Fun with JTs, which bluff worked?

[BobboFitos]

They both worked. I like #1 more then #2 though. Thanks all.

[tozzy]

how is your aim today?

[BobboFitos]

[ QUOTE ]

two is meh... i mean why did you decide to bluff the maniac? i think you get called by alot on the river... just make a hand and stack the guy playing 52/50... hes prob not good postflop if hes that bad pf... so hell call you too much.

[/ QUOTE ]
This was heads up, villain was not a maniac. For what it's worth, I have even looser heads up stats, and I dont think I am a maniac. He was just a LAG HU player. Also, contrary to popular myth, the better play TO bluff is a maniac/looser type simply because their absolute hand values tend to be towards the bottom range. Also, drawing postflop conclusions about preflop numbers is really silly.

[KvGalen]

i hate 1, 2 is fine, but against a very good player 1 is fine too

[schwza]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
honestly hand 1 is pretty bad
i hate pf
then i hate flop
then i slightly dislike turn
then i think river is pretty meh

hand 2:
looks ok

[/ QUOTE ]

Is flat calling IP the new 3-bet?

A few months ago people would say 3-bet to anything when you're IP, but now 3-betting here is horrible.

As a side questions, what hands would you think are ok to 3b here pre-flop? low suited connectors? Only premiums? Complete junk?

I can't understand how 3betting TJs here is horrible at all, so if anybody would like to elaborate why it would be a bad play I would appreciate it a lot!

[/ QUOTE ]


It depends on the type of villain.

[/ QUOTE ]

i try to mix up my calling vs 3betting with sc type hands in these spots. if i were just going to play a single hand in a vacuum i'd probably prefer to just call vs most people but 3betting gives cover for big hands.