Two Plus Two Newer Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Newer Archives > PL/NL Texas Hold'em > Small Stakes
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 10-27-2007, 09:13 PM
Dire Dire is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,511
Default Re: 200/400 NL - Overbet = Nuts?

Hand 1: of course you would not check behind AK/AQ or a 7. On the same note, you also wouldn't typically overbet shove the pot for more than a buyin when looking for value. Don't forget to not only consider his range, but also what sort of range we are representing.

Hand 2: you are failing to understand the point of not shoving here. There are basically no hands that call a second barrel, but fold to a shove. Given the board texture, villain likely either has an ace or some pocket pair or nothing. He's stacking off with aces, and he's folding pocket pairs/air to a second barrel.

The point of not shoving is to allow your opponent to make a huge mistake. If he has a hand like AQ that he's willing to stack off with that just calls (instead of shoving) then we have induced a huge mistake. Since we save a quarter of a buyin (or more) when we don't hit, but we still earn the same when we do hit.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 10-27-2007, 10:02 PM
luckybacon luckybacon is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,430
Default Re: 200/400 NL - Overbet = Nuts?

i dont know really anything about your game but for these bluffs to work especially in hand 1 you have to be able to value bet pretty thin against thinking players.

I rate your bluffs on first level as fine. As in, I dont think you have much therefore ill bet alot to make you fold. I dont think you can rep a strong repuable range
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 10-27-2007, 10:55 PM
jessica1994 jessica1994 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 482
Default Re: 200/400 NL - Overbet = Nuts?

[ QUOTE ]
Hand 1: of course you would not check behind AK/AQ or a 7. On the same note, you also wouldn't typically overbet shove the pot for more than a buyin when looking for value. Don't forget to not only consider his range, but also what sort of range we are representing.



[/ QUOTE ]

if u dont like hand 1 its probably because you think hes going to call too much with AJ/AT because OP is not representing much. so why cant OP be shoving AK/AQ on river if you think villian will call with AJ/AT..
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 10-28-2007, 12:07 AM
Dire Dire is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,511
Default Re: 200/400 NL - Overbet = Nuts?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Hand 1: of course you would not check behind AK/AQ or a 7. On the same note, you also wouldn't typically overbet shove the pot for more than a buyin when looking for value. Don't forget to not only consider his range, but also what sort of range we are representing.

[/ QUOTE ]

if u dont like hand 1 its probably because you think hes going to call too much with AJ/AT because OP is not representing much. so why cant OP be shoving AK/AQ on river if you think villian will call with AJ/AT..

[/ QUOTE ]

It is a matter of percentages. When we're bluffing for 2x potsize, he doesn't have to call very often for it to be -EV for us. When we're value betting for 2x potsize, he has to call rather frequently to make it +EV compared to a normal 3/4-1x potsize bet we think he would usually call.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 10-28-2007, 12:35 AM
billybeartku billybeartku is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 554
Default Re: 200/400 NL - Overbet = Nuts?

i give you 0 out of 10 for both [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 10-28-2007, 02:23 AM
spivey spivey is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,645
Default Re: 200/400 NL - Overbet = Nuts?

Hand 1 I'm not bluffing twice the pot size.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 10-28-2007, 08:51 AM
BombayBadboy BombayBadboy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: CRAI me a river...
Posts: 1,356
Default Re: 200/400 NL - Overbet = Nuts?

In hand 1 you represent 66 only. Like Bilbo said, no way you should check behind here with AQ, but he is not gonna belive you v-bet it this hard.

I don't like hand 2 that much. He is not folding an A, and he might just have made a set with KK.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 10-28-2007, 09:04 AM
deaders deaders is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Perth, AU
Posts: 3,362
Default Re: 200/400 NL - Overbet = Nuts?

hand 1 I dont think your turn bet size meshes with your river overbet.

hand 2 um yeah why not
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 10-28-2007, 09:45 AM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Post deleted by Ryan Beal

Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 10-28-2007, 09:55 AM
martijn martijn is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: punishing minraises
Posts: 533
Default Re: 200/400 NL - Overbet = Nuts?

hand 1 looks good
hand 2 looks bad
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:20 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.