fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu

reckon i can muck turn? i mean.. i dont see him check jamming TX here. JJ T8s, TT, 55, 88, AKss
pretty close

On December 26 2012 14:35 wobbly_au wrote: reckon i can muck turn? i mean.. i dont see him check jamming TX here. JJ T8s, TT, 55, 88, AKss pretty close

too many trolala hands for you.

i have no idea. seems really strange to have a check/jam range here.

people seem to 3bet all pp's these days but i'd much prefer flatting an open raise with 88 than risking the chance to play a 4bet pot oop with 88, which is a nightmare vs any half decent opponent.

i forget the

[x] hope

alot of 10/20 players, myself included are too confident postflop that we make some ridiculous preflop errors..

On December 26 2012 15:05 Stroggoz wrote: i have no idea. seems really strange to have a check/jam range here. people seem to 3bet all pp's these days but i'd much prefer flatting an open raise with 88 than risking the chance to play a 4bet pot oop with 88, which is a nightmare vs any half decent opponent.

Not that strange to have a c/j range. No real advantage to c/c lead river just gives up some cards that could improve villain or scare him. C/c check allows villain to check back some hands that would have otherwise called a turn jam

Like if he check calls turn wobbly are jamming a 9s/Js river when checked to?

On December 26 2012 16:17 traxamillion wrote: Show nested quote + On December 26 2012 15:05 Stroggoz wrote: i have no idea. seems really strange to have a check/jam range here. people seem to 3bet all pp's these days but i'd much prefer flatting an open raise with 88 than risking the chance to play a 4bet pot oop with 88, which is a nightmare vs any half decent opponent. Not that strange to have a c/j range. No real advantage to c/c lead river just gives up some cards that could improve villain or scare him. C/c check allows villain to check back some hands that would have otherwise called a turn jam

yeah that's true, it's probably better to exploit the turn barreling range than river since turn barreling is wider. he can just balance the check jam with the weakest part of his flop calling range.

On December 26 2012 14:35 wobbly_au wrote: reckon i can muck turn? i mean.. i dont see him check jamming TX here. JJ T8s, TT, 55, 88, AKss pretty close

If you aren't sure he's capable of shoving Tx+ here for bluff, value and protection, I think queens should be a clear fold with your image. Not many people if any would think they can get you off a good pair in a bloated pot. Having Q of spades makes it even easier since you have blockers for some of the flop floats you beat that jams. I think you should stick to game theory optimal approach and call with Kings+ and fold the rest. You also gotta include some of his Kings and Aces he decided to slow play.

On December 26 2012 17:52 AndrewSong wrote: Show nested quote + On December 26 2012 14:35 wobbly_au wrote: reckon i can muck turn? i mean.. i dont see him check jamming TX here. JJ T8s, TT, 55, 88, AKss pretty close If you aren't sure he's capable of shoving Tx+ here for bluff, value and protection, I think queens should be a clear fold with your image. Not many people if any would think they can get you off a good pair in a bloated pot. Having Q of spades makes it even easier since you have blockers for some of the flop floats you beat that jams. I think you should stick to game theory optimal approach and call with Kings+ and fold the rest. You also gotta include some of his Kings and Aces he decided to slow play.

that was my exact thought.. But then come to think of it.. he does have AKss, A5ss, A2ss how would he play those? what about JJ?

Its such a narrow range of value and semi bluffs here..


If you had JJ and 88 which one would you more likely jam,?

He's probably not 3betting A5s/A2s 100% so we can't really add both in the range at the same time. Even if he was, he's probably not jamming those 100%. He does have decent showdown value and Ace or trips on the river can be a great card for you to pull the trigger. AKss is also another hand u cant include 100% in the range. I would think most would just 5bet it against you a lot of the times if they wanted to continue vs your 4bet sizing and being it a ante game and all.. So I think it's only fair to include one suited combo instead of all three.

88 I would jam 100% unless I thought ur range is very wide and u would bluff off on non J or Q river if I call.

t y t y

Makes alot of sense

Assuming he knows I 4bet fairly wide and balanced here how would you play JJ or at.

On December 27 2012 04:11 wobbly_au wrote: Makes alot of sense Assuming he knows I 4bet fairly wide and balanced here how would you play JJ or at.

4bet balanced meaning you are 4betting weak as jacks for value?

Either way, I would 5bet or fold AT. Even on best run out like this, I think turn call with AT is still a losing play. Not to say ur betsize was exploitable or to sound fishy, your turn size of $1190 would perceive as value to me. I would've bet smaller with my overall range since I would like to have my turn betting range perceived as being wide so he can stick around with weak hands that still has some showdown value. I'd also have better fold equity with stack to pot ratio being better and also giving him a chance to make costly mistake with hands he would've likely folded to a bigger turn bet. Tbh I personally use that turn sizing with hands im giving up on river if unimproved. If you have other reasoning behind your sizing, let me know!

So yeah, I'm folding both hands if I wasn't tilting or anything which is rare

On December 27 2012 07:12 AndrewSong wrote: Show nested quote + On December 27 2012 04:11 wobbly_au wrote: Makes alot of sense Assuming he knows I 4bet fairly wide and balanced here how would you play JJ or at. 4bet balanced meaning you are 4betting weak as jacks for value? Either way, I would 5bet or fold AT. Even on best run out like this, I think turn call with AT is still a losing play. Not to say ur betsize was exploitable or to sound fishy, your turn size of $1190 would perceive as value to me. I would've bet smaller with my overall range since I would like to have my turn betting range perceived as being wide so he can stick around with weak hands that still has some showdown value. I'd also have better fold equity with stack to pot ratio being better and also giving him a chance to make costly mistake with hands he would've likely folded to a bigger turn bet. Tbh I personally use that turn sizing with hands im giving up on river if unimproved. If you have other reasoning behind your sizing, let me know! So yeah, I'm folding both hands if I wasn't tilting or anything which is rare

Yea i definately 4bet TT+ AQ+(sometimes) here for value, but also have alot of bluffs, so given he is a mindreader technically he should be able to call turn as I just picked up some semi bluffs to go with my overpairs and AK bluffs.

As with my sizing on the turn, the way i see it is his flop c/c range is fairly wide and because its such a blank turn that i feel like TX will have trouble folding to me (but i guess i could be wrong since you would fold AT here to me). If he calls my bet on the turn then i feel he will be commited to call on most rivers and I guess thats what i want him to feel as my allin range on the river will be heavily geared towards value bets..
Now lets look at my option opens on the turn,

1. bet tiny again and leave pot sized on the river
2. bet big and commit to look like some type of XXss (I HATE THIS SIZE, because i cant be bluffed over and the number of combos of XXss is small compared to overpairs whether he thinks i play them the same or not)
3. check back

Im starting to think checking back will be good, as it prevents me from getting stacked and I still suck a bet out of JJ and maybe TX.. Do you c/c TX on river?