01-12-2007 01:20 AM
#76
| |
| |
01-12-2007 04:20 AM
#77
| |
| |
| |
01-12-2007 08:27 AM
#78
| |
| |
01-12-2007 09:01 AM
#79
| |
| |
| |
01-13-2007 05:19 PM
#80
| |
|
Low content, high risk: |
01-13-2007 07:11 PM
#81
| |
1. limping SC early is not deceptive, it's just kind of dumb. | |
| |
01-14-2007 03:13 AM
#82
| |
| |
01-14-2007 05:32 AM
#83
| |
| |
01-14-2007 12:02 PM
#84
| |
| |
| |
01-14-2007 01:18 PM
#85
| |
|
All right, we are talking about playing suited connectors, not 680. Suited, all right. If the table is loose passive, I limp with them in ep at 25NL. If the table is tight passive, hell, I raise with them in ep! I don't have enough experience with aggressive tables, but at 25NL, you should mostly raise in 6 max ep and limp in full ring in ep, I believe. |
01-14-2007 02:38 PM
#86
| |
the 68o was just an extreme example that, in fact, happened to MY AK, and the guy was UTG...and raised. a little silly, but what do you expect on a 25 NL table...on a Fri nt? that crap tends to happen on occasion. | |
| |
01-14-2007 05:57 PM
#87
| |
|
Good question, Chopper. How do I play them in ep? Usually I bet with a strong draw (let's say ace high flush draw) because I want to build the flop so that when I hit, people will more likely be prepared to go broke. No one will go broke in a nothing pot. Plus, people rarely raise on flop if it was limped around preflop cause they figure they have to slowplay big hands to build pot so I am usually not concerned about being raised. |
01-14-2007 06:44 PM
#88
| |
| |
| |
01-15-2007 11:39 AM
#89
| |
|
|
01-15-2007 07:22 PM
#90
| |
yes, when i say "bet small" i mean about 1/2 the pot...maybe 2/3. my normal cbet is 3/4 to full pot. however, lately, i have been better at switching the bet sizes up a bit. | |
| |
01-16-2007 05:49 AM
#91
| |
|
I feel that 1/2 of pot doesn't accomplish a lot. I just feel that way. You might feel different. I tried the same approach when I read Harrington who suggests 1/2 of pot bet, but this is for tournaments and experienced opponents and I feel it didn't work. 2/3 of pot might be good I guess. I bet 3/4 of pot or full pot almost all the time. |
01-16-2007 06:50 AM
#92
| |
FWIW... I will raise or call a raise or anything a even a reraise with 54s+, 64s+, 74s+. I do this mostly in position, but will call HU out of the blinds. This month 30,000 hands, I am showing a profit on Small SCs(T9s-54s), Small SGs(J9s-64s), and I would be showing a profit on Small S2Gs(Q9s-74s) if not for a runner runner 4 flush. | |
01-16-2007 09:48 AM
#93
| |
i play 25 now, but played a lot of 50 6 mos ago at stars. you get on the "rockier" tables (weekday afternoons) and you need to keep the bets on the smaller side to get action, imo. at night, bump it back up because people will still call. | |
| |
01-16-2007 09:51 AM
#94
| |
Jager, in a full ring game, i cannot "open up" that much. i dont have the stomach or skills. but i will play just about any sc/sg in postion for limps and moderate raises where we have more than a HU pot. oop, i may limp if i am pretty sure the players w/ position on me will let me limp, and i will most definitely steal from hijack+ w/ tight-passives behind me (it gets fun when they call and i cbet w/ air..i love watching a rock fold his AJ+ to my 79s cbetting a T-high board...lol). any raises, however, and i usually wont play oop. | |
| |
01-16-2007 10:02 AM
#95
| |
correction. lately may only mean the last hand...lol. | |
| |
01-16-2007 12:10 PM
#96
| |
| |
| |
01-16-2007 01:28 PM
#97
| |
thats a gambool i will take. i had about $10 to call to win almost a hundy. i know 2-outers need something like 50:1 to call on the river, but there is no guarantee that any of these guys have the flush. i already had the straight. sure, someone prolly did, but if you have read a couple of books they will tell you, "call a little more liberally in big pots." its not like it was TPTK. | |
| |
01-16-2007 04:19 PM
#98
| |
|
Jager, you play 47s? I ask myself one question a lot. What is actually a difference between 96s and 76s? One is better than other, but why? |
01-16-2007 06:28 PM
#99
| |
| |
| |
01-16-2007 06:54 PM
#100
| |
another hand for you guys...' | |
| |
01-16-2007 07:30 PM
#101
| |
| |
01-16-2007 07:38 PM
#102
| |
