Professional No-Limit Hold 'em Volume 1 Review Thread

[tightymcfish]

[ QUOTE ]
Here's a hand I played today, my first session after reading PNL (cross-posted in SSNL):

1/2 NL. Table is loose and pretty deep. I am 300BB deep with 99 UTG. I bump it to $10. Normally I limp, but taking SPR into account and expecting several callers I'm able to get the preflop pot to $60.

Flop is Ts9h5h. BB blind leads out for $20. I raise $120, effectviely putting him all-in. Normally I'd raise less, but with loose players behind me I want them to pay to much for whatever hands they may want to make. The button, who has me covered, calls, and BB folds. We are now heads up in a $320 pot.

Turn is a 7d. I lead for $200 and get put all in. I'm not terribly pleased, but with $270 to call for a $990 pot (plus what I knew about the player), the decision was easy.

That hand clarified the logic behind planning bet sizes that PNL discusses. In the past I would have had a much more troubling river decision and/or wouldn't have maximized the value on my set.

It's also interesting to observe how poorly players choose their bet sizes, folding when they've committed over half their stack and there's twice as much (or more) in the pot than they have left.

At the very least, the info in the book kept me focused on hands I wasn't involved in, since it gave me a new criteria for evaluating players I had already formed opinions about.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you really needed the book to help you with this river decision you need to reevaluate your game.

[feelixthegreek]

My point was that I played the previous streets in such a way that my final decision was much easier than it could have otherwise been. And no, I don't make a habit out of laying down top set. I just chose that hand because it illustrated the difference in how I approached the hand PF vs. how I might have normally played it.

[jeffnc]

[ QUOTE ]
If you really needed the book to help you with this river decision you need to reevaluate your game.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you need to reevaluate your post reading skills. That's not what he meant. Obviously it was an easy river decision because of how he played the hand earlier. If he had played the hand different earlier (starting with limping), then he could indeed have been faced with a tough river decision.

[tightymcfish]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you really needed the book to help you with this river decision you need to reevaluate your game.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you need to reevaluate your post reading skills. That's not what he meant. Obviously it was an easy river decision because of how he played the hand earlier. If he had played the hand different earlier (starting with limping), then he could indeed have been faced with a tough river decision.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nope I read it correctly, any way he played it, it wouldn't have been a tough river decision either way, ducy? (I am not saying that you should mash the call button cuz you have a set either)

[roger1111]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you really needed the book to help you with this river decision you need to reevaluate your game.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you need to reevaluate your post reading skills. That's not what he meant. Obviously it was an easy river decision because of how he played the hand earlier. If he had played the hand different earlier (starting with limping), then he could indeed have been faced with a tough river decision.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nope I read it correctly, any way he played it, it wouldn't have been a tough river decision either way, ducy? (I am not saying that you should mash the call button cuz you have a set either)

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't understand this argument. There was no river decision to make. The OP was put all in on the turn. Or am I missing something (not unusual btw)