blonde poker forum

He over called from the blinds

He shouldn't have AA or QQ so I call. If he has the case K its cold. He probs has a T

Middy that's because you play big, there are plenty of re....... Spast...... Idi......

Erm

Crazy people at low stakes who jam here thinking that they are both good and going to get paid.

Except they aren't really thinking

$50 cubed not exactly low stakes.
So people think heakes this line with a ten?

$50 cubed not exactly low stakes.
So people think heakes this line with a ten?

the level that i play (low) I see lots of ppl put their stacks in in that situation

Surely with a K he should be check/shoving this river? (Also, do you call a crai on the river Trigg?)

hmm first posts all calls, last 5 all folds?? leaked info IMO

He almost never checks/shove a K here because most people aren't Rick Trigg and value bet thin here.

What's thin on a board of KKK?

Jamming the river with the four kings isn't optimal imo as you miss value from bluffs and vbets from big pairs...thus villain isn't playing poker very well...and you can't say somebody who doesn't play poker very well definitely has quads when implementing this particular line...he might have another hand he's not playing very well instead.

Jamming the river with the four kings isn't optimal imo as you miss value from bluffs and vbets from big pairs...thus villain isn't playing poker very well...and you can't say somebody who doesn't play poker very well definitely has quads when implementing this particular line...he might have another hand he's not playing very well instead.

Ever rangemerge?

Jamming the river with the four kings isn't optimal imo as you miss value from bluffs and vbets from big pairs...thus villain isn't playing poker very well...and you can't say somebody who doesn't play poker very well definitely has quads when implementing this particular line...he might have another hand he's not playing very well instead.

zeebo's theorem came out in 2006, pretty cool that there are still people who haven't heard of it, or maybe i'm a sad no life poker geek, hmmm

Jamming the river with the four kings isn't optimal imo as you miss value from bluffs and vbets from big pairs...thus villain isn't playing poker very well...and you can't say somebody who doesn't play poker very well definitely has quads when implementing this particular line...he might have another hand he's not playing very well instead.

Ever rangemerge?

huh? like who the fuck ever jams 99 for value here or has bluffs?

meh maybe iv lost the plot

huh? like who the fuck ever jams 99 for value here or has bluffs?

meh maybe iv lost the plot

zeebo's theorem came out in 2006, pretty cool that there are still people who haven't heard of it, or maybe i'm a sad no life poker geek, hmmm

I don't get it. How does villain know hero has a house again?

you're saying that villain should check if he has quads cos hero might bluff or bet his big pairs. I think he almost never bluffs and will check back small pairs that he may possibly call with if you put in the big bluffy looking all in.

So you think hero is the type of player who doesn't vbet his big pairs, always gives up with his unpaired hands, and makes big all-in calls with small pairs? Some player.

FOLD CALL WHO CARES THIS SPOT COMES UP ONCE EVERY THREE YEARS.  WHY DOESNT EVERYONE FIX THEIR PREFLOP LEAKS FIRST LOL

edit: RANGE MERGE ZEEBO THEOREM HI GUYZ

Zeebo's Theorem - Nobody ever folded a full house.

Reasoning: Nobody is good enough to fold a monster. Most players aren't even good enough to fold a hand that looks like a monster but really isn't.

Application: There are two basic applications to this theory. The first is that if you put your opponent on a full house and you can beat them, don't be afraid to overbet/push the river. This is particularly true when there is three of a kind on the board. Players will call with an incredible range of full houses in that spot. It is true that some villain may fold 22 on a board with three aces. However, you have no way of knowing if they have 22 or TT so go ahead and felt them. You are losing value if you don't. And sometimes they'll call with 22 anyway.

The second thing to realize is to never try to bluff anyone off a full house. If you have 22 on a board with three Aces, don't expect to be able to push 66 off his hand.

This theorem also generally applies to any monster over monster situation, from straight flush over quads/FH/nut flush down to set over set.

Reliability: This is the most reliable theorem. Nearly 100%. Somebody will post and argue that it is actually 100%.

