Stupid preflop decision vs DeathDonkey

[vmacosta]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
why is it that all these great poker minds are wasting their time bickering about such an unimportant little pf decision?

btw i vote call but i am looser than most.

[/ QUOTE ]

Because little decisions like this are the only ones remotely worth discussing. I think I probably dump it. Also, mike, talking about those of you who 'primarily play live' isn't especially worthwhile because I can't imagine how this could be a live vs. online decision. I mean sure, you get better reads postflop and maybe pay off less when you are behind, but even online players pick up reads vs. guys like this when playing live, and the difference between what you see vs. a guy like this and what i see can't be all that much different.

I think ultimately this decision is so close that it's probably not worth discussing tooooo much, but now that I've typed this whole post, I think that in a vaccuum it's a fold, but there are certain table conditions where it would be a call(most notably if there are players who would become more likely to attack what will ultimately give you a weak/nit/unstandard folding type image).

James

James

[/ QUOTE ]

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...;gonew=1#UNREAD

James,
Personally I think the above post is worth discussing much more. Both because it applies to more expensive streets and because it comes up way more often. Care to comment? Also, how about Stoxtrader, Schneids, Mike L, DD, Clark, and some of the many other excellent players who popped up in this thread?

[mike l.]

"For you guys advocating calling or capping, are there any hands, in this situation, that you would raise with on the button and not continue on with when sb 3-bets and DD 4-bets? or that Joe should raise with on the button and not continue on?"

YES! id be thrilled to throw away anything like K9o or A4o or whatever for two more bets. all sorts of crap like that belongs in the muck.

[andyfox]

Does the suitedness of Joe's 9-7 really make that much difference? Is suitedness, generally, more or less important in shorthanded, as opposed to longhanded, games?

[James282]

[ QUOTE ]
Does the suitedness of Joe's 9-7 really make that much difference? Is suitedness, generally, more or less important in shorthanded, as opposed to longhanded, games?

[/ QUOTE ]

Mathematically speaking, suitedness is super important both short and long handed. I mean it's "more" important long handed because you'd always limp a hand like 97s behind a few limpers and never limp 97o, but, it's also very important in spots like this. It's a 5% edge. Blackjack players spray wet dreams daily for 5% in their favor.

James

[mike l.]

it's the non broadwayness that makes a difference. being suited helps too obviously.

[PokerBob]

[ QUOTE ]
DD 4 bet specifically because he knew joe would fold hands he should call with and then he'd get to play a pot with dead money with a pair heads up in position against a really weak player

[/ QUOTE ]

if a good, aggro player was in the small blind, calling (or maybe even capping, but i doubt it) makes much more sense, as his range is huge and we are much less likely to be in big trouble.

this whole dynamic between Joe and DD matters much more in that case. when SB is this weak guy who never raises preflop, the Joe/DD dynamic becomes moot. he has you both killed.

[Clarkmeister]

[ QUOTE ]
he has you both killed.


[/ QUOTE ]

There are 3 more streets to play and he's predictable and OOP. Joe is getting odds from the pot that surpass his equity and he's going to have maximum playing advantage the rest of the way since he knows his opponents range, his opponent plays poorly, Joe plays well, and Joe has position.

[PokerBob]

[ QUOTE ]
Joe is getting odds from the pot that surpass his equity

[/ QUOTE ]

unfortunately, Joe is not all-in, so this matters much less. When the flop comes down A92, K92, Q74, A97, K97, Q97, J97,etc. he has to see the river because now the pot is so [censored] big that he has odds, but may be drawing stone dead. wonderful.

the other thing that is getting overlooked here is DD's play. 44 is a fold there. wtf??????

[Joe Tall]

[ QUOTE ]
joe should know by now this is what chris thinks of his play and surprise him some times by getting a little out of line and throwing him some laggro curve balls. this would have been a great time to do that.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was well aware of what Chris could be capable here. But I made the mistake of thinking DD had a read on the SB (which later said he didn't at this time but agreed to mine) since this hand was early-ish after Chris sat down (I had played with the SB for about 2hours before Chris sat down).

[Schneids]

[ QUOTE ]
joe should 5 bet (or at least call) because chris had 44 and he said he 4 bet specifically because he knew joe would fold hands he should call with and then he'd get to play a pot with dead money with a pair heads up in position against a really weak player. joe should know by now this is what chris thinks of his play and surprise him some times by getting a little out of line and throwing him some laggro curve balls. this would have been a great time to do that.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're focusing on Chris, but SB still has a hand too. 5-betting isn't magic pixie dust that turns SB's Aces into JT.

That, and, the simple fact is Chris SHOULD have a hand that is legit here pretty often too.

My personal opinion is Chris's estimated 4-betting hand range is INSANE and it is not winning poker to have that large of a hand range in this situation, but if he does in fact, then oh well this one hand he gets us to fold a better one.

If this raise, 3b, 4b scenario starts happening more than once every 8 hrs and it starts to look like they're trying to bully you around after you fold once, then you start playing.


And am I allowed to guess that the SB in this pot was Piejay?