|
| Author |
Message |
bdbranch
Banned
Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Posts: 503
Location: At home wdyt. Btw. I'm not opinionated all the time, umm can you be opinionated when you're asleep
|
 Posted: Mon May 19, 2008 8:20 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Perhaps the low stakes players at FT are suddenly amazing experts which would be astonishing considering that everyone is calling them donks who will play anything however what I've noticed is that people will call with hands that I would never consider doing so. If people are willing to call, why not give them the opportunity to do so. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
drtre1987
Message Board Junkie
Joined: 07 Nov 2006
Posts: 1759
|
| Posted: Mon May 19, 2008 12:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Link to the information. Why aren't you linking it?
It is so obvious to me that the information given is not suppossed to be implying what you say it is.
| Quote: |
1 : "The second reason for steep raises/reraises is that often you are not being as tricky as you think when you slowplay your hand."
2 : "But his own unwillingness to raise the pot pre-flop allowed the small blind to be in a pot he almost surely would not have been in had a proper raise been made".
3 : "The third and perhaps most overlooked reason for putting in a steep raise with premium hands is that these hands offer you a rare opportunity to get your money in as a huge favorite". |
1.) I've said this before, but raising the standard amount is not considered slowplaying. That is irrelevant to what we are talking about.
2.) I've said this before too, but this is talking about limping with big hands preflop compared to raising. This is also irrelevant in this discussion.
3.) This is just a stupid hint or tip anyway. It is so vague and can be taken out of context very easily. This does not apply at all to what we are talking about either. If you think that you should make a huge raise because you are a heavy favorite preflop, then you are forgetting that you are cutting your action from worse hands. Say that your standard raise is to pot it to 3.5bb preflop. Then all of a sudden you raise to 6bb. Playing like that tells the table that you have a huge hand, causing a lot of hands to fold that might have called or raised. This concept is so incredibly easy to understand that I don't get why you don't understand it. Playing like you do might work at freerolls where nobody cares about money, but that strategy is huge -EV at even the low/mid stake games. It just simply doesn't work unless you play morons. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bdbranch
Banned
Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Posts: 503
Location: At home wdyt. Btw. I'm not opinionated all the time, umm can you be opinionated when you're asleep
|
| Posted: Thu May 22, 2008 7:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yes the whole world revolves around the internet. However I'll get back to you. In the meantime, yes part of it talks about errors of limping but other parts talks about insufficient raises. What we already know from you drtre is that you will purposely ignore the parts thats you choose to. Let me ask you, what would you call a steep raise? Of course we see that you don't believe in the word but tell us what you believe steep raise to mean? Next, why on earth do you want every cat and dog in the pot anyway. It's quite stupid to give so many chances to be beaten and lose big money. And isn't it the dumbest people that you want in the pot, not the smartest? And surely you don't want people to call with 'appropriate' odds. To my knowledge the whole point is to make dumb people call badly, with 'inappropriate' odds. And don't go around to stupid HuJwang type namecalling trash.
Finally you have people writting that you should either push the turn/river or call/reraise any bets on the turn/river. And you apparently have no problem with waiting to the turn/river for big bets to be made. Ummm, that's interesting, waiting until it's only people with good hands that will put money in. I wonder that this would work out???? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Peepers_au
Full House
Joined: 15 Feb 2008
Posts: 178
Location: Melbourne, Australia
|
| Posted: Thu May 22, 2008 10:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bdbranch wrote: |
| And isn't it the dumbest people that you want in the pot, not the smartest? |
I'd rather have the ones with weak hands personally. Even dumb people get monsters. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GoldenDomer9
Message Board Junkie
Joined: 25 Apr 2006
Posts: 1705
Location: Pwning $25NL 6-max CAP tbls
|
| Posted: Thu May 22, 2008 10:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Riddim wrote: |
| GoldenDomer9 wrote: |
Sorry for chiming in so late, but a big +1 for mucking here. I have a ton of FR $25NL experience and you are just never, ever, good here. Also, please note that said opinion is coming from a guy who hates giving these low stakes players credit. This spot is really tough to not give the villain credit though.
Into the muck, high five monitor, we save monies! |
How often do seemingly decent players in Rob's spot get to showdown with an overpair or worse? This seems like a really great bluff spot because it looks so strong and hero will have a hand better than an overpair so rarely. My concern is that hero will have an overpair so often and people just hate folding those, so I'm curious what your experience tells you about the range a decent 25NL player gets to showdown with here.
