKish! 1/4th turn bet? ..followed by a quick 5/6th river bet. Seems to accomplish the same thing and might even seem a little more convincing, simply because of it's 'innocence'. And on the plus: it keeps the pot and bluff amount small.
Did you see latest High Stakes Poker, when Jen bluffed Dan? She simply kept 'valuebetting'. |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] check the river!!!! no worst hand calls and any bigger hand spits on you [/ QUOTE ] ok, go ahead and call 1000 on the river here w/ KK and report back on how it worked out for u. [/ QUOTE ] UTG checked. Why wouldn't he check behind? [/ QUOTE ] you are dumb as hell. [/ QUOTE ] QFT |
![]() |
|
|