A couple of quotes by Nate tha' Great - Page 2

Ariose · #11 02-28-2006, 09:12 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Just read stox's Jan article in the 2+2 mag that sums it up.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think I found the right article.. link

Stox's article covers the case when you are in position. Cartman is asking about out of position situations.

Nate tha\\\' Great · #12 02-28-2006, 09:12 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Just read stox's Jan article in the 2+2 mag that sums it up.

[/ QUOTE ]

Stox has mad game, but I disagree with a couple of examples, particularly #4.

helpmeout · #13 02-28-2006, 09:51 PM

I think that it shouldn't be done too often because players will know that they can pickup a freecard after calling the flop a good deal of the time. So even if they slightly take the worst of it odds wise on the flop they can make up for it a lot of times because you check to them on the turn.

I really only do it against very bad players who bluff on an overcard turn if you dont bet.

Spy Dog · #14 03-01-2006, 06:46 AM

Villian is 38/24 and steals religiously.

This seemed like a good spot.

Cryptologic 5/10
Hold'em (5 handed) link

Preflop: Hero is SB with A[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], 8[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img].
1 folds, Button raises, Hero 3-bets, 1 folds, Button calls.

Flop: (7.00 SB) T[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], K[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], 8[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] (2 players)
Hero bets, Button calls.

Turn: (4.50 BB) 3[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] (2 players)
Hero checks, Button bets, Hero calls.

River: (6.50 BB) 6[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] (2 players)
Hero checks, Button bets, Hero calls.

Final Pot: 8.50 BB.
Results in white below:
Button has 4s 7d (High Card King)
Hero has Ad 8c (A Pair of Eights, Ace high)
Hero wins 8.47 BB.

cartman · #15 03-01-2006, 08:19 AM

[ QUOTE ]

I'm talking, of course, about those situations in which you're way ahead/way behind or mostly ahead/mostly behind

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not sure what you mean by "mostly ahead/mostly behind". The situation where I feel inclined to relinquish the initiative on the turn is when I 3-bet preflop with a big Ace and my opponent is extremely aggressive. There are a bundle of these guys who are very likely to raise the turn on boards that they deem unlikely to have hit me with a wide variety of draws as well as unpaired high card hands. As some others have said they also aren't necessarily opposed to betting again on the river with worse hands either. Do you think it is a bad idea in this case to check the turn at least tentatively planning to call both streets?

[ QUOTE ]
you'll make this play all the time when you're on a draw that misses.

[/ QUOTE ]
I must be misunderstanding what you mean by "this play" when it comes to missed draws. You aren't talking about betting or raising the flop out of position and then checking the turn are you?

[ QUOTE ]

There *is* an in between case too. Say that you have 76s on a 742(Q) board. You check-raised the flop and your opponent raised the turn when the queen appeared. You might not quite have the odds to draw to a five-outer, and the hand might not quite be worth calling down, but against certain opponents, you can probably credit yourself with an extra couple of outs for those times that you still have the best hand *and* you gain a free showdown.

[/ QUOTE ]
We are usually getting and immediate 7.25:1 and the chances that he is raising intending to take a free showdown seem to somewhat offset the chances that we often don't have 5 full outs. Would you say that the majority of time it is correct to call the turn raise in this situation with any non-pocket pair with which you decided to checkraise the flop provided that your opponent is capable of making a free showdown raise unpaired?

Thanks,
Cartman

Wynton · #16 03-01-2006, 10:20 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Just read stox's Jan article in the 2+2 mag that sums it up.

[/ QUOTE ]

Stox has mad game, but I disagree with a couple of examples, particularly #4.

[/ QUOTE ]

At the risk of hijacking this, can you elaborate about your disagreements with the article please?

BigEndian · #17 03-01-2006, 11:35 AM

I need to read the online mag more often. Lot's of good stuff there. It's also encouraging to see a strategy explained that I'd been using for a while because it "felt" right.

- Jim

Nate tha\\\' Great · #18 03-01-2006, 01:21 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Just read stox's Jan article in the 2+2 mag that sums it up.

[/ QUOTE ]

Stox has mad game, but I disagree with a couple of examples, particularly #4.

[/ QUOTE ]

At the risk of hijacking this, can you elaborate about your disagreements with the article please?

[/ QUOTE ]

The main issues are that:

1) I think Nick us underestimating the number of outs that his opponent will have. A great number of times, when you have ace high or a low pair on a coordinated flop, your opponent will have 6 pairing outs + 4 gutshot outs, for 10 total.