Personally I have way too little FR experience to have any clue. I'm used to 6max games where even nits get it in for 200 BB in a small PF pot vs. a line that screams set (this may be slightly biased by my only somewhat recent attempt at bluffing a nit off of an overpair). |
It seems like a great spot to bluff, but no one folds here. To answer your question, even seemingly decent players in Rob's spot get to showdown constantly in this spot. Granted, if said player folds in this spot and doesn't pull the "woe is me" routine, I have no way of knowing what he/she folded; however, I do see showdowns in this spot constantly, which tells me there are not many folds occuring. Being a "seemingly decent" $25NL player is an interesting beast. On one side, you know in your heart of hearts you should fold here. On the other, what your memory recalls is that random time you saw an opponent take this line with no pair, no draw. You know you aren't supposed to be good, but how much credit do you give an unknown at $25NL? That topic could drag on for pages, but in a vaccuum, in this one spot, I nearly always gave credit, unless I had a specific reason to believe otherwise. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bdbranch
Banned
Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Posts: 503
Location: At home wdyt. Btw. I'm not opinionated all the time, umm can you be opinionated when you're asleep
|
| Posted: Thu May 22, 2008 11:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| GoldenDomer9 wrote: |
| Riddim wrote: |
| GoldenDomer9 wrote: |
Sorry for chiming in so late, but a big +1 for mucking here. I have a ton of FR $25NL experience and you are just never, ever, good here. Also, please note that said opinion is coming from a guy who hates giving these low stakes players credit. This spot is really tough to not give the villain credit though.
Into the muck, high five monitor, we save monies! |
How often do seemingly decent players in Rob's spot get to showdown with an overpair or worse? This seems like a really great bluff spot because it looks so strong and hero will have a hand better than an overpair so rarely. My concern is that hero will have an overpair so often and people just hate folding those, so I'm curious what your experience tells you about the range a decent 25NL player gets to showdown with here.
Personally I have way too little FR experience to have any clue. I'm used to 6max games where even nits get it in for 200 BB in a small PF pot vs. a line that screams set (this may be slightly biased by my only somewhat recent attempt at bluffing a nit off of an overpair). |
It seems like a great spot to bluff, but no one folds here. To answer your question, even seemingly decent players in Rob's spot get to showdown constantly in this spot. Granted, if said player folds in this spot and doesn't pull the "woe is me" routine, I have no way of knowing what he/she folded; however, I do see showdowns in this spot constantly, which tells me there are not many folds occuring. Being a "seemingly decent" $25NL player is an interesting beast. On one side, you know in your heart of hearts you should fold here. On the other, what your memory recalls is that random time you saw an opponent take this line with no pair, no draw. You know you aren't supposed to be good, but how much credit do you give an unknown at $25NL? That topic could drag on for pages, but in a vaccuum, in this one spot, I nearly always gave credit, unless I had a specific reason to believe otherwise. |
Hey GoldenDomer9, if you put my name to it, you give drtre a excuse to claim I don't know what I'm talking about. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
drtre1987
Message Board Junkie
Joined: 07 Nov 2006
Posts: 1759
|
| Posted: Thu May 22, 2008 11:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bdbranch wrote: |
| What we already know from you drtre is that you will purposely ignore the parts thats you choose to. Let me ask you, what would you call a steep raise? Of course we see that you don't believe in the word but tell us what you believe steep raise to mean? |
A steep raise to me means a larger raise. But a larger raise does not mean a larger preflop raise. If you would link me to the information, then I can read what they meant in the article. My guess is that they aren't talking about making large raises preflop. I can't be sure of that though since I can't read the article.
| Quote: |
Next, why on earth do you want every cat and dog in the pot anyway. It's quite stupid to give so many chances to be beaten and lose big money. And isn't it the dumbest people that you want in the pot, not the smartest? And surely you don't want people to call with 'appropriate' odds. To my knowledge the whole point is to make dumb people call badly, with 'inappropriate' odds. |
Its not that I want everyone in the pot. Its just more +EV to raise a standard amount. If you raise more based on your hand strength, you get your opponents to fold out their bad hands and you don't get to play against them postflop. You end up winning the blinds instead of pots played on the flop, turn, and river.
Also, they won't have "odds" to call if you are playing properly postflop. For their preflop call to be profitable, they have to make a certain amount of money from you postflop to make up for how much they are behind preflop. For example, if someone has 33 and is facing your 3.5bb raise 100bb deep, then they may be getting "profitable set mining odds" of 100 to 3.5, which is better than 8.5 to 1 (or whatever odds of a set are). But they aren't really. They are only getting proper odds if you will, on average, stack off 8.5 times your 3.5 bet. Even though you might stack off with KK there if they flop a set, against your range of opening hands, they do not have the odds to set mine. Many times, you will be folding to significant resistance, checking a street or flat calling for pot control, and other things that make their set mine unprofitable.
