400: What a Sweet Ending

[Peleus]

This brings a question into my mind of how much do you rely on SPR's? It seems as though Qtip hasn't managed to get near his favorable/target SPR so he almost playing the hand like walking on eggshells.

Is this the correct thing to do? Does REM take over at any point? (Take over is perhaps the wrong word). Against the range of the villain here, we're ahead of the vast majority of his range, and can get excellent value out of over pairs TT-QQ, should we not bet because we've got a high SPR?

On one hand, I see exactly what Qtip is saying with dealing with a c/r, puts you in an awful situation, according to SPR you played it right.

On the other hand (without being results orientated) REM says you probably left a hell of a lot of value on the table which may have paid you off.

Seems like they are working 'against' each other (yes, I know the principles aren't meant to be direct comparisons, just two separate tools).

- Confused and trying to learn, don't flame me.

[1p0kerboy]

This is the best threads we've had in a while.

Qtip- part of the reason I don't post much here anymore is because I take non-standard lines like this one in certain circumstances and it's not received well here. But I do like your analysis and reasoning behind your play.

I think as we are getting lower and lower on fishies and the average player is getting stronger we're going to have to add some additional tools to our game other than "you should bet there cuz you prolly got the best hand."

[jfish]

full ring forum is awesome

[QTip]

[ QUOTE ]
This brings a question into my mind of how much do you rely on SPR's? It seems as though Qtip hasn't managed to get near his favorable/target SPR so he almost playing the hand like walking on eggshells.

Is this the correct thing to do? Does REM take over at any point? (Take over is perhaps the wrong word). Against the range of the villain here, we're ahead of the vast majority of his range, and can get excellent value out of over pairs TT-QQ, should we not bet because we've got a high SPR?

On one hand, I see exactly what Qtip is saying with dealing with a c/r, puts you in an awful situation, according to SPR you played it right.

On the other hand (without being results orientated) REM says you probably left a hell of a lot of value on the table which may have paid you off.

Seems like they are working 'against' each other (yes, I know the principles aren't meant to be direct comparisons, just two separate tools).

- Confused and trying to learn, don't flame me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Peleus:

Well...I see what you're saying, and my answer would be summed up in one type of concept.

You don't think about what his range is but rather what his range is if you get all in. I mean, as sunny has said and others here, if his range is only pps here and he's the type to get in 11 times the pot with an overpair, my line blows something fierce.

[crunny]

[ QUOTE ]
full ring forum is awesome

[/ QUOTE ]

Comments like this tilt me.

[QTip]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why did you post the results Q?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because he was hoping everyone would be like, whoa you saved so much money cause he had AA, great read!!

But makes no bets on a money board, and has no clue where he stood in the hand. I wouldnt be suprised if villain had shown KJ or something less.

[/ QUOTE ]

coordi, your read of QTip's reasoning was off in many ways.

More importantly, your above comment is just screaming to me that you are thinking nothing more when analyzing this hand than "I have an overpair, so I should bet". Certainly you realize that poker is more complicated than that?

It is great practice to think about the alternatives when analyzing a hand.

For example:

"I tend to bet the flop with an overpair, but when shouldn't I?"

After reading all the valid points in this thread for checking the flop, you are being a bit insulting and, quite frankly, childish with your previous post.

It is important to not group-think as it is very easy to do in this atmosphere.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was the first person to post I thought he played bad, hardly group thinking.

He shouldnt have posted results.

I think he played poorly, I'm sorry if there isnt more to the hand than I think you should bet the flop or raise the turn, because you could very likely be ahead here. Of course we don't know where we are at because we dont bet the flop or raise the turn. I can't rule any of villains range out of possability. So I guess in actuality, considering these factors, he played the hand to perfection. He lost/won the minimum in hand he was unsure of.

[/ QUOTE ]

I could be missing something here but, I'm a bit confused at why we feel like we must "know where we're at" in every hand.

[QTip]

[ QUOTE ]
This is the best threads we've had in a while.

