|
|
#31
11-13-2007, 08:18 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: squeeze gone bad? 200nl
[ QUOTE ]
You're missing that sometimes he checks, the turn is a 2, we bet and he calls with 88. You're missing that sometimes he bets with JT or QJ or some random [censored] because we checked, when he would have folded if we bet. You're missing that very little of his range is overpairs, but sometimes he'll check them and we'll turn a 9 or a T. If he does bet them, we lose the same amount that we lose if we bet, because they're never folding. You guys are pretty much all missing that raising this kind of [censored] from the blinds, and auto-cbetting EVERY flop, is very very very exploitable. It's pretty profitable for villain to just call in position preflop with a wide range, and float/shove over your c-bets with a lot of semi-bluffs as well as sets/overpairs. [/ QUOTE ] What about when villain has a one pair hand? Isn't there reverse implied odds then if we don't bet? I think its also wrong to give a free card to overcards and 2 or 5 outers, even if they are WB. And yes it might be exploitable, but then villains adjusted tendencies are also exploitable, so it goes on and on with the levelling. 
|
|
#32
11-13-2007, 08:21 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: squeeze gone bad? 200nl
Bilbo,
I respect your posts and i think you have a solid poker mind. So let me ask you this question. If you arent willing to bet to protect your hand in this hand are you ever betting for protection?examples? Or is betting for protection something that you just don't think is ++ev?
|
|
#33
11-13-2007, 08:23 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: squeeze gone bad? 200nl
Good thing you sucked out. This is a standard fold. Ya, 6 aggro factor but he obviously had a play in mind going into the flop and I doubt it's on a weak hand.
|
|
#34
11-13-2007, 08:46 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: squeeze gone bad? 200nl
[ QUOTE ]
Bilbo, I respect your posts and i think you have a solid poker mind. So let me ask you this question. If you arent willing to bet to protect your hand in this hand are you ever betting for protection?examples? Or is betting for protection something that you just don't think is ++ev? [/ QUOTE ] I'll bet for protection with a ton of hands. Like QQ for example. Hands that have a lot more equity vs. his calling/shoving range are usually auto-bets. Also remember that this flop is very dry. "Protecting your hand" is a concept that, imho, is very over-rated on dry flops.
|
|
#35
11-13-2007, 08:49 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: squeeze gone bad? 200nl
[ QUOTE ]
Also remember that this flop is very dry. "Protecting your hand" is a concept that, imho, is very over-rated on dry flops. [/ QUOTE ] strongly disagree with that here.
|
|
#36
11-13-2007, 09:04 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: squeeze gone bad? 200nl
[ QUOTE ]
Except the reason why we are raising [censored] from the blinds and auto c-betting every flop is because we are exploiting the villain's loose raising/calling range. Lucky for us not many villains float/shove over c-bets with a wide range at these levels. [/ QUOTE ] well then it's very easy we raise pf and cbet every flop because we aren't getting exploited, so when he raises we have a super easy fold [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] btw to those saying protecting our hand is overrated: it's not only that QJ has 25% equity vs us, it's also the fact that they can bluff us out on an A or K turn ... really betting should be standard here imho
|
|
#37
11-13-2007, 09:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: squeeze gone bad? 200nl
First of all, I dont like squeezing unknowns, because it gets you into situations like this. This could be an auto-allin vs some players and an auto check-fold vs others.
As for the hand, this is a standaaaaard fold. He is telling you he has you beat.
|
|
#38
11-13-2007, 09:13 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: squeeze gone bad? 200nl
100% std bet and fold to a raise. if you check, i'm afraid it becomes a check fold which is really bad
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
