b/c and c/c both seem fine, but neither feels good.

pretty easy check fold.

c/c up to 2/3pot bet

On November 13 2014 11:26 dogmeat wrote: c/c up to 2/3pot bet

was thinking about mb turning my hand into a bluff ? with Qd we block most flush combos, and Ax should be folding pretty often. Even AJ should think twice before calling.

c/c

On November 13 2014 12:32 GoTuNk wrote: Show nested quote + On November 13 2014 11:26 dogmeat wrote: c/c up to 2/3pot bet was thinking about mb turning my hand into a bluff ? with Qd we block most flush combos, and Ax should be folding pretty often. Even AJ should think twice before calling.

?aj never folds turn/river, planty of other high diamonds to bluff with

I typically just bet/decide here, c/c can be good too sometimes depending on the opponent

Also I 3bet bigger

Yeh I'd say his 3bet is kind of too big considering today's standards
Mmm isnt c/c the worst out of all 3 options vs a tight reg? Or least my definition of a tight reg doesn't semi bluff here ( checks back all KdX) and bets everything that crushes us. I mean he won't even have semi-bluffs

Obv a tight reg for goose's games would mean none of the above
I probably like a bet/fold best vs a tight reg, since he will only be shipping hands that shit all over us ( even lower flushes crush us ) and we could still get value off weaker hands. It does matter if he s able to bluff rivers too
Bet/call seems terrible vs tight guy, best case scenario we're vs JJ, AJ ( 22% equity ) or JdTd,9dTd type of hand ( 15% equity )

I think at lower stakes it's even more important to 3bet larger for two reasons 1) we get more value with our premiums against players who call too much and deny our opponents good pot/implied odds and 2) we get more folds when we 3bet 76s

^amazing, so we get more folds when bluffing, and more value when not, basically we cant even lose
lol