#51
|
|||
|
|||
Re: grade the level of poker thinking in this explanation
kind of funny, but was my initial thought process on the situation. Unfortunatly, after thinking about it for awhile I think your hand is pretty obviously ace high so you may get bet out by another ace high hand.. Only downside.
If you put his 3-barreling range to be 77-AA and AK, there are 39 combos of PP and 9 combos of AK (which you are calling to chop). This means a good villain has a near optimal betting distribution on the river 0wning the crap out of you. The more I think about it, and his hand range , I may want to c/r this flop and just bet all the way down. If he has an overpair and gives you action, you lose barely anything more If he has a mid-pair and calls you down when your UI most of the time you are making around the same as if you had just c/c down.. You lose a little implied odds on your heart, but gain a little deception on your other cards. Why getting agressive against some opponents is t3h nuts is that you are retaking the initiative against another AK (still 9 combos), possibly stealing the pot.. Or if hes a showdown monkey value p0wning AQ. Another important fact to cosnider is if you get repopped anywhere, it is basically never done by a worse hand (wont go into why).. So you dont have to worry about getting value p0wned or bluffed... I think the key to playing this hand is extremly dependent on meta game conditions as well as the skill level of your opponent. I think the thought process of OP is perfect against a very good solid value oriented opponent who will check behind all their ace high hands, and never has a hand like 78s or KQs in their PF range, but against many other player types (including IMO the best in the world) there is a better line to take. Calling the river against some, and getting agressive against others. Another thing to consider is how you would play your pocket pairs on this board... by making your hand look like ace high, you may get a lot of bets on the river that probabily wouldnt normally bet the river... (hands trying to fold out A hi as well as mid PP). Assuming you care at all about information hiding... Guessing the best strategy would be something close to: c/r and bet all the way down with sets + high PP + AK hearts + some other flush draw c/c down with mid PPs and a few combos of AK c/c, c/f with other combos of AK and AQ/AJ/AT including if they have heart draws AK being the tweener hand that depends on opponents preflop distribution |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
results
i like your answer the best. it summarizes my thinking on the hand and hero's mediocre incomplete uneducated thought process.
the hero in the hand is go_seminoles winning online 1k-2k player. the hand is from a high stakes forum hand posted by joe tall. the bb is death donkey. the recent go seminoles thread in high stakes is what brought around this post. im not out to get the guy, just prove that he plays non-expertly and non-experts can run super good for super long. |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
Re: grade the level of poker thinking in this explanation
Because you donīt think you can get AK to fold anyway or what ?
|
#54
|
|||
|
|||
Re: grade the level of poker thinking in this explanation
If you cant get AK to fold, can you get AQ to call? That is qvuestion
|
#55
|
|||
|
|||
Re: grade the level of poker thinking in this explanation
mike you are awesome. you post 1 hand over a series of thousands I had while I was out for the wsop. I like how the other thead died down so you had to bring it over here. If your point is that I suck and that anyone can win over a 4 year span at the highest stakes online, then so be it, point made, you win. GG me. Or, if you for some reason think you are that much better than me, I'll play you HU, I don't care. Prove that you can beat me around with a pwning stick and I won't say another word.
I think to be "expert" you need to play every hand the exact same way every time because if you play it at all any differently, you played it wrong. The only thing I believe I might have done wrong on this hand was not c/r the flop to get more info on where I was at with my hand. But what happens if I do that? I either get 3 bet on the flop or called then raised on the turn. Once either of these happen, I obviously can't fold until I see the river (in which I have now put out either double the bets I would have if I played it the way I did or just an extra bet). Now the river is a blank...do I lead out and try and steal...probably not...do I check and call down with ace high? Maybe after putting that many bets in, I would. But yeah, forgot I was done explaining things to you. I play the way I want to, and it's my money to lose, so please quit being a little prick and posting thread after thread about this hand. |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
Re: grade the level of poker thinking in this explanation
dont you understand yet that you as a person and player are at this point almost irrelevant to the discussion? so stop taking it personally. all you are is a piece of evidence. the point is guys who have a mediocre thought process about the game can randomly run good for long periods of time and go on to beat huge online games. nothing youve said or can say at this point will convince anyone that you play expertly. i submit as evidence the Q high hand you played in the other thread, or the hand where you limped utg in a full 1-2 game with A6o.
kudos to you that you ran super good, for all i care i hope you continue to do so. there wont be any hu grudge match between us, although i do have a friend named crazy mike who id delight in seeing you beat. |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
Re: grade the level of poker thinking in this explanation
[ QUOTE ]
mike you are awesome. you post 1 hand over a series of thousands I had while I was out for the wsop. I like how the other thead died down so you had to bring it over here. If your point is that I suck and that anyone can win over a 4 year span at the highest stakes online, then so be it, point made, you win. GG me. Or, if you for some reason think you are that much better than me, I'll play you HU, I don't care. Prove that you can beat me around with a pwning stick and I won't say another word. I think to be "expert" you need to play every hand the exact same way every time because if you play it at all any differently, you played it wrong. The only thing I believe I might have done wrong on this hand was not c/r the flop to get more info on where I was at with my hand. But what happens if I do that? I either get 3 bet on the flop or called then raised on the turn. Once either of these happen, I obviously can't fold until I see the river (in which I have now put out either double the bets I would have if I played it the way I did or just an extra bet). Now the river is a blank...do I lead out and try and steal...probably not...do I check and call down with ace high? Maybe after putting that many bets in, I would. But yeah, forgot I was done explaining things to you. I play the way I want to, and it's my money to lose, so please quit being a little prick and posting thread after thread about this hand. [/ QUOTE ] I would like to go on record as saying that I too think mike is FOS. I constantly tell myself that his babble is nonsense and that there must be something that these big game players do so much better than the rest of us. There must be some deeper understanding, clarity in the minds of guys like you who just get it. I constantly have to cut him off and tell him to STFU. And then you start posting, and I am waiting, so patiently waiting to read stuff that we don't think of. Things that set you apart. And then the disappointment hits. The disappointment that comes from realizing you don't get it any better and that the best we get is "not c/r the flop to get more info on where I was at with my hand". No mention of any special read on deathdonkey or hand ranges or metagame or equity. And then to finish it off we get namecalling and the inevitable "c'mon dude HUHU for rolls" stuff as the knockout punch. So basically that phucking mikel guy is right after all. Again goddamn it. I am getting tired of it. Meh. |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
Re: grade the level of poker thinking in this explanation
"The only thing I believe I might have done wrong on this hand was not c/r the flop for value"
|
#59
|
|||
|
|||
Re: grade the level of poker thinking in this explanation
[ QUOTE ]
"The only thing I believe I might have done wrong on this hand was not c/r the flop for value" [/ QUOTE ] Duh. DeathDonkey had a set. How dumb can you be Victor? |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
Re: grade the level of poker thinking in this explanation
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] "The only thing I believe I might have done wrong on this hand was not c/r the flop for value" [/ QUOTE ] Duh. DeathDonkey had a set. How dumb can you be Victor? [/ QUOTE ] more than you could imagine. |
|
|