took me some time to come back because nothing is mine the job ... I wish I had more answers in the comments, for further analysis of the hands etc but I realize that 10 hands maybe a lot ... The next time you try with fewer hands. However a lot of votes directly into the replayer, I hope this little quiz you will be amused ...
Makes 1
the 113 votes, the result is clamped between 3 options: check (39%) - but alas it is not known if the intention to call or fold if of the opponent's river bet, bet (35%) and all-in (24%). Note 3 votes for option fold that does not seem very
listed :-) For my part, I bet 36 €, or half the pot, I could see a pair (1010/JJ) and hoped to have more opportunities to charge me with a small bet by his hand is a bluff that starting flying carpet. Here, only those choosing the option check-fold (or fold-line option:)) came to save € 79 ...
Makes 2
Like a clear majority (65% of 72 votes), I decided to cut my losses and not to extend my bluff, the they have very little chance of success against such a player and in view of his stack. The 19% who chose to bet € 20 will lose more, because I can not imagine a second that he does not call here. As said by one commentator spot was not right for a 2nd barrel bluff, to avoid facing a shortstack. A note here another 15% (11 votes anyway!) Who prefer folder rather than showing their hand and sometimes (not often, I grant you) win at showdown ...
Makes 3
As the majority (52% of 54 votes), I paid this minraise loser. Yet it is without doubt a situation where he would learn to fold despite the enormous coast ... Although it was a little difficult to see what hand with a 9 has been able to call on the flop (quoique. ago .. all 9x suited to tile ...), what can it be other than 9 to revive the river? 37% of voters cast their hand wisely, congratulations to them. The 11% who raise (or go all-in), I suggest you temper your fervor, you'd better be a little kiki rich, but broke that severely burn ...
Makes 4
This hand is probably the one that has most divided the panel of voters: Out of 44 votes, 54% and 46% call fold. I was part of the narrow majority, which allows me to reveal the hand of naughty ...
is well on the anonymous commentator (who in the passage made me laugh, I do not know if it was voluntary or not) who was right on this hand: If I bet a lot bigger on the flop and still very heavy on the turn, because I knew if I was ahead or not (if I was to fold it, and if I'm paid because I'm behind :))... This revolutionary technique would certainly have helped save me from this river well ugly. Well, no, nothing at all, I regret nothing, when I put it to be less well paid, not to have an info or to scare away the hands that have 2 outs ... The time one of these 2 fit outs, well, that's poker ...
Makes 5
Out of 34 votes (I wonder how I will of voters to 10 hand, lol), the call and the raise are exactly equal to 44% each. The rest are timid who choose to fold. I personally just call, congratulations to those who raisent (and in particular bringing rAAise its name and read the hand perfectly ugly) ...
Makes 6
As an overwhelming majority (66% of 41 voters), I fold here. Call 29% and 5% raise. To answer rAAise on why the play on the flop: I defend very few hands in the blinds: pairs, QA, and ... that's about all. Every once in a while (rarely), I call with a suited broadway. Then, usually, or I hit (combo set or draw) and it's party, or give up. It happens from time to time to make a move on the flop with a hand that has little equity to vary my game (and make the call PF a bit more profitable). It is in this case here, where I have a gutshot I am ready to give up to 4-bet when villain. I avoid the check-up call, especially as here against an aggressive opponent that will in any case continue to put pressure on me the following streets.
So basically, it's either I take the hit on the flop if he has nothing, or I give up, unless my card miraculous happens. I'm not saying it played well and also 9 / 10 times I either fold or be revived PF fold the flop. But here in any case the explanation of the move ;-)
Makes 7
Of the 39 voters, only 20% are cautious enough to check here, the rest divided between those who bet (44%) and those who go all in (36%), which amounts to roughly the same as it seems impossible not to raise the pay of ugly ... To meet again rAAise, however there is indeed a standard play for me to return with a raise after sc, a fortiori if it is already a multiway pot. As you say, it is clear that there is often forced to abandon her 3 blinds on a squeeze ... I have not yet had the opportunity to do but go in my tracker analyze what happens, they call the cut-off with sc. The fact is that I am almost over already know the answer, which lead me to conclude that the sc will be played as button! Thank you for drawing my attention to this point.
The other interesting aspect of this hand (play beyond the flop ridiculous that I still can not explain), that once again it is useless to bet less than carpet when we managed to create a pot of good size, if he had an inferior hand to mine I would have lost a little value here because of course he never revived ...
Makes 8
Only 9% of 33 voters have found a Fold here. Not much to cope with the set on a board and also against an opponent drawY aggro. Further to comment rAAise I thank him again for his very complete answer, I confirm that this is not a standard play for me 3bet KQ. Let's just say that when I am left with a lag (one that plays well, eh, not a maniac), I try to increase my rates 3bet position to exploit the fact that too much stimulus (here 30% it is huge, though) one hand and to create a dynamic that leads him to face 4-bet my good hands later on the other. So of course I am with what I have, while trying to take hands with a bit of equity post-flop (83o I avoid, what): Axs, KXS, J9, etc. ... Then KQ, or worse than K5s J10?
It's rare that a player like this simply call with AK / AQ (I think these hands are clearly part of its range of 4-bet for value against a player like me who 3bet much) so I do 'm not often dominated with KQ. So, I do not understand why this would be a worse hand than another for a 3bet light and would love to read more arguments about this.
I can not reveal the villain's hand on the replay, but he had good pocket 6.
Makes 9
With 38% of 34 voters, I found that the situation merited vBET here (being well prepared to give up on the case I would be unlikely or raise). I think it would vBET a Q and is therefore probably of 1010 or a lower pair (type 77). I think it will be difficult for him not to pay me if 1010, and therefore the game is worth it, even though I seemed very close. And besides, 59% do not take that risk and chose a wise check. They lose a little value, but it's true that I tend to vBET enough light on patterns of weakness (check-call, check-check, check) and sometimes I'm having a tricky-player liabilities which had slowplay his set from the beginning ... I will not return to the fold player here, he must have big fingers or a sight problem ...
To respond to points raised by Redge and rAAise respectively advocating a raise on the flop or 3bet PF: The player in question is relatively tight (PFR 16), it is utg and it almost never call 3bet (4-bet or fold - 20% anyway). As I do not like the idea of 3bet to fold a huge pair of DD, nor that of 5bet all in a thin pair of JJ, I choose to just call and take advantage of the post-flop position, ready to hand to go after in the case where a squeezer wake up and make our folder utg raiser. The flop is just the same problem, I do not want to have to give up on a reraise that could come from both hands that beat me hands that I beat. My
hh contains no villain's hand, but I think I remember that it was a pair of 1010 as planned ...
Makes 10
only 33 votes and no fold (I think I know what is the player we have lost the hand between 9 and 10 hand:) The overwhelming majority (79%) is like me and cracks over weak-line passive chosen from the beginning against the good reg aggressive betting. We do not know what he would do in case of new check, but the carnival is all I think part of its range and so I have regretted not having had the guts to continue to make him want to I put pressure ... Congratulations to the 21% who dare to check, they probably would not take anything more in most cases, but were given another chance against our play that is too large to pass against a player responsible, what was clearly the case here. With over stack, another possibility would have been an honest bet shy, but now it does not work ...
0 comments:
Post a Comment