NL400 Odd Spot vs Idiots

Got some player reads: jsndvtt01 is a super donk/fish/moron playing 88/42/6, basically minraising very hand preflop and calling raises with everything, and never folding any flop, making retarded bluffs etc... mopao is some 32/10/3 fish that minraised Q8 on a Q-X-X board in position vs me an orbit before, and underbets pots like a bad habit. This spot is wtf... I don't want to give either of them credit for better than QQ:

Submitted by : JonnyCosMo

POKERSTARS GAME #14498736667: HOLD'EM NO LIMIT ($2/$4) - 2008/01/12 - 05:51:14 (ET)
Table 'Gaea II' 6-max Seat #3 is the button
Seat 1: skater3598 ($469 in chips)
Seat 2: JonnyCosMo ($440 in chips)
Seat 3: mopao ($279.25 in chips)
Seat 5: willybeer22 ($1052.40 in chips)
Seat 6: jsndvtt01 ($460.80 in chips)
willybeer22: posts small blind $2
jsndvtt01: posts big blind $4

Holecards
Dealt to JonnyCosMo
skater3598: folds
JonnyCosMo : raises $8 to $12
mopao: calls $12
willybeer22: folds
jsndvtt01: calls $8

Flop (Pot : $38.00)

   
jsndvtt01: bets $4
JonnyCosMo : raises $24 to $28
mopao: raises $24 to $52
jsndvtt01: raises $396.80 to $448.80 and is all-in
JonnyCosMo :

opponents would have to be LOOOOL bad/crazy/insane to call this and if they were you would snap call it, otherwise snap fold they r probably vbad and a 6 is in their holdings a lot

minbet
raise
reraise
overshove

dude wtf, this is like 6x 99% of the time. Id pitch really fast

Myeah it's a dumb spot because that mopao is yet to act behind you.

Against that action it's likely one of them has a six though.

jsndvtt01 is LOOOOL bad/crazy/insane and that is why I'm asking.

On January 12 2008 11:43 JonnyCosMo wrote: Got some player reads: jsndvtt01 is a super donk/fish/moron playing 88/42/6

he has sooo many combinations of 6x here.

Submitted by : JonnyCosMo

POKERSTARS GAME #14498564088: HOLD'EM NO LIMIT ($2/$4) - 2008/01/12 - 05:31:46 (ET)
Table 'Gaea II' 6-max