Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="loafaBREAD, post: 5885704, member: 440287"]
Wow, I got two competing suggestions.  I obviosly side with 300HP since his line is closer to mine, lol.  Increase of turn sizing is the simplest solution.

But on gustav's:

Is my bet polarizing?  I went for a less than half pot sizing here, though I probably could have gone for a third.  I am betting here with a merged range, checking back very good hands (in this spot, trip Q with Q of spades, AQ with Q of spades, AK with K of spades...) and garbage hands with little equity (non spade/non diamond suited cons).

I think a bet that large never gets called by worse... a smaller bet puts enough pressure on those TT-77 hands, which are in a 3-bet pot oop otf, with two streets to go on a board that smashes my range.  I want those hands to call, along with weak pairs, draws, or both.

I'm not sure what a 65%+ bet would accomplish... maybe It makes sense with A5s here, but generally i needn't bet that size.  ...am I wrong?  (you are better than me, so let me know!)

V can have 1 spade hands to go with a pair of aces that can continue.  My real problem with checking turn is that we don't get enough value by the end of the hand.  There are only a handful of fds V can have (perhaps we have a few more, but not much), but since V xcalled flop hes range is stronger and more condensed to top pair + holdings.

I guess I just disagree about this hand being a bluff catcher.

Also, I'm starting to think a smaller river bet might be best at least some of the time.  We can do it with all of our value range, but since that range is wide( and strong, 2 pair at least).

I like a jam with this hand, and lower flush draws, since they allow V to have all kinds of 2 pair that can call.  I also can't see how V can get away from AQ here, but there are many a nit at 25nl...!
[/QUOTE]

Verification

Search

Reply to thread

About CardsChat

Our Community

Our Site

Follow us

Language