Fuper hand w/ Erick Lindgren

[adanthar]

[ QUOTE ]
Can someone point me to a hand Erick's holding that would make his line plausible, assuming he is playing well and not dicking around?

[/ QUOTE ]

given our flop bet size, pretty much anything. I mean, I don't even like a flop check here but it sure beats a 5K bet, and this is why.

as played call because (if ansky's right about PF being that wide) he can easily be trying to bluff you off a 'split'.

[uclabruinz]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Can someone point me to a hand Erick's holding that would make his line plausible, assuming he is playing well and not dicking around?

[/ QUOTE ]

given our flop bet size, pretty much anything. I mean, I don't even like a flop check here but it sure beats a 5K bet, and this is why.

as played call because (if ansky's right about PF being that wide) he can easily be trying to bluff you off a 'split'.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have a hard time seeing hands that beat us take the entire line (preflop included). For example, I talked to Ansky about this privately and one area of disagreement that we have is that he says Lindgren could have AT here. Doesn't AT seem like an awful preflop call?

[MLG]

ucla, he could def have it. hands that beat us that worry me...

56/76s. KQ w/1 diamond. AT/JT in no particular order. I dont think he bets many weak aces, i do think he could reverse float here sometimes intending to bet, or could have missed diamonds here.

[uclabruinz]

MLG, you seriously think he played any of those hands well? That's what I am getting at. I'm not saying he can't have any of those hands, I'm just saying I really wouldn't expect a very good player to play any of those hands in the manner they were played here.

[Todd Terry]

[ QUOTE ]
MLG, you seriously think he played any of those hands well? That's what I am getting at. I'm not saying he can't have any of those hands, I'm just saying I really wouldn't expect a very good player to play any of those hands in the manner they were played here.

[/ QUOTE ]

With AT, I would bet the flop. All of the other hands MLG listed I would probably play the way Lindgren played them. I think TT and 66 and maybe JJ would play the same way as well. For the reverse float hands, I just can't see folding to the small flop bet after everyone else folded and I have the bettor outchipped.

As far as the river bet, I think Lindgren's less likely to bet out if he has OP beat, because he has little reason to think he's getting called. At the same time, he has little reason to think OP will try to bet, since he checked behind on the river. Under those circumstances, whether to throw out a river bet that looks like a bluff is a toss-up.

[luckychewy]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Can someone point me to a hand Erick's holding that would make his line plausible, assuming he is playing well and not dicking around?

[/ QUOTE ]

given our flop bet size, pretty much anything. I mean, I don't even like a flop check here but it sure beats a 5K bet, and this is why.

as played call because (if ansky's right about PF being that wide) he can easily be trying to bluff you off a 'split'.

[/ QUOTE ]

if he's peeling flop real wide to a 5k bet and bluffing the river after turn goes chk chk how is betting 5k worse than checking, assuming we are going to call the river?

[mikeJ]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Can someone point me to a hand Erick's holding that would make his line plausible, assuming he is playing well and not dicking around?

[/ QUOTE ]

given our flop bet size, pretty much anything. I mean, I don't even like a flop check here but it sure beats a 5K bet, and this is why.


[/ QUOTE ]

A check is better than a 5k bet, because it might induce a bluff enough that we have a tough river decision?

That seems results oriented. I mean, if he had KQ/67, I want him to peel flop for 5k. Even if I pay off this river bet his flop call is still incorrect.

I agree the hand would've been a lot easier, and probably better played if I bet 7-8k on flop, but saying that a check is better than 5k doesn't seem right.

[adanthar]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Can someone point me to a hand Erick's holding that would make his line plausible, assuming he is playing well and not dicking around?

[/ QUOTE ]

given our flop bet size, pretty much anything. I mean, I don't even like a flop check here but it sure beats a 5K bet, and this is why.


[/ QUOTE ]

A check is better than a 5k bet, because it might induce a bluff enough that we have a tough river decision?

[/ QUOTE ]

no, 5K is bad because it doesn't narrow down his range at all while simultaneously not getting enough value vs whatever he's gonna decide to peel with in the first place.

like, if ansky's read is right, he might still peel with QJ and certainly peels any ace for 8K, so just go ahead and bet 8K. then call the river because the pot is big and your effective stacks are going to be right for him to bluff shove a lot, anyway.

the reason betting 5K makes this a tougher decision is because he's quite possibly actually bluffing this particular river/pot size less often.

[dumbndumb]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Can someone point me to a hand Erick's holding that would make his line plausible, assuming he is playing well and not dicking around?

[/ QUOTE ]

given our flop bet size, pretty much anything. I mean, I don't even like a flop check here but it sure beats a 5K bet, and this is why.

as played call because (if ansky's right about PF being that wide) he can easily be trying to bluff you off a 'split'.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know that much about EL, but I think this is a fold. Take a look at the hands that he has that could beat you and those that do not and think about what is more likely here.

The hands that beat you are a 6 with some kind of connector, pocket 6s, JJ (don't know how he plays and if he would always rr PF so I am assuming this is a possibility), A10, AJ, and KQ. Because of your small flop bet and turn check he could have stuck around with A10 or KQ. He my have AJ or a 6 and checked to you on the turn with the intent of CRAI. He knows by now that you do not have AJ and probably not AK given your turn check on that board (some may say this makes it more likely that you should call because it increases the chance he is bluffing), but I think it is easy for him to narrow your range here.

What if you look at the hand another way: What could he have that he has stuck around with that you beat? The only thing I can really see is a flush draw (and what flush draw calls in his position PF? K10?) or a J of some sort that he now thinks is no good and needs to bet to take the pot. He could have complete air, but I always thought EL was a reasonable player. Given the PF action and this flop/board he would really have to be f'ing around to have stuck around just to try to take the pot now.

I think I fold.

[dumbndumb]

[ QUOTE ]
ucla, he could def have it. hands that beat us that worry me...

56/76s. KQ w/1 diamond. AT/JT in no particular order. I dont think he bets many weak aces, i do think he could reverse float here sometimes intending to bet, or could have missed diamonds here.

[/ QUOTE ]

MLG,

We should be delighted, not worried, if he has JT. DUCY?