|
|
|
|
#1
11-26-2007, 02:28 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 63o - hand vs Private Joker
I can't imagine he would 3-bet with AA, KK or QQ here unless he thinks you're trying to check raise him off his big pair.
Does he think you might check raise a single pair here? If he suspects you have two small pair then I would imagine he would just call hoping to counterfit you. By 3-betting he's saying "I have you crushed." 
|
|
#2
11-26-2007, 03:21 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 63o - hand vs Private Joker
[ QUOTE ]
I can't imagine he would 3-bet with AA, KK or QQ here [/ QUOTE ] I can...along with AJ and KJ if he plays it from that early on. [ QUOTE ] If he suspects you have two small pair then I would imagine he would just call hoping to counterfit you. By 3-betting he's saying "I have you crushed." [/ QUOTE ] Not really. Think about it from PJ's prospective: That turn 6 was pretty innocuous (there's no way it should improve any hand on the turn, right?). So he'll probably think snowball was making a move at it on the turn with some mediocre hand trying to get PJ off the best hand, while charging the drawer. You have a hidden gem of hand. Easy 4-bet and lead non-scary river. And despite what stox says, I'm probably folding 63o to a raise pre-flop. Garland
|
|
#3
11-26-2007, 03:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 63o - hand vs Private Joker
The only reason I can think of to continue is that PJ knows that we didn't flop a big hand (including an OESFD) because we didn't check-raise or lead out on that draw-heavy flop. Also, he knows that we wouldn't call the flop with 66. So, the only hands that make sense for hero are J6/T6/36, and if PJ doesn't know that OP read stox's book (or never read it himself), then he might think that OP wouldn't call PF with any of those hands.
So it's possible that PJ went through that thought process and determined that OP simply couldn't have a hand that beats his overpair. I think that's enough doubt to call here and call again on the river (plus we could have outs again JTs). I think 4-betting is too much because too often PJ will have JJ or TT here. Also it'll be an easy fold for him with an overpair when he'd probably bet again on the river with it (so we win the same, lose less).
|
|
#4
11-26-2007, 04:02 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 63o - hand vs Private Joker
[ QUOTE ]
I think 4-betting is too much because too often PJ will have JJ or TT here. Also it'll be an easy fold for him with an overpair when he'd probably bet again on the river with it (so we win the same, lose less). [/ QUOTE ] Given his range of hands (AJ, AA, KK, QQ, maybe KJ along with of course the JJ and TT), I think 63 kills his range. Some thoughts on the turn: It's a 4-bet cap. If we are ahead, we need to charge the drawer. In addition, we need to charge PJ to draw to counterfeits and better two pair etc. If PJ does have a set, he will raise on the river, and I am perfectly willing to fold to a river raise. Garland
|
|
#5
11-26-2007, 04:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 63o - hand vs Private Joker
[ QUOTE ]
Given his range of hands (AJ, AA, KK, QQ, maybe KJ along with of course the JJ and TT), I think 63 kills his range. Some thoughts on the turn: It's a 4-bet cap. If we are ahead, we need to charge the drawer. In addition, we need to charge PJ to draw to counterfeits and better two pair etc. If PJ does have a set, he will raise on the river, and I am perfectly willing to fold to a river raise. [/ QUOTE ] If that really is his range and it's all weighted equally, then capping is clearly right - I just think that his range is weighted more towards the hands that crush us than the ones that we beat (i.e. he won't 3-bet every time with one pair, but he'll always do it with a set). Letting him draw to his 5-8 outer is tempered by the times that we are way behind and save a bet (or two bets, if the river comes bad and we can just check-fold), and the times that the river is a blank and we make the same amount (by calling twice) as capping the turn and leading.
|
|
#6
11-26-2007, 05:59 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 63o - hand vs Private Joker
[ QUOTE ]
Not really. Think about it from PJ's prospective: That turn 6 was pretty innocuous (there's no way it should improve any hand on the turn, right?). So he'll probably think snowball was making a move at it on the turn with some mediocre hand trying to get PJ off the best hand, while charging the drawer. You have a hidden gem of hand. Easy 4-bet and lead non-scary river. And despite what stox says, I'm probably folding 63o to a raise pre-flop. [/ QUOTE ] This is a protected pot and pj knows this. there is no way he thinks you're bluffing when you c/r the field on the turn. His 3 bet is a sign of strenth. Would he do this w/AA or KK? Possibly but maybe not, would he do it w/TT or JJ? Definatly. PJs range should be heavily weighted toward JJ or TT. I call here and call the river if it doesn't counterfit my hand. 4 betting is just silly here. Call down and don't like it
|
|
#7
11-27-2007, 03:47 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 63o - hand vs Private Joker
[ QUOTE ]
Not really. Think about it from PJ's prospective [/ QUOTE ] OK. Let's do that. When PJ has an overpair or maybe AJ.......I bet the JT3 flop and got called in a few spots, one of whom is in the BB and reads 2+2, so there is a chance he is not a complete idiot. A rag hits the turn, and now this guy check/raises. Hmmm. Well, he can't have JT, because check calling this flop would be idiotic. He can't have a set, because check calling this flop would be idiotic. He MAY have something like AJ-QJ, but if he does the only hand in my range here that (a) currently beats him and (b) is rather vulnerable to that is QQ. There were lots of people in preflop, so he was getting a good price. I bet he has something like T6s, which I cannot currently beat. I could 3bet this turn with my AA and charge the tramp behind me to draw to her spades, but why would I ever do that when BB clearly has me beat? OK, I call and sure hope the board pairs the 3. When PJ has JJ or TT....I don't what this guy has, but it doesn't beat me and now I get to go crazy on this turn with a set and this gal drawing at a flush behind me. Thank you, God. The proper turn play for BB here is to call the 3bet. When a good card comes on the river (like a red 2), he should donk/fold.
