blonde poker forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
July 24, 2025, 01:38:41 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
2262399 Posts in 66606 Topics by 16991 Members
Latest Member: nolankerwin
* Home Help Arcade Search Calendar Guidelines Login Register
+  blonde poker forum
|-+  Poker Forums
| |-+  Poker Hand Analysis
| | |-+  Fish or a "considered risk"?
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] Go Down Print
Author Topic: Fish or a "considered risk"?  (Read 2426 times)
SuuPRlim
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 10437



View Profile
« Reply #15 on: May 05, 2011, 04:24:17 PM »

As prev said in thread just make it more pre, anywhere btwn 8-10k sounds fine.

Villain is clearly appaulling, limp calling with 58std from his stack-well period-puke.

Don't worry that he was affronted, yes post is totally standard, but pre is obv a huge leak on his part.

Try not to educate the fish at the table, hopefully he won't go home wondering if he maybe shldnt limp call here.

We need this dead money in the game.

disagree i think pre-flop is totally stnd from him. dont wanna raise your hand isnt strong enough, but nice to see a flop
Logged

Nico29
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2412


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: May 05, 2011, 04:56:46 PM »

lol mr level Smiley
Logged
SuuPRlim
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 10437



View Profile
« Reply #17 on: May 05, 2011, 10:35:11 PM »

lol mr level Smiley

hehe
Logged

PekayRocks
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 10


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: May 06, 2011, 12:32:14 PM »

thanks to all for the input.

Stronger pre is noted for future reference.

Not sure where howling at a blue moon or the probability of cheating on the missus fit into it - gosh, I have SOOOO much to learn about poker Smiley
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.061 seconds with 20 queries.