blonde poker forum

Hi rich, sorry... added the stack sizes in, both 10k ish..
Yeh never really posted an hand for discussion on here before, unfortunatly ive just read the guidelines after I posted lol.

btw.. its Liam ;)

and

I am sure the flop c/r is where you loose this hand.

James has opened the hijack so we he can give you credit for knowing that he has a wide range of hands pre-flop, and most of them are going to c-bet. So you're range for such a small c/r has to be either 78, or a draw of some description, would you make such a small c/r with a set or two pair? most likely with a set or 2p u would c/r larger but id imagine you'd be more likely to c/call. With the small c/r you are repping such incredible strength that really the only hand strong enough is 78 or possibly 37 (but then u hardly ever peel from the BB with 37) I dont think 23 is strong enough to play like this on the flop and again you hardly ever have that hand. So it's reasonable for James to assume that either you have the 8straight, or are drawing to it.

Turn and river roll off J K, and if we stick to the assigned range on the flop he looses to a set (which you do 3 barrel, but hardly ever take this flop line with) a 2p hand (which I do not believe you would bet the river with if its a flopped 2p (and we dont think ur likely to c/r the flop with any 2p hand that involves a K or a J - or indeed peel from the BB with K6/J5 etc) he looses to J7 (again unlikely that you peel the BB, or bet the river) he looses to K7 (same again although u are more likely to bet the river with K7 than J7, but still more likely to c/call imo) he looses to A7 which is more likely from your turn/river line than K7/J7 esp. if it has spades, but I would imagine that his line in the hand is also congruent with a draw you are likely to check back A high a certain % of the time as well on the river.

So I can see why James thinks its 87 or nothing

The good old day of the 3barrel bluff might be fading away lol

yeah but sometimes/ most of the time nothing is better than q high.

Matt: cant understand why u think c/r bet is a weird line!? How often do you check raise a flop then check the turn unless you have just totally given up with the hand?
 

I just dont get how people are supposedly only raising the nuts vs an aggro thinking opponent on this board.

I think its pretty flawed thinking to just expect to check the nuts and expect people to just bluff off every street for you, sometimes you have to induce your own action.

With lots of legitimate hands that you want to get value from (not the hand in this situation obv) there are going to be a bunch of action killers on the turn that will make the betting slow down when the original raiser actually does have a decent hand, which some people seem to forget they are allowed to have sometimes, even if they are opening the hijack.

If your perception of people raising in this situation is nuts or draws only then its so easy to get value towned surely!?

I just dont get how people are supposedly only raising the nuts vs an aggro thinking opponent on this board.

I think its pretty flawed thinking to just expect to check the nuts and expect people to just bluff off every street for you, sometimes you have to induce your own action.

With lots of legitimate hands that you want to get value from (not the hand in this situation obv) there are going to be a bunch of action killers on the turn that will make the betting slow down when the original raiser actually does have a decent hand, which some people seem to forget they are allowed to have sometimes, even if they are opening the hijack.

If your perception of people raising in this situation is nuts or draws only then its so easy to get value towned surely!?

This is my perception of most live players yes and I also don't expect to get value towned very often by them.

If I've raised the hi jack and someone such as Mr Keys or yourself has taken this line against me then I'd be very concerned but against most I'm expecting a big hand or a draw yes.

A big hand doesn't have to be the nuts obviously. 2 pair could take the same line on the flop but I'd still expect a check either turn or river hoping I was going to hang myself.

As for action killers, again most live players don't consider that. They protect hands against getting out drawn not against losing value.

OK, i take your point, maybe thinking on the wrong level for the general abilities of players in the DTD 300  ;D

Therefore i will be donating 2moro.

U playing Matt?

Straddle when you have aces obv.

Not tomorrow mate. Decided to fold pre tournament and go out on an all dayer with Hopkin.

Wasnt gonna tell u this story Andy, as it will make you cry, but as u have brought it up....

Stopped off at DTD on the way home from The Vic last night and played some comical capped £1/£2.
 ;tk; ;tk; ;tk;
Managed to find aces on the only hand which had been straddled to £16. Got a 3 way all in for £1200.



Thankfully, to preserve my repuation, i only won the side pot ~£600. Unfortunatley, the might that is 85 off on the £8 straddle just couldnt get away for his remaining £175 pre. Standard.

I just dont get how people are supposedly only raising the nuts vs an aggro thinking opponent on this board.

I think its pretty flawed thinking to just expect to check the nuts and expect people to just bluff off every street for you, sometimes you have to induce your own action.

With lots of legitimate hands that you want to get value from (not the hand in this situation obv) there are going to be a bunch of action killers on the turn that will make the betting slow down when the original raiser actually does have a decent hand, which some people seem to forget they are allowed to have sometimes, even if they are opening the hijack.

If your perception of people raising in this situation is nuts or draws only then its so easy to get value towned surely!?

mitch, i think the point being made by the "nuts or air crew" is that hands that might raise the flop such as 2pr, and top pair with o/e check for showdown on the end when they mostly miss

Will post reasoning in a bit.

Yeah, i get what your saying, but personally, if i have any of the hands i check raise the flop with that i am continuing, im going to bet the river because either;

a) I have a hand that i want to get value from because the river is going to go check check unless he missed a draw and you want to bluff catch (if that is your read of your opponents hand)

b) You have a hand that cant often win at showdown due to the way the action has gone on previous streets.

c) He might be a hero

OK so I think up to the river my hand plays itself. IIRC I actually had Q7dd so the open is fine too ;)

Then on the river I decided that you were capable of having a bluff. The argument that I don't know you is a valid one, however I stereotyped you pretty early as someone young, wearing a hoody, headphones and sunglasses, and you looked comfortable with live poker, playing with your chips, paying blinds unprompted, watching other players for tells etc. Also you had already had a short conversation with Alex from DTD (sick brag) which, although I didn't listen in over my headphones, tells me at the very least that you probably play a bit of poker online. So... if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck etc etc, i.e. you are probably good+aggressive. The fact that we've never played before and you had been quite quiet up until this point I think makes it more likely you will make a big bluff, because you're thinking that you ought to be deserving of some respect (maybe caution is a better word, I don't disrespect you by calling)

The hands I figured you might 'bluff' (some/all of these are not bluffs on the flop obv) are pair+up and down (35, 57, 67), 2 overs+up and down (97, T7, J7, maybe A7), 2 overs + gutshot (89, 8T, 8J). Along similar lines you could say pair+gutshot (58, 68) is possible but I think 58 folds pre and 68 check-calls flop most of the time. So combined with your value range of 4s that got there (47, 34), full houses and flopped straights, I figured I beat more than I didn't beat, or at least near enough to make the pot odds I was getting, and called. Also there were one or two small live-tells that I don't want to say on a public forum for obvious reasons.

I obviously considered the shove but tbh in the moment I struggled to work out the maths of it. I think this is the most interesting part of the hand and would like to hear people's thoughts. At the time I figured I needed to work out roughly the ratio of hands that call a shove to hands that fold to a shove and have me beat, the number of hands I actually beat is irrelevant because it's the same result, does this seem right? And then that ratio needs to be greater than the amount of the shove compared to the amount in the pot for a shove to be better? The shove would have been an extra 3.5k I think and the pot would have had about 10k in. The hands I beat that fold are imo 65 (although this almost hand is no different to 76, people often play the same hands differently depending on how they got there, so I would expect most villains to check this on the river), 67 57 A7 and 35, total of about 42 combos. The hands that call a shove are 78 66 55 44 45 46 47 43, or about 48 combos. Doesn't actually even look close tbh, shove is probably way the better option, although I would weight the hands on the right as much more likely to show up in villain's range than those on the left. Also I think I would have been left with 4k if i was wrong and called, whereas if I was wrong and shoved, I would have been left with 500 chips. At the time tho I just thought there's too much to work out here and basically in the end I decided I would call because I can muck if I'm wrong and noone will be any the wiser (unless he has A7) but I have to show my hand and look like a donk if I shove into the nuts.

NB: My memory of the hand is that the board ran out 456 K 4, which I think is pretty crucial to my reasoning. However I could be misremembering I guess.

OK so I think up to the river my hand plays itself. IIRC I actually had Q7dd so the open is fine too ;)

Then on the river I decided that you were capable of having a bluff. The argument that I don't know you is a valid one, however I stereotyped you pretty early as someone young, wearing a hoody, headphones and sunglasses, and you looked comfortable with live poker, playing with your chips, paying blinds unprompted, watching other players for tells etc. Also you had already had a short conversation with Alex from DTD (sick brag) which, although I didn't listen in over my headphones, tells me at the very least that you probably play a bit of poker online. So... if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck etc etc, i.e. you are probably good+aggressive. The fact that we've never played before and you had been quite quiet up until this point I think makes it more likely you will make a big bluff, because you're thinking that you ought to be deserving of some respect (maybe caution is a better word, I don't disrespect you by calling)

The hands I figured you might 'bluff' (some/all of these are not bluffs on the flop obv) are pair+up and down (35, 57, 67), 2 overs+up and down (97, T7, J7, maybe A7), 2 overs + gutshot (89, 8T, 8J). Along similar lines you could say pair+gutshot (58, 68) is possible but I think 58 folds pre and 68 check-calls flop most of the time. So combined with your value range of 4s that got there (47, 34), full houses and flopped straights, I figured I beat more than I didn't beat, or at least near enough to make the pot odds I was getting, and called. Also there were one or two small live-tells that I don't want to say on a public forum for obvious reasons.

I obviously considered the shove but tbh in the moment I struggled to work out the maths of it. I think this is the most interesting part of the hand and would like to hear people's thoughts. At the time I figured I needed to work out roughly the ratio of hands that call a shove to hands that fold to a shove and have me beat, the number of hands I actually beat is irrelevant because it's the same result, does this seem right? And then that ratio needs to be greater than the amount of the shove compared to the amount in the pot for a shove to be better? The shove would have been an extra 3.5k I think and the pot would have had about 10k in. The hands I beat that fold are imo 65 (although this almost hand is no different to 76, people often play the same hands differently depending on how they got there, so I would expect most villains to check this on the river), 67 57 A7 and 35, total of about 42 combos. The hands that call a shove are 78 66 55 44 45 46 47 43, or about 48 combos. Doesn't actually even look close tbh, shove is probably way the better option, although I would weight the hands on the right as much more likely to show up in villain's range than those on the left. Also I think I would have been left with 4k if i was wrong and called, whereas if I was wrong and shoved, I would have been left with 500 chips. At the time tho I just thought there's too much to work out here and basically in the end I decided I would call because I can muck if I'm wrong and noone will be any the wiser (unless he has A7) but I have to show my hand and look like a donk if I shove into the nuts.

NB: My memory of the hand is that the board ran out 456 K 4, which I think is pretty crucial to my reasoning. However I could be misremembering I guess.

Taking lessons from Vanessa Rousso ldo

Will post reasoning in a bit. FWIW, actually the turn was a K and the river was a 4. I don't remember if the turn brought a flush draw but I know it didn't for diamonds as I had Qd7d.