|
|
|||||||
| View Poll Results: What cardrooms comes to mind when you think B&M | |||
| I have small local mini-cardrooms in my state |
   
|
30 | 29.70% |
| My buddy vinnie or Guido's house |
  
|
1 | 0.99% |
| Tropicana,Sands,Taj Mahal |
  
|
11 | 10.89% |
| Wynn, Mirage, Bellagio |
  
|
54 | 53.47% |
| Oldschool Binions |
  
|
5 | 4.95% |
| Voters: 101. You may not vote on this poll | |||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#261
08-13-2007, 04:45 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Question 33
[ QUOTE ]
So if Brunson is "reasonable in his aggresssion"... [/ QUOTE ] If Brunson was reasonable in his aggression, you never would have heard of him. This style defines unreasonable aggression. The gameplan is to take lots of uncontested pots (primary way to win), get people to play back hard with vulnerable made hands, and stack them with an unlikely holding. 
|
|
#262
08-13-2007, 05:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Question 33
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] So if Brunson is "reasonable in his aggresssion"... [/ QUOTE ] If Brunson was reasonable in his aggression, you never would have heard of him. This style defines unreasonable aggression. The gameplan is to take lots of uncontested pots (primary way to win), get people to play back hard with vulnerable made hands, and stack them with an unlikely holding. [/ QUOTE ] Well, now we're getting into Bill Clinton territory of defining what "reasonable" is. You're obviously right, from one perspective--but from another, how unreasonable can a style that wins 10 bracelets be?
|
|
#264
08-13-2007, 05:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Question 33
[ QUOTE ]
To bring us back on track . . . anyone else want to take a crack at Question 35, or should I go ahead and post #36? [/ QUOTE ] I think we're ready.
|
|
#265
08-13-2007, 07:28 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Question 33
[ QUOTE ]
That's the passage I was relying on--you can judge for yourself whether it's relevant for this question or not. [/ QUOTE ] I wasn't disagreeing with you -- that if we were playing against Doyle, and it looked like he wanted us to fold, we should shove. And Doyle would want us to fold if he had 67 here, or at least he should. You said he doesn't mind "gambling", but if we never fold here, then it's -EV for Doyle to move all-in on this draw. As worded, the question seems to indicate that this is a fairly tight, somewhat passive player (he's playing 15% of his hands, only raising 5%). This guy may be making a move on us to get us to fold -- but it sure doesn't look like it from the information we have. One big part of the equation that isn't mentioned, is our table image. What does the Villain think we would do here? We should probably do the opposite of that. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
|
|
#266
08-13-2007, 09:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Question 33
I actually agree with Kip here. I have no idea what "reasonable" actually means in this context. Does it mean passive? Does it mean reasonably aggressive? Does it take into account our table image?
This is a really tough situation, that requires alot of backup information. I think the test writer probably wants you to fold, but I just think its such a close call that its awfully hard to know for sure what is right without a VERY good read. I will say that if you could put a guy in this situation to essentially having only an overset or a straight, you would have plenty better opportunities to get his money in any event. Lets see the next question!
|
|
#267
08-14-2007, 10:17 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Question 36
5/10 NL. 9 Handed. Everyone has about $1,000. You're in early position with:
A[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]A[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] UTG limps. You raise to $50. Two players in middle position call, and UTG calls. The flop is: 10[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]2[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]4[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] The pot is $265 and you bet $200. UTG folds and the first middle position player (loose/passive) raises all-in for $750 more. Everyone folds to you.
|
|
#268
08-14-2007, 01:10 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Question 36
[ QUOTE ]
UTG limps. You raise to $50. Two players in middle position call, and UTG calls. The flop is: 10[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]2[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]4[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] The pot is $265 and you bet $200. UTG folds and the first middle position player (loose/passive) raises all-in for $750 more. [/ QUOTE ] This action can't happen in this order. I'm assuming it should be: you bet $200, MP1 raises all-in, MP2 + UTG fold. Anyway, I voted fold. Again. I'm starting to feel like a weak passive player. [img]/images/graemlins/crazy.gif[/img]
|
|
#269
08-14-2007, 01:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Question 36
I voted fold also. I cant see a reasonable holding for a passive player going all in that we are a favorite to beat. And because he is loose, he could have basically any combination that would make a set or 2 pair. Our best hope is he hit a flush draw on the flop and is semi-bluffing, and that isnt alot of hope.
Loose Aggressive here would be a tougher question.
|
|
#270
08-14-2007, 05:22 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Question 36
at .05/.10, I snap call this. Villain's range could include QQ, JJ, AT, and those outweigh TT, 44, 22.
I think testmaker wants us to fold at 5/10. Our "loose passive" opponent saw PFR (us) bet into a field of 4, and he's still willing to risk everything with 2 players yet to act. This is not a "passive" action with an overpair or TPTK. Two pair is out of the question, by the way. Someone calling a preflop raise in middle position with T4 or 42 is more than just loose passive.
|
|
|
|
Linear Mode
