|
|
#11
10-23-2007, 01:49 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: hit two pair turn check raise super DEEP
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] against a player described as tough/tight i dont like the pf call. i think pf calls like this OOP are one of the biggest leaks of the current crop of players. calls like this OOP are reserved for players who will go broke w/ tptk and overpairs not the player described [/ QUOTE ] nitacular. [/ QUOTE ] if mr. gambool is in L.A. (as the name implies) ive been playing in said game (and its earlier equivalents) for the past 20 years and have had time to see thousands of players come and go. many of whom like to call my pfr's w/ crap hands oop for the "implied odds" only to find its not so fun to play tough solid properly bankrolled players oop. some learn some dont...you obviously havent. [/ QUOTE ] wow, so your argument is that you've been playing 20 years therefore I should take your word as god. the funny thing is that unless you play online also i've probably played way more hands than you also. [/ QUOTE ] take my word as god because as far as you're concerned i am god. the better players on this forum can follow the logic of the arguement and make a well thought out counter arguement if they like. 
|
|
#12
10-23-2007, 02:15 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: hit two pair turn check raise super DEEP
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] against a player described as tough/tight i dont like the pf call. i think pf calls like this OOP are one of the biggest leaks of the current crop of players. calls like this OOP are reserved for players who will go broke w/ tptk and overpairs not the player described [/ QUOTE ] nitacular. [/ QUOTE ] if mr. gambool is in L.A. (as the name implies) ive been playing in said game (and its earlier equivalents) for the past 20 years and have had time to see thousands of players come and go. many of whom like to call my pfr's w/ crap hands oop for the "implied odds" only to find its not so fun to play tough solid properly bankrolled players oop. some learn some dont...you obviously havent. [/ QUOTE ] wow, so your argument is that you've been playing 20 years therefore I should take your word as god. the funny thing is that unless you play online i've probably played way more hands than you also. [/ QUOTE ] limon is legit yo
|
|
#13
10-23-2007, 02:28 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: hit two pair turn check raise super DEEP
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] against a player described as tough/tight i dont like the pf call. i think pf calls like this OOP are one of the biggest leaks of the current crop of players. calls like this OOP are reserved for players who will go broke w/ tptk and overpairs not the player described [/ QUOTE ] nitacular. [/ QUOTE ] if mr. gambool is in L.A. (as the name implies) ive been playing in said game (and its earlier equivalents) for the past 20 years and have had time to see thousands of players come and go. many of whom like to call my pfr's w/ crap hands oop for the "implied odds" only to find its not so fun to play tough solid properly bankrolled players oop. some learn some dont...you obviously havent. [/ QUOTE ] wow, so your argument is that you've been playing 20 years therefore I should take your word as god. the funny thing is that unless you play online also i've probably played way more hands than you also. [/ QUOTE ] take my word as god because as far as you're concerned i am god. the better players on this forum can follow the logic of the arguement and make a well thought out counter arguement if they like. [/ QUOTE ] well fine, I'll argue about the hand instead of making statements about how long I've been playing. First off, I think your point of folding this OOP is stronger if there weren't two (or three, don't want to check the action again) limpers behind that are probably going to call if you call. Also, we don't have to play 98 for pure implied odds. We get to make moves on all sorts of flops (76x, 6s5sx, any two spade flop etc etc) that will widen our perceived range and image at the table and enable us to get paid in more situations. If we are only calling here with mid to low pairs here pre, this tough player will never pay us off on any hand.
|
|
#14
10-23-2007, 02:55 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: hit two pair turn check raise super DEEP
the pf argument is pretty dumb. there's nothing wrong with playing 98s for just a pot-sized pf raise with 350bb stacks and probable 3-4way action. there are far bigger mistakes to talk about in this hand on later streets, the turn cr being the biggest imo.
|
|
#15
10-23-2007, 03:14 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: hit two pair turn check raise super DEEP
[ QUOTE ]
the pf argument is pretty dumb. there's nothing wrong with playing 98s for just a pot-sized pf raise with 350bb stacks and probable 3-4way action. there are far bigger mistakes to talk about in this hand on later streets, the turn cr being the biggest imo. [/ QUOTE ] would you check call or bet call or bet shove?
|
|
#16
10-23-2007, 06:36 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: hit two pair turn check raise super DEEP
[ QUOTE ]
playing in said game for the past 20 years [/ QUOTE ] lol i dont blame anyone for getting bored of hand analysis or noobs, but i would just not say anything before i just trolled someone and said it was cause i play for 20 years. also 10/20 live <<<<<< 5/10 online 20 years live <<<< 2 years online hating << helping
|
|
#17
10-23-2007, 09:25 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: hit two pair turn check raise super DEEP
this is one ugly hand, if you want to make a profit by calling preflop oop with these hands then you have to play better postflop. i think the flop donk-call is a big mistake as is the turn c/r.. by the time the money goes in ur 2 pair is no good, gl hitting the flush on the last one..
|
|
#20
10-23-2007, 11:40 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: hit two pair turn check raise super DEEP
Can who doesn't like a turn C/R explain to me why? Is it because they check behind all their strong one pair hands but only bet their sets and two pair hands?
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
