NL400 Odd Spot vs Idiots - Page 2

Im sure its superior when you have a 80vpip fish behind you

On January 12 2008 20:31 [vital]Myth wrote: i'm not explaining the 3x open but it's better

I know you said you weren't going to explain it, and I can see why it's better when we are going to be raising a shitload of hands to not raise as big, but vs sick fish who are calling regardless, why not make it expensive?

On January 13 2008 02:52 TianYuan wrote: Show nested quote + On January 12 2008 20:31 [vital]Myth wrote: i'm not explaining the 3x open but it's better I know you said you weren't going to explain it, and I can see why it's better when we are going to be raising a shitload of hands to not raise as big, but vs sick fish who are calling regardless, why not make it expensive?

lol what? If as a LAG player (such as myself) you have almost as much, if not THE SAME amount of FE (by which I mean that I don't feel like people in position are going to vastly increase their calling ranges, if at all) on your 3x as you do on your 3.5x or 4x then how is it not better if we're choosing to have the same sized raise from all positions? We're entering the pot with weaker holdings and therefore it's best to have the pot be as small as possible and we can then carry on to utilise our skill, position and deceptively wide range of hands to manipulate the pot-size to our liking post-flop. When we have regulars incorrectly playing back at us or rather, bad regs playing back at us, because we 3x'd and then their 3-bet, depending on it's size, has different exploitable qualities - for example, if they 3-bet huge (as if we had 4x'd or whatever), then it means they've parted ways with more money for the times we choose to 4-bet for value or as a bluff. If they 3-bet 'too' small then we can see a flop, hopefully in position, with a (hopefully) hard to define range of hands that will allow us to rape him post-flop.

fold with only how much invested in that pot....

On January 13 2008 04:21 tokeweed wrote: fold with only how much invested in that pot....

lol investaments

Myth and I cry a little inside

siege tanks

we have the semi-decent player to act behind us after he raised our raise.... we are in no way in a good spot here i think fold is best.

On January 13 2008 04:11 sOah wrote: Show nested quote + On January 13 2008 02:52 TianYuan wrote:   On January 12 2008 20:31 [vital]Myth wrote: i'm not explaining the 3x open but it's better I know you said you weren't going to explain it, and I can see why it's better when we are going to be raising a shitload of hands to not raise as big, but vs sick fish who are calling regardless, why not make it expensive? lol what? If as a LAG player (such as myself) you have almost as much, if not THE SAME amount of FE (by which I mean that I don't feel like people in position are going to vastly increase their calling ranges, if at all) on your 3x as you do on your 3.5x or 4x then how is it not better if we're choosing to have the same sized raise from all positions? We're entering the pot with weaker holdings and therefore it's best to have the pot be as small as possible and we can then carry on to utilise our skill, position and deceptively wide range of hands to manipulate the pot-size to our liking post-flop. When we have regulars incorrectly playing back at us or rather, bad regs playing back at us, because we 3x'd and then their 3-bet, depending on it's size, has different exploitable qualities - for example, if they 3-bet huge (as if we had 4x'd or whatever), then it means they've parted ways with more money for the times we choose to 4-bet for value or as a bluff. If they 3-bet 'too' small then we can see a flop, hopefully in position, with a (hopefully) hard to define range of hands that will allow us to rape him post-flop.

You could make the same argument for mini-raising then... i 3-bet and call IP a ton against 3bb raisers

never fold

stop thinking, stop arguing, this ain't some genius shit

you have QQ. they suck.

i'd fold jus cus u got that one guy who 3 bet u runnin 32/10 to act even if u call even if u have the idiot raising beat

On January 13 2008 09:20 Baal wrote: Show nested quote + On January 13 2008 04:11 sOah wrote:   On January 13 2008 02:52 TianYuan wrote:   On January 12 2008 20:31 [vital]Myth wrote: i'm not explaining the 3x open but it's better I know you said you weren't going to explain it, and I can see why it's better when we are going to be raising a shitload of hands to not raise as big, but vs sick fish who are calling regardless, why not make it expensive? lol what? If as a LAG player (such as myself) you have almost as much, if not THE SAME amount of FE (by which I mean that I don't feel like people in position are going to vastly increase their calling ranges, if at all) on your 3x as you do on your 3.5x or 4x then how is it not better if we're choosing to have the same sized raise from all positions? We're entering the pot with weaker holdings and therefore it's best to have the pot be as small as possible and we can then carry on to utilise our skill, position and deceptively wide range of hands to manipulate the pot-size to our liking post-flop. When we have regulars incorrectly playing back at us or rather, bad regs playing back at us, because we 3x'd and then their 3-bet, depending on it's size, has different exploitable qualities - for example, if they 3-bet huge (as if we had 4x'd or whatever), then it means they've parted ways with more money for the times we choose to 4-bet for value or as a bluff. If they 3-bet 'too' small then we can see a flop, hopefully in position, with a (hopefully) hard to define range of hands that will allow us to rape him post-flop. You could make the same argument for mini-raising then... i 3-bet and call IP a ton against 3bb raisers

congratulations? lol you adjust and then a good player will readjust in whatever way he wants to, etc. truth is, with minraising then a few of the factors I name don't hold as true and even though we're playing a lot of hands we still want the pots to be reasonably-sized while we're in position etc. etc. etc. etc. just assuming 100bb 3x being called works out better than 4x being called, at least from my experience and a few other very successful LAGs

you can minraise successfully as a standard if you're not a total retard

On January 13 2008 12:51 [vital]Myth wrote: you can minraise successfully as a standard if you're not a total retard

catcher3333?

oh wait, you said if you're not a complete retard

results!!

I folded... and mopao insta folded behind me. I end up stacking this idiot 5 minutes later.