|
|
#21
06-06-2006, 09:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: river play vs 2p2er, again.
Are results of the other hand at all relevant to this hand? I think so, although you didn't post them.
|
|
#22
06-06-2006, 11:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: river play vs 2p2er, again.
You should definately fold I believe. I'd actually like the idea of openpushing a lot more if we did not hit that king on river, since I don't like the fact that we'd bluff with a hand that will probably be good a high percentage of the time (all the times it goes check/check and he mucks his jack for example). If you don't believe he will call with a jack on turn versus you, your hand is of course essentially air, but that is probably not the case, is it? Obviously, if we check and he bets our hand is not good, but I don't like the stacksizes for a checkraise-bluff here at all. He WILL feel beat when you checkraise, but I don't think he can lay it down anyway, not for so little more.
If we did not hit that king, openpushing river is a much more viable option I'd say, and very dependant on what Prev said; how often he will raise with a flush on turn (this, in turn, probably dependant on whether it's a baby flush or the nuts also obviously).
|
|
#23
06-07-2006, 01:48 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: river play vs 2p2er, again.
Brian, I assume he knows it's you? If so, I think pushing could be excellent. If not, just fold.
|
|
#24
06-07-2006, 10:05 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: river play vs 2p2er, again.
[ QUOTE ]
Brian, I assume he knows it's you? If so, I think pushing could be excellent. If not, just fold. [/ QUOTE ]he knows its me, were chatting on AIM probably. weve played together alot, we respect each other, etc..
|
|
#25
06-07-2006, 11:32 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: river play vs 2p2er, again.
Hmm...if he knows you that well, then that might sway it back to making a push retarded. I think it's pretty much a spectrum:
push = retarded ...... excellent ...... retarded where doesn't know you .... knows you .... knows you very well but I'm not sure where he falls on this spectrum.
|
|
#26
06-07-2006, 11:59 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: river play vs 2p2er, again.
That is of course true TWP, but I think that, as always in poker, adding to many levels (it's in theory possible to go on and on for ever obviously) is just retarded. Sure, he might get confused and work on these level of thoughts on his own, then just decide that he cannot afford being wrong (deciding on the wrong level) given the odds and just calls. He will probably except to be wrong a high percentage of time, but it's just deep enough for him to make a heroic laydown here I believe.
|
|
#27
06-07-2006, 12:02 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: river play vs 2p2er, again.
[ QUOTE ]
Are results of the other hand at all relevant to this hand? I think so, although you didn't post them. [/ QUOTE ]
|
|
#28
06-07-2006, 01:50 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: river play vs 2p2er, again.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Are results of the other hand at all relevant to this hand? I think so, although you didn't post them. [/ QUOTE ] [/ QUOTE ] the results of the other hand are that he folded to my river bet...
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
