|
|
#51
11-03-2006, 09:58 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 6000th Post. Let\'s Try This Hand Reading Thing Again
Great post.
Your river line really got me thinking. Betting 250 and confidently folding to a min-raise >> checking, and making a crying call for 400 not really knowing if he's on a better king, or spiked an ace, or hit his flush. PS. To whoever said that that the min-raise on the river means a big hand OR they think your FOS: 99% of the time at the lower buy-ins (27 and below) this is a big hand. The players here DO NOT have the brains and/or balls to make a play like that with air. 
|
|
#52
11-03-2006, 10:30 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 6000th Post. Let\'s Try This Hand Reading Thing Again
Somewhere in there was a flop lead by our dashing Hero that I thought was interesting. Pudge recomends checking and folding to strength for the reasons he stated. I think our dashing good-looking Hero intended to bet and be done. It's only 3-handed, top pair to a limper and a random hand should more than often be the best hand.
So I'm wondering why "bet and re-evaluate" is worse than "check and re-evaluate" when betting gives us a chance to win the hand there and charge the draws to continue?
|
|
#53
11-03-2006, 10:32 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 6000th Post. Let\'s Try This Hand Reading Thing Again
I hate when people make posts in threads and say after this post I'm done with this thread, but here goes.
The reason I have been harsh in my response is because all of my thought processes is posted in the OP and drzen's reading comprehension has sucked. [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] QJ has a straight. 's have a flush. There is no possible draw on the flop that didn't get there. If he bets he is going to have a hand. Now he might not always have you beat (like he might just have Ax) but if you bet that Ax hand will call so it is a wash. The downside to checking is that better hands will never check and worse hands sometimes will. It could be that check/calling +EV compared to check/folding but betting will be even more +EV and that is why c/c'ing is incorrect. [/ QUOTE ] Okay, thanks for going through that. That sure beats "you are a tool box donkey". [/ QUOTE ] The thing is I went through that thought process in my OP. [ QUOTE ] This river card is good for us. It gives us two pair, but it also completes any flush draws. Again we have two options on this river bet or check. In the original thread most people said to check/call, which I think is a bad. Consider the following The villains in this hand are almost always betting the turn or raising the flop with two pair or set. That means villains ranges of are the following are basically missed draws, one pair hand, made draws. Pretty much every single draw got there except flopped gutshots. Therefore by checking we are either hoping that villains are making thin value bets with one pair hands, or bluffing with missed draws in a multiway pot. Although people will bet this river occasionally with those hands, but it will be infrequent. By betting here we can control the pot, gain value from worse hands and fold to better hands. Earlier I said that betting bloated the pot, that is not the case on the river as we don’t need to worry about future streets. We can control bet sizing here if we bet 200-300 and fold to a raise we are only losing 200-300 chips. Compare that to facing a 400 chip river bet from on of the villains. Saving those extra 100-200 chips can be very important. What hands can we get value from here? In a $27 and most buyin SNG’s people will be calling this river with Kx, Ax, T6, T5, 56, Obviously once we bet this river we have the intention of folding to any raise. [/ QUOTE ] Also FWIW I was going to go through whether or not check calling was better than check folding, but I feel betting this river is clearly the best option, which you seem to agree with, frankly I don't get what you think is wrong with my post. [ QUOTE ] Sometimes this is Ax that has put you solidly on TP and wants you to take a stab at the river, feeling you will fold on the turn. You can't always interpret call-check-raise as a flush draw. It's no good talking about ranges if you then discount the range without reason. A flush draw needs to fold the flop, by the way. (A good reason to bet top pair, actually; I'm not sure why you're so keen on checkfolding. Risking being bluffed is part of poker. And worse hands don't always fold. Sometimes they call and hope to get lucky.) A pair plus FD is enough to chase, so maybe he had that, but he must have had specifically 6 [/ QUOTE ] From this post it looks like A) You don't like my river line B) You don't think villain's are calling the flop with a FD. C) You think I check the flop with the intention of check folding. A) Read the last line of your post B) Last line again. Do you assume donkeys will play the same as you and fold your FD? Also FWIW calling with a flush draw here is standard in position. Especially for the limper. C) I mention in my op that that isn't the case. Two more things as for the Ax thing. Here is another example of basic hand reading. In order for villain to have Ax here he needed to A) Call the flop with ace high no pair no draw B) Check the turn when he hit his ace C) Minraise that scary river card. If he took that line kudos to him. As for this post http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...page=&vc=1 That's the whole point you learn how to hand read by practicing and induce whether or not you should bet for value based on whether or not you think you are ahead.
|
|
#54
11-03-2006, 10:35 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 6000th Post. Let\'s Try This Hand Reading Thing Again
Mike,
Not to be a dick, but for know just reread my OP and see if you agree with my argument. I may post later, but right now I have no intention of making a long post. The amount of words I have posted in this thread> The amount of words in my posts between #5000-5999.
|
|
#55
11-03-2006, 10:55 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 6000th Post. Let\'s Try This Hand Reading Thing Again
Pudge,
Really nice post man, thanks for taking the time to write it up. This is the sort of hand I tend to take a different line with, but your OP definitely got me thinking about that and which is actually the best line and why. I'd write it all out in this thread, but it's already a dramabomb and I said I'm not getting involved in any more of those b/c they are retarded. So maybe I will talk to you on AIM or via PM sometime. Just wanted to say 'nice post' though.
|
|
#56
11-03-2006, 11:00 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 6000th Post. Let\'s Try This Hand Reading Thing Again
agreed with wiggs.
i tried to stay out of the whole flame-war aspect of this post, but it's definitely important to think about how we play the middle levels, as these tend to be the hardest once we more or less master pushbotting. pudge--i know a lot of us apprecicate the fact that you are one of the few higher stakes players who still posts strategy in STTF a lot. also...bigt's post and the ensuing drama was followed by a big MTT score. just do that. show the haters whatsup.
|
|
#57
11-03-2006, 11:05 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 6000th Post. Let\'s Try This Hand Reading Thing Again
[ QUOTE ]
pudge--i know a lot of us apprecicate the fact that you are one of the few higher stakes players who still posts strategy in STTF a lot. [/ QUOTE ]
|
|
#59
11-03-2006, 11:14 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 6000th Post. Let\'s Try This Hand Reading Thing Again
[ QUOTE ]
Pudge, for your nice post I will try not to own you so hard in fantasy football this week [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] That's karma right there!
|
|
#60
11-03-2006, 11:17 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 6000th Post. Let\'s Try This Hand Reading Thing Again
Pudge,
excellent post. drzen, we know you are flight risk. Never post again.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
