|
|
#51
11-27-2007, 06:00 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 63o - hand vs Private Joker
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I would play a turned pair+flushdraw like this. [/ QUOTE ] well that sure is bad. [/ QUOTE ] no it really isn't. it's almost breakeven equity wise and it might buy me a fold on the river VS pj. [/ QUOTE ] its bad. PJ has precisely top pair or better or KsQs here always. [/ QUOTE ] You think he is calling me down every time when I CR the turn with any top pair or one pair hand? I know I would have to worry about the lady as well, but she has a draw pretty often on this particular board. [/ QUOTE ] and how many of those draws (a) are better than yours (b) if not better, hold some of your outs and (c) are hands like KQ that when the river comes a red K or Q, she ain't folding to your bet closing the action in a now HUGE pot after PJ begrudgingly decides to dump his aces? 
|
|
#52
11-27-2007, 06:02 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 63o - hand vs Private Joker
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I would play a turned pair+flushdraw like this. [/ QUOTE ] well that sure is bad. [/ QUOTE ] no it really isn't. it's almost breakeven equity wise and it might buy me a fold on the river VS pj. [/ QUOTE ] its bad. PJ has precisely top pair or better or KsQs here always. [/ QUOTE ] You think he is calling me down every time when I CR the turn with any top pair or one pair hand? I know I would have to worry about the lady as well, but she has a draw pretty often on this particular board. [/ QUOTE ] yes he is calling the raise because he has the proper odds to call and beat 2 pair. Plus you have to deal with the other lady who at worst also has a draw. If your firing a blank on that river after having them both call you... then wow. Think of it this way, vs their showdown range your toast with a small pair + flushdraw more often than your going to be good.
|
|
#53
11-27-2007, 10:57 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 63o - hand vs Private Joker
A few things.
-I don't think it's inconceivable for Joker to bet this turn with AK/AQ, but whatever. -Joker himself advised calling down against his own range. -If you never 3-bet the turn with one pair in situations like this, you are making big mistakes. However, when I say this I'm speaking from experience, so maybe the situation's different in your games with your images. But I doubt it. -There are good reasons for Joker to bet AT on this turn. -At various points in this thread I've mentioned "Qx" as a possible holding for Snowball. I meant Jx. --Nate
|
|
#54
11-27-2007, 11:02 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 63o - hand vs Private Joker
[ QUOTE ]
[ 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. [/ QUOTE ] TT-- OK, if you take as axioms that Snowball doesn't raise the turn with less than one pair and that Joker knows this, the hand gets a lot easier. I'm saying there are good reasons to think that's not the case. Also, wtf with Snowball's "realm of experience"? This is limit hold'em, not kabuki. The fact that he's posting here means that he's trying to read hands and play well against them. Also he himself said that he would raise some hands worse than two pair here. And again, Joker's 3-bet is not a particularly risky play. --Nate
|
|
#55
11-27-2007, 03:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 63o - hand vs Private Joker
This hand's been done to death, but for the life of me I can't understand why you guys think that PJ isn't betting hands worse than top pair here. Look at the action on the flop. How would you feel in Snowball's shoes if PJ kept betting and Snowball held a weak T? You're calling it down, right?
-Michael
|
|
#56
11-27-2007, 03:21 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 63o - hand vs Private Joker
[ QUOTE ]
This hand's been done to death, but for the life of me I can't understand why you guys think that PJ isn't betting hands worse than top pair here. Look at the action on the flop. How would you feel in Snowball's shoes if PJ kept betting and Snowball held a weak T? You're calling it down, right? -Michael [/ QUOTE ] fwiw if i was PJ and had UI overs, i'd likely bet this turn, as it was a total blank and no one seems to like their hand on the flop and it sure would be fun if 55 folded.
|
|
#57
11-27-2007, 03:27 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 63o - hand vs Private Joker
"fwiw if i was PJ and had UI overs, i'd likely bet this turn, as it was a total blank and no one seems to like their hand on the flop and it sure would be fun if 55 folded."
Agreed, that seems pretty standard. -Michael
|
|
#58
11-27-2007, 04:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 63o - hand vs Private Joker
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] This hand's been done to death, but for the life of me I can't understand why you guys think that PJ isn't betting hands worse than top pair here. Look at the action on the flop. How would you feel in Snowball's shoes if PJ kept betting and Snowball held a weak T? You're calling it down, right? -Michael [/ QUOTE ] fwiw if i was PJ and had UI overs, i'd likely bet this turn, as it was a total blank and no one seems to like their hand on the flop and it sure would be fun if 55 folded. [/ QUOTE ] You would bet AK/AK with no other draw on the turn in a live mid-stakes game? I wouldnt. I dont think PJ would either, and he is nittier than you or me.
|
|
#59
11-27-2007, 05:15 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 63o - hand vs Private Joker
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] This hand's been done to death, but for the life of me I can't understand why you guys think that PJ isn't betting hands worse than top pair here. Look at the action on the flop. How would you feel in Snowball's shoes if PJ kept betting and Snowball held a weak T? You're calling it down, right? -Michael [/ QUOTE ] fwiw if i was PJ and had UI overs, i'd likely bet this turn, as it was a total blank and no one seems to like their hand on the flop and it sure would be fun if 55 folded. [/ QUOTE ] You would bet AK/AK with no other draw on the turn in a live mid-stakes game? I wouldnt. I dont think PJ would either, and he is nittier than you or me. [/ QUOTE ] well, i'm calling a bet for sure, and i am very unlikely to get raised given the turn card, so yeah, i'd likely bet it.
|
|
#60
11-27-2007, 06:50 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 63o - hand vs Private Joker
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] This hand's been done to death, but for the life of me I can't understand why you guys think that PJ isn't betting hands worse than top pair here. Look at the action on the flop. How would you feel in Snowball's shoes if PJ kept betting and Snowball held a weak T? You're calling it down, right? -Michael [/ QUOTE ] fwiw if i was PJ and had UI overs, i'd likely bet this turn, as it was a total blank and no one seems to like their hand on the flop and it sure would be fun if 55 folded. [/ QUOTE ] You would bet AK/AK with no other draw on the turn in a live mid-stakes game? I wouldnt. I dont think PJ would either, and he is nittier than you or me. [/ QUOTE ] well, i'm calling a bet for sure, and i am very unlikely to get raised given the turn card, so yeah, i'd likely bet it. [/ QUOTE ] PB-- Unsurprisingly, I agree. Good posts in this thread. TT-- I'd be very interested to hear any argument for checking that isn't "you have no pair!" --Nate
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
