|
|
#51
07-27-2007, 07:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: I disagree with hand 1-2 in the 2+2 SnG book.
The concept sounds great in a vacuum but what does he say about the times you don't get a LRR in? That is where the $$$ is won and lost and personally I hope more people start doing this since almost everyone goes broke with just an overpair. I limp KK a very big % of the time fwiw
|
|
#53
07-28-2007, 12:27 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I disagree with hand 1-2 in the 2+2 SnG book.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I think the idea that all our opponents are totally retarded has no merit, even if they do retarded things from time to time. You fold every hand of 20 and then raise from UTG and you think no one noticed? They notice. [/ QUOTE ] Are you suggesting that they aren't going to notice when a tight player 3 bets after limping utg? [/ QUOTE ] No, of course not. Like I said, I raise KK every time. But if they all fold, I'm going to wish I had LRR'd because worst case I make the money from their raise. There must be a point at which each play is best: some percentage that you get no callers and some percentage that you'll get reraised. Of course, you cannot know whether your table will all fold before you raise, so you raise and hope to get called.
|
|
#54
07-28-2007, 12:36 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I disagree with hand 1-2 in the 2+2 SnG book.
[ QUOTE ]
The concept sounds great in a vacuum but what does he say about the times you don't get a LRR in? [/ QUOTE ] What generally happens is that that's the hand I pick up an overpair too and you trap me with it. [ QUOTE ] That is where the $$$ is won and lost and personally I hope more people start doing this since almost everyone goes broke with just an overpair. I limp KK a very big % of the time fwiw [/ QUOTE ] Brad, could you explain why? Are you simply looking for the LRR or do you consider there is value gained through deception? I find KK/QQ hugely disappointing at the first couple of levels, and I'd be interested to know what kind of case there is for limping big pairs.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
