|
|
#11
08-16-2007, 07:55 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: ($109) AQward.
What weak king can he have? He's not going to be here with KJ very often. He's unlikely to have played AK thus on any street. Whatever K he might have, he's simply not folding TP with so many of his chips in the middle.
As far as I see it, it's a busted flush, or a two-way bet, or some other form of pouncing on weakness nonsense because we've c-bet/checked turn or he's got KQ or JT. The only reason I can see for shoving is that he sometimes has and then usually folds AQ. But that's not a good reason. 
|
|
#12
08-16-2007, 08:04 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: ($109) AQward.
[ QUOTE ]
What weak king can he have? He's not going to be here with KJ very often. He's unlikely to have played AK thus on any street. Whatever K he might have, he's simply not folding TP with so many of his chips in the middle. As far as I see it, it's a busted flush, or a two-way bet, or some other form of pouncing on weakness nonsense because we've c-bet/checked turn or he's got KQ or JT. The only reason I can see for shoving is that he sometimes has and then usually folds AQ. But that's not a good reason. [/ QUOTE ] Any hand involving the Kc?
|
|
#13
08-16-2007, 08:13 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: ($109) AQward.
OK. I guess that's so. Do you think he gets here thus with KT/KJc? That's all he might fold (and he never will).
Basically, he's not bet/folding a K ever with less than 900 behind. It's a bluff, he's a total idiot with AQ or TT, or we're screwed. I think he's bluffing often enough and idiocy is rife so I call. I think shoving is bad.
|
|
#15
08-16-2007, 09:20 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: ($109) AQward.
Hey I admitted I was drunk when I decided to agree with nath (is that a bad thing, that I need to be drunk to agree with you?)
But I still think call is >>>>fold, and I think a case could be made for shoving *IF* you think he'll fold a Kc
|
|
#17
08-16-2007, 11:23 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: ($109) AQward.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I find it hard to believe that a donk is calling something like QK or TJ on the flop and then not leading the turn. [/ QUOTE ] play more? i feel like i see this play a lot... [/ QUOTE ] Read further. It's very rare that a random/unknown hits a hand like that on this kind of turn (multiple flush draws, potential for bigger hands being made, etc.) to not bet the turn to "protect" their hand.
|
|
#18
08-16-2007, 12:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: ($109) AQward.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I find it hard to believe that a donk is calling something like QK or TJ on the flop and then not leading the turn. [/ QUOTE ] play more? i feel like i see this play a lot... [/ QUOTE ] Read further. It's very rare that a random/unknown hits a hand like that on this kind of turn (multiple flush draws, potential for bigger hands being made, etc.) to not bet the turn to "protect" their hand. [/ QUOTE ] i understand what you're saying, i'm just not sure i agree with it completely. i feel like it isn't incredibly rare (even if it isn't the most likely play) to see JT go for a checkraise here.
|
|
#20
08-16-2007, 12:53 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: ($109) AQward.
[ QUOTE ]
bluff shove the river he never has backdoor hearts and you have the key card [/ QUOTE ] There's a few fairly likely hands that they're not folding here, that's the problem. KQ and JT come to mind (not to mention a set). Just because they didn't bet the turn doesn't mean they can't have these hands. Remember, most people don't play well. For all we know, he could have been thinking "omg good hand, must check raise yeah". Ryan
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