|
|
#8
11-27-2007, 04:15 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 63o - hand vs Private Joker
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Not really. Think about it from PJ's prospective [/ QUOTE ] OK. Let's do that. When PJ has an overpair or maybe AJ.......I bet the JT3 flop and got called in a few spots, one of whom is in the BB and reads 2+2, so there is a chance he is not a complete idiot. A rag hits the turn, and now this guy check/raises. Hmmm. Well, he can't have JT, because check calling this flop would be idiotic. He can't have a set, because check calling this flop would be idiotic. He MAY have something like AJ-QJ, but if he does the only hand in my range here that (a) currently beats him and (b) is rather vulnerable to that is QQ. There were lots of people in preflop, so he was getting a good price. I bet he has something like T6s, which I cannot currently beat. I could 3bet this turn with my AA and charge the tramp behind me to draw to her spades, but why would I ever do that when BB clearly has me beat? OK, I call and sure hope the board pairs the 3. When PJ has JJ or TT....I don't what this guy has, but it doesn't beat me and now I get to go crazy on this turn with a set and this gal drawing at a flush behind me. Thank you, God. The proper turn play for BB here is to call the 3bet. When a good card comes on the river (like a red 2), he should donk/fold. [/ QUOTE ] PokerBob-- Thanks for this post. I agree Snowball looks like two pair, but if he's going to fold two pair to a threebet then Joker can exploit the crap out of him. I understand that exploitability is far from the end of the story, but in a spot like this it's worth thinking about. And I don't think Joker can put Snowball so squarely on two pair, simply because Snowball can't put Joker squarely on a pair at all. This could be an opportunistic raise in a substantial pot against someone who probably doesn't have much and someone who might not. Or it could just be for value with a Q that he for some reason decided to check twice. And, as I elaborated on before, I think this is a spot where Joker should be looking for reasons to 3-bet, not to call. --Nate EDIT: I see that you edited your post to include a line for BB. Glad to see we agree.
|
|
#9
11-27-2007, 04:24 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 63o - hand vs Private Joker
[ QUOTE ]
I agree Snowball looks like two pair, but if he's going to fold two pair to a threebet then Joker can exploit the crap out of him. [/ QUOTE ] This is so rare that it really isn't worth worrying about. [ QUOTE ] And I don't think Joker can put Snowball so squarely on two pair, simply because Snowball can't put Joker squarely on a pair at all. This could be an opportunistic raise in a substantial pot against someone who probably doesn't have much and someone who might not. [/ QUOTE ] What has PJ done in this hand to give the impression that he doesn't have anything???? [ QUOTE ] And, as I elaborated on before, I think this is a spot where Joker should be looking for reasons to 3-bet, not to call. [/ QUOTE ] 3betting this turn against anyone other than a spazz is just plain bad.
|
|
#10
11-27-2007, 05:45 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 63o - hand vs Private Joker
[ QUOTE ]
I agree Snowball looks like two pair, but if he's going to fold two pair to a threebet then Joker can exploit the crap out of him. [/ QUOTE ] what Snowball should do and what he will do are two different things. Snowball, and most other tags like him will call (no offense snowball - this is not a slight on you at all) because they see two pair and hope its good on the river. Exploitability shouldn't be a concern in PJ's eyes because Snowball wouldn't play this way with anything less than 2 pair. [ QUOTE ] I understand that exploitability is far from the end of the story, but in a spot like this it's worth thinking about. [/ QUOTE ] PJ should only be thinking about exploiting Snowballs inability to fold 2-pair or better on this turn, folding out top pair shouldn't even cross his mind because snowball won't play that way with top pair. [ QUOTE ] And I don't think Joker can put Snowball so squarely on two pair [/ QUOTE ] i dont think he can put him squarely on 2 pair either, sets are also within the range. Nothing smaller than 2 pair is in his range however when he c/r the field on the turn. [ QUOTE ] simply because Snowball can't put Joker squarely on a pair at all. [/ QUOTE ] If Joker bets the turn with anything less than a pair, unless its precisely KsQs then he would have lost his mind. Its not happening, PJ knows better than that. [ QUOTE ] This could be an opportunistic raise in a substantial pot against someone who probably doesn't have much and someone who might not. Or it could just be for value with a Q that he for some reason decided to check twice. [/ QUOTE ] its not within snowballs realm of experience to do that. All you have to do is read his countless posts on the strat forums to know that Snowball isn't getting frisky with top pair. Thats one of the great benefits of playing vs 2+2 tags, they are often easy to read and predictable in multi-way pots. [ QUOTE ] And, as I elaborated on before, I think this is a spot where Joker should be looking for reasons to 3-bet, not to call [/ QUOTE ] 3-betting here with an overpair is suicide. 3-betting here with a set is brilliant because PJ will get maximum value.
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