So when they call with junk because they are "going to stack you" when they hit, they aren't going to on average in the long run. Therefore when they call with junk, they don't actually have proper odds to do so.
Also, when you raise, its just not all that often where you get into a 4 or 5 player multiway pot where you are sure you are outdrawn. Those pots do occassionally happen, but they don't happen often enough to warrant changing your bet sizing.
| Quote: |
| Finally you have people writting that you should either push the turn/river or call/reraise any bets on the turn/river. And you apparently have no problem with waiting to the turn/river for big bets to be made. Ummm, that's interesting, waiting until it's only people with good hands that will put money in. I wonder that this would work out???? |
I just browsed through this thread and I don't think I saw anyone that said you should be getting it in on the turn or river. I think that you are thinking about other threads and different hand histories. You are probably thinking of threads about 6max hands or something where it is correct to get it in deep in the hand. In a full ring game on a dry board like this, I think most people can agree that this is a pretty standard fold.
| Quote: |
| Hey GoldenDomer9, if you put my name to it, you give drtre a excuse to claim I don't know what I'm talking about. |
wtf are you talking about? You need to calm down. Not everyone is out to get you. I'm certainly not. I just disagree with your stance on preflop raises. Stop taking everything so personally. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bdbranch
Banned
Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Posts: 503
Location: At home wdyt. Btw. I'm not opinionated all the time, umm can you be opinionated when you're asleep
|
| Posted: Fri May 23, 2008 12:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| drtre1987 wrote: |
I just browsed through this thread and I don't think I saw anyone that said you should be getting it in on the turn or river. I think that you are thinking about other threads and different hand histories. You are probably thinking of threads about 6max hands or something where it is correct to get it in deep in the hand. In a full ring game on a dry board like this, I think most people can agree that this is a pretty standard fold.
|
Just checked, Honest Rob had 3 similar KK turn/river threads. Here is the link to the one I was thinking about.
http://pokerforums.fulltiltpoker.com/viewtopic.php?t=54432&start=0
Now the question that I have is this, what is so different about these two threads to justify the absolute difference in responses? They are both KK's out of position, both raised and called on the flop, the only difference is that in the other example the villian was able to get all of the chips in by calling hero's raises. Am I not reading something or misreading something because to me, they are very similar, the villian would be on a similar type (or range) of hand and would surely justify a similar course of action, not opposite actions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bdbranch
Banned
Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Posts: 503
Location: At home wdyt. Btw. I'm not opinionated all the time, umm can you be opinionated when you're asleep
|
| Posted: Fri May 23, 2008 12:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ps the only difference is a bit more information. But this goes back to the question of what would the villian be willing to play with and willing to call any raise with and surely the answer would be similar. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
drtre1987
Message Board Junkie
Joined: 07 Nov 2006
Posts: 1759
|
| Posted: Fri May 23, 2008 1:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
In this hand, the flop is T64 rainbow. On the other hand, the flop was Jc9c9h. On that hand, there are many draws that the villian could have. Villian could call with any two clubs while this hand has no flush draws. Also, the T64 hand has no legit OESD (75 is an unlikely holding based on someones calling range). On the J99 flop, there is still QT to give an OESD and also KT for a gut shot and overcard that he can float with.
Also, the villian is raising on this hand when there are no draws. The villian is representing a much narrower range than on the other hand. In the J99 hand, the opponent just flat called and represents a larger range. Its hard to put him on a full house since there are just not that many holdings. And if he had a 9x, he probably should raise to protect against the draws. Also, there are some Jx hands that he could have that you can get value from. But in the T64 hand, Tx is much more unlikely than Jx, especially since the Tx would be the first person to call while the Jx would be the 4th person in the pot. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bdbranch
Banned
Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Posts: 503
Location: At home wdyt. Btw. I'm not opinionated all the time, umm can you be opinionated when you're asleep
|
| Posted: Fri May 23, 2008 3:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
Ok I hadn't considered the unlikely flush option. But then again the betting of hero should've been questioned on this as there was almost the incentive there. But I see this as a clear example of villian giving hero the chance to hang on their own accord.
It would be nice to know what was the result. I'd bet that hero lost. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
esperz
Full House
Joined: 10 Apr 2008
Posts: 220
|
| Posted: Fri May 23, 2008 10:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
...I'd agree. If not only because he posted it here. Most peeps wouldn't post it unless something went wrong.
So, the next question is... What effing hand beat him here?
...I'll put a dollar on 1:3 odds that it was TJ. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Honest_Rob
Postmaster General
Joined: 21 Jul 2005
Posts: 4997
Location: trying to get back to even
|
| Posted: Fri May 23, 2008 11:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I refuse to reveal villian's hand on principle. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
|
FAQ
Search
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