Personally I wouldn't lead out with a draw when 6 players are to the flop. Your draw will only complete 30% of the time over turn+river combined, so I wouldn''t blow up the pot without fold equity before it hits. Also, consider beforehand that half your outs seem to be tainted (ie, your draw hits but you're still haphazard to felt it) | |
| |
01-16-2007 08:51 PM
#103
| |
i guess i dont get this one. if i check here, someone/anyone bets...i have no odds to draw. if i want to play this hand, i must lead and toss out a smallish bet. i use it as a psuedo-block. if someone sees thru it, fine...or if someone hits something and will charge me the rest of the way, fine...i fold, as this is not a hand i want to go far with anyway, unless its cheap. | |
| |
01-16-2007 09:05 PM
#104
| |
consider that calling flop bet with QJ is pretty loose, would only have gutshot + overs, plus your turn bet was weak. I would probably just call the turn raise. I am not going to gleefully get a/i on the river, but I am probably never folding either. | |
01-16-2007 10:01 PM
#105
| |
| |
| |
01-16-2007 10:10 PM
#106
| |
| |
01-16-2007 10:19 PM
#107
| |
| |
01-16-2007 10:48 PM
#108
| |
I think you're missing some things in your reasoning here: | |
| |
01-16-2007 11:24 PM
#109
| |
2 debatable things about the comment, imo. | |
| |
01-16-2007 11:57 PM
#110
| |
| |
| |
01-17-2007 12:19 AM
#111
| |
now thats the kind of post i look for. thank you. | |
| |
01-17-2007 12:47 AM
#112
| |
Heh, np. I actually just started playing poker again after a lapse of two or so months. Played two sessions (first prima then FT) for a total of 10 hours and had a nice run, so I can't talk about real winrates but my impression is that all seems as before. | |
| |
01-17-2007 12:55 AM
#113
| |
i play low stuff too, obviously. so, are you saying you cant sustain that win rate? or, you have too few hands, and that is what you run as of right now? | |
| |
01-17-2007 01:06 AM
#114
| |
I think I ran at 15-20 on 10NL and 10-15 on 20/25NL. 50NL I was winning but don't know my winrate (the numbers are skewed because my friend played here quite a bit and murdered my BR). I started today with $125 on prima and $30 (lol) on FT, so I nearly doubled my roll today. What my current real winrate is, we'll see in some weeks. I really hope I can find it in me to put in enough hours per day to get to 100NL fast. Probably not if the past is any indication.. | |
| |
01-17-2007 01:52 AM
#115
| |
|
I think if you are playing on a very passive table then betting your draws is a good thing regardless of the stakes. Obviously this is not the case if the table is full of passive calling stations, and probably not the best idea to semi-bluff into 6 players, but still a good idea overall. |
| |
01-17-2007 05:53 AM
#116
| |
|
You explained it well, pgil. Passive tables - bet your draws to put money in the pot. I see we agree in this. This concept comes from limit, I know. I never loved limit, but before I got addicted to no limit, I studied it for a while and the concept there is: when you have a draw, put as much money into the pot as possible. How this transfers to no limit, is another question. |
01-17-2007 12:48 PM
#117
| |
| |
01-17-2007 01:20 PM
#118
| |
I really don't see the merit of betting a draw if there are more than 2 other people in the pot. Heads-up I bet them close to 100% of the time, but in a family pot it's bad play imho. I have a HH from today's session to illustrate what I mean: | |
| |
01-17-2007 03:12 PM
#119
| |
| |
01-17-2007 04:12 PM
#120
| |
| |
01-17-2007 04:28 PM
#121
| |
my guess is that they were "committed" to this pot. especially, by the river. the minraise was moot here, imo, because the pot is pretty big. i think if you raise all-in on THIS turn with THESE players in THIS hand, they still call. i bet this is one of the 25% hands that doesnt fold. | |
| |
01-17-2007 04:36 PM
#122
| |
| |
| |
01-17-2007 04:38 PM
#123
| |
where do you see fancy play? I think this is ABC. | |
| |
01-17-2007 09:32 PM
#124
| |
just a minraise instead of the regular 3X his bet, etc. and the ensuing analysis of the thought process (saying that it is one of the few justified min raises). | |
| |
01-18-2007 05:31 AM
#125
| |
| |
| |
01-18-2007 10:21 PM
#126
| |
agreed. lol. | |
| |