2) I think Nick is overestimating the number of times that you'll be bluffed off your hand with air. One of the "moments of clarity" I've had since returning to the online game is that the *postflop* play at the 10/20 through about 30/60 limits isn't quite as aggressive as you guys make it out to be, and it's fairly predictable in which types of situations people are going to try and make moves and in which they aren't. Now, above 30/60, you'll some very aggressive types who can read hands pretty well and probably come fairly close to optimal bluffing frequency. But most of you guys aren't playing that high (I haven't played that high very much either - but enough to recognize some shifts in game texture) and I think his advice could be costing you some value/protection opportunties against more typical sorts of opponents. Certainly, you should make adjustments against known tricky LAGs, but I object to the notion that these should be the *default* plays at midlimits.

3) Finally, in a couple of cases, I think Nick is negleting the bonus you get when you get someone to fold a better hand. I'm not under any illusions that this is going to happen often. But, if in Hand 2 for example you can get someone to fold a hand like a pair of 7's or T [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 8 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] even 3-5% of the time, that begins to have a quite significant impact on the equity valuations.

Nate tha\\\' Great · #19 03-01-2006, 01:34 PM

[ QUOTE ]
There are a bundle of these guys who are very likely to raise the turn on boards that they deem unlikely to have hit me with a wide variety of draws as well as unpaired high card hands. As some others have said they also aren't necessarily opposed to betting again on the river with worse hands either. Do you think it is a bad idea in this case to check the turn at least tentatively planning to call both streets?

[/ QUOTE ]

As a default play, yes. The reasons basically are the same as I've listed in the response to Wynton's post immediately above.

Mind you, I do plenty of calling down. My W$SD have always been very low, and my my W$WSF have always been very high. But I still pick my spots. I just don't feel all that hellbent on getting to showdown when I have ace high out of position on a semi-coordinated board.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
you'll make this play all the time when you're on a draw that misses.

[/ QUOTE ]
I must be misunderstanding what you mean by "this play" when it comes to missed draws. You aren't talking about betting or raising the flop out of position and then checking the turn are you?

[/ QUOTE ]

That is what I'm talking about. I'm trying to be a little bit more selective about when I make continuation bets with my draws.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

There *is* an in between case too. Say that you have 76s on a 742(Q) board. You check-raised the flop and your opponent raised the turn when the queen appeared. You might not quite have the odds to draw to a five-outer, and the hand might not quite be worth calling down, but against certain opponents, you can probably credit yourself with an extra couple of outs for those times that you still have the best hand *and* you gain a free showdown.

[/ QUOTE ]
We are usually getting and immediate 7.25:1 and the chances that he is raising intending to take a free showdown seem to somewhat offset the chances that we often don't have 5 full outs. Would you say that the majority of time it is correct to call the turn raise in this situation with any non-pocket pair with which you decided to checkraise the flop provided that your opponent is capable of making a free showdown raise unpaired?

Thanks,
Cartman

[/ QUOTE ]

The *majority* of the time, almost certainly.

sweetjazz · #20 03-01-2006, 01:47 PM

Nate I think your observation regarding postflop play in midlimits is quite accurate. Most turn raises (flop play consists of raises with all sorts of hands) are made hands of some sort. Even on a TT7(4)r board a turn raise is more often a hand like A4 or 97 than QJ.

I had the following sequence occur the other day. Two straight hands I openraised AJ then AT and bet flop and turn against a loose passive who always peeled the flop. Both times I got checkraised and folded as I had no piece of the board. The next hand I play is J8s with a button raise and only called by a TAGgy player in the BB. Flop is KT6 and I bet, he calls. Turn is a 2, I bet expecting him to CR and push me off the hand, but he just folds. So I'm pretty sure he had a gutshot and either didn't notice I was willing to give up on weak hands or figured I was gonna call down lighter or just doesn't CR turns as bluffs ever. Next hand I enter is against the loose passive (who I am starting wonder might be a bit trickier than usual) with JJ on a Q86(9)(9) board and the loose passive calls me down as I bet all streets with 87. So he had a pair and straight draw in the last hand and didn't semibluff raise the turn. Almost certainly his two earlier raises were with real hands (two pair / top pair). At the time, though, the short-term variance played with my head a bit and I had to wonder whether he was trickier than my first 75 hands or so seemed to indicate. I probably would have made a bad calldown with the JJ hand had he raised the turn -- especially since I picked up the gutshot outs. I can only tell now in hindsight that it would be bad as I would have included hands like 87 in his range if he had raised the turn because of the past two hands against him.