Qtip- part of the reason I don't post much here anymore is because I take non-standard lines like this one in certain circumstances and it's not received well here. But I do like your analysis and reasoning behind your play.

I think as we are getting lower and lower on fishies and the average player is getting stronger we're going to have to add some additional tools to our game other than "you should bet there cuz you prolly got the best hand."

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm still very new to this game, but I'll tell you what has been a bit fascinating to me. In the limit world, the "right" play was almost always agreed on by the majority of the "better players". However, it's interesting to me here in this forum how different the plays can be. These are all players who confess to "good" winrates. I think this NL game is much more it dependsy than limit.

It's late....maybe I'm delirious here.

[threads13]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why did you post the results Q?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because he was hoping everyone would be like, whoa you saved so much money cause he had AA, great read!!

But makes no bets on a money board, and has no clue where he stood in the hand. I wouldnt be suprised if villain had shown KJ or something less.

[/ QUOTE ]

coordi, your read of QTip's reasoning was off in many ways.

More importantly, your above comment is just screaming to me that you are thinking nothing more when analyzing this hand than "I have an overpair, so I should bet". Certainly you realize that poker is more complicated than that?

It is great practice to think about the alternatives when analyzing a hand.

For example:

"I tend to bet the flop with an overpair, but when shouldn't I?"

After reading all the valid points in this thread for checking the flop, you are being a bit insulting and, quite frankly, childish with your previous post.

It is important to not group-think as it is very easy to do in this atmosphere.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was the first person to post I thought he played bad, hardly group thinking.

He shouldnt have posted results.

I think he played poorly, I'm sorry if there isnt more to the hand than I think you should bet the flop or raise the turn, because you could very likely be ahead here. Of course we don't know where we are at because we dont bet the flop or raise the turn. I can't rule any of villains range out of possability. So I guess in actuality, considering these factors, he played the hand to perfection. He lost/won the minimum in hand he was unsure of.

[/ QUOTE ]

I could be missing something here but, I'm a bit confused at why we feel like we must "know where we're at" in every hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

QFT

I think the "bet to find out where you are at" is a bit overemphasized.

[coordi]

If he hadn't posted results this would be an allright thread.

I don't know what you want though, it looks like your bragging. You obviously couldn't play the hand any better to reach SD. Are you looking for better lines? Something could be said about villains range that he would probly 3bet 89s 910s A9s and any number of pps OOP from the SB in a likely HU situation. I would guess hes more likely to flat call with QQ+ in a blind steal situation. Even taking that in mind, I still think I stack off here.

It would have been much better if you had done a street by street analysis and countered everyone raise replys with your thoughts.

[xxrod17xx]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This brings a question into my mind of how much do you rely on SPR's? It seems as though Qtip hasn't managed to get near his favorable/target SPR so he almost playing the hand like walking on eggshells.

Is this the correct thing to do? Does REM take over at any point? (Take over is perhaps the wrong word). Against the range of the villain here, we're ahead of the vast majority of his range, and can get excellent value out of over pairs TT-QQ, should we not bet because we've got a high SPR?

On one hand, I see exactly what Qtip is saying with dealing with a c/r, puts you in an awful situation, according to SPR you played it right.

On the other hand (without being results orientated) REM says you probably left a hell of a lot of value on the table which may have paid you off.

Seems like they are working 'against' each other (yes, I know the principles aren't meant to be direct comparisons, just two separate tools).

- Confused and trying to learn, don't flame me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Peleus:

Well...I see what you're saying, and my answer would be summed up in one type of concept.

You don't think about what his range is but rather what his range is if you get all in. I mean, as sunny has said and others here, if his range is only pps here and he's the type to get in 11 times the pot with an overpair, my line blows something fierce.

[/ QUOTE ]

I do understand this concept of what his range is when the money gets in, but are we going to get all-in every pot? I know I am missing something here. Aren't you missing out on value in smaller pots with crappy SPR's? Idk the more this thread goes on the more I learn about the concepts in this book, but this is not clicking.