What I do and recommend you do, is to gamble on whether or not my opponent is bluffing. What I hold isn't all that important; it only has to be able to beat a bluff. As I gain experience, I'm constantly being surprised by how often players bluff. Missed Flush draws are somewhat predictable of course (if only two of a suit is on the board, nobody has a Flush) and missed Straight draws are fairly evident as well. More difficult to determine is the bluff where your opponent holds second pair, but is representing top pair and you hold top pair with a poor kicker. As an example, let's say you have Kh-5h and the flop is Kc,Js,7d. Your opponent bets into it and you raise. If he calls your raise, you have got to at least suspect he also has a King and, if he does, his kicker may be better than yours. But don't forget that he might be holding Q-J here and is hoping for either a J or Q to come on the turn, which is evidenced by the fact he didn't re-raise. Let's say the turn card is 10h. If he now bets into you, it could mean he has either made a Straight (from a hand of A-Q or Q-9), hit two-pair (from a hand like K-10 or J-10) or has a Straight draw (from a hand of J-Q). I would just call here, unless I had a lot of chips, in which case I'd raise in light of my Flush draw. Either move is a gamble, but I think it's a reasonable gamble. I still have top pair and, unless the river card makes my hand totally untenable, I'm going to call his river bet, assuming he makes one. Of course, if the river makes my Flush, he's getting it with both barrels, should he bet. Yes, he might have A-x of hearts, but that's a chance I'm willing to take. After all, I'm gambling, right?

What I do and recommend you do, is to gamble on whether or not my opponent is bluffing. What I hold isn't all that important; it only has to be able to beat a bluff. As I gain experience, I'm constantly being surprised by how often players bluff. Missed Flush draws are somewhat predictable of course (if only two of a suit is on the board, nobody has a Flush) and missed Straight draws are fairly evident as well. More difficult to determine is the bluff where your opponent holds second pair, but is representing top pair and you hold top pair with a poor kicker. As an example, let's say you have Kh-5h and the flop is Kc,Js,7d. Your opponent bets into it and you raise. If he calls your raise, you have got to at least suspect he also has a King and, if he does, his kicker may be better than yours. But don't forget that he might be holding Q-J here and is hoping for either a J or Q to come on the turn, which is evidenced by the fact he didn't re-raise. Let's say the turn card is 10h. If he now bets into you, it could mean he has either made a Straight (from a hand of A-Q or Q-9), hit two-pair (from a hand like K-10 or J-10) or has a Straight draw (from a hand of J-Q). I would just call here, unless I had a lot of chips, in which case I'd raise in light of my Flush draw. Either move is a gamble, but I think it's a reasonable gamble. I still have top pair and, unless the river card makes my hand totally untenable, I'm going to call his river bet, assuming he makes one. Of course, if the river makes my Flush, he's getting it with both barrels, should he bet. Yes, he might have A-x of hearts, but that's a chance I'm willing to take. After all, I'm gambling, right?
[/q


This is where i am going wrong, i just can not get all this info info into 22 seconds...FML

What I do and recommend you do, is to gamble on whether or not my opponent is bluffing. What I hold isn't all that important; it only has to be able to beat a bluff. As I gain experience, I'm constantly being surprised by how often players bluff. Missed Flush draws are somewhat predictable of course (if only two of a suit is on the board, nobody has a Flush) and missed Straight draws are fairly evident as well. More difficult to determine is the bluff where your opponent holds second pair, but is representing top pair and you hold top pair with a poor kicker. As an example, let's say you have Kh-5h and the flop is Kc,Js,7d. Your opponent bets into it and you raise. If he calls your raise, you have got to at least suspect he also has a King and, if he does, his kicker may be better than yours. But don't forget that he might be holding Q-J here and is hoping for either a J or Q to come on the turn, which is evidenced by the fact he didn't re-raise. Let's say the turn card is 10h. If he now bets into you, it could mean he has either made a Straight (from a hand of A-Q or Q-9), hit two-pair (from a hand like K-10 or J-10) or has a Straight draw (from a hand of J-Q). I would just call here, unless I had a lot of chips, in which case I'd raise in light of my Flush draw. Either move is a gamble, but I think it's a reasonable gamble. I still have top pair and, unless the river card makes my hand totally untenable, I'm going to call his river bet, assuming he makes one. Of course, if the river makes my Flush, he's getting it with both barrels, should he bet. Yes, he might have A-x of hearts, but that's a chance I'm willing to take. After all, I'm gambling, right?

tl:dr