Dtd £50 +1 reload

[paulhouk03]

Snap what? The raise?

i assume snap jam?

[TL900]

confirmed snap jam

[Junior Senior]

muck 'em

[cambridgealex]

Online Id snap this in. Live I think its a trivial fold

I think it's correct to say it's a trivial fold with the reads OP gave (maybe not trivial since 99 is close and TT is an easy get in), however since he ended up having 44 in the hand, (which given OPs description we wouldn't expect him to open in this spot in the first place), AND he called (which doesn't really match to OPs description) then it actually proves that OPs reads are either bad, or (more likely) that he has placed too much significance on a tiny sample of hands, and used that to deviate from a standard line.

What I mean by this is OPs read "He's loose aggressive likes to limp call and donk alot" may give the impression that villain limps small pocket pairs, suited connectors, hands he wants to see a flop with, but in actual fact we haven't seen enough hands (nor enough, if any, showdowns to eliminate certain hands from his range in this spot.

Maybe he played that way in the rebuy period, but now is playing different (everybody does)?

Maybe the times he limp/called he had suited connectors or off suited broadways.

The theme of the week is variance and sample sizes - same applies to making reads based on small number of hands. It's fair enough to label someone as a weak player if you see them limp utg with 52o, but to depart from a standard jam because you've ruled out certain things that aren't possible to rule out (him opening small pairs), you've made a big mistake.

[smashedagain]

Online Id snap this in. Live I think its a trivial fold

I think it's correct to say it's a trivial fold with the reads OP gave (maybe not trivial since 99 is close and TT is an easy get in), however since he ended up having 44 in the hand, (which given OPs description we wouldn't expect him to open in this spot in the first place), AND he called (which doesn't really match to OPs description) then it actually proves that OPs reads are either bad, or (more likely) that he has placed too much significance on a tiny sample of hands, and used that to deviate from a standard line.

What I mean by this is OPs read "He's loose aggressive likes to limp call and donk alot" may give the impression that villain limps small pocket pairs, suited connectors, hands he wants to see a flop with, but in actual fact we haven't seen enough hands (nor enough, if any, showdowns to eliminate certain hands from his range in this spot.

Maybe he played that way in the rebuy period, but now is playing different (everybody does)?

Maybe the times he limp/called he had suited connectors or off suited broadways.

The theme of the week is variance and sample sizes - same applies to making reads based on small number of hands. It's fair enough to label someone as a weak player if you see them limp utg with 52o, but to depart from a standard jam because you've ruled out certain things that aren't possible to rule out (him opening small pairs), you've made a big mistake.

nice post and good to know. But not as good to know that at least you can't last the distance and stay up shagging all night. 1 o'clock in the morning in Tallinn with fit bird and you are posting in PHA. Live the dream

[JK]

Yes, I meant snap jam.

As Alex stated above, with the reads given then i think its a fold.

However, I think that these kind of hands are sometimes random acts. Sometimes rec's play a certain way and then will randomly play a single hand in some ridiculous type of way (as seen in the OP). Villain may play exactly as our reads state 99% of the time, then do this 1% of the time. He could be bored, "have a feeling", "love this hand", " have been coming", I could go on.

Im not saying that we shouldn't base our lines on a read we had on a guy an hour ago (that's just retarded), but sometimes people definitely just do random things randomly.

[cambridgealex]

@Jase, I'd look at it the other way around - I've done my job and she was dead to the world at 1am

[smashedagain]

@Jase, I'd look at it the other way around - I've done my job and she was dead to the world at 1am

lol. Wp

[Leatherman]

Thanks for all the feed back, think I've described villain badly tbh.. Should of just put bad rec I guess.
Against most players your right i shouldn't be in great shape vs a Utg 3x raise when average stack is 17 bigs... Seem to get myself in these spots a lot, quite frustrating as i felt comfortable at the table, will learn and move on.. Think maybe the fact that stacks were getting short and blinds getting juicier and I didn't put villain on strong range, thought it would get through a high % of time, but when he called I was surprised to be a massive favourite, win this hand and I'm double average with a FT pretty much locked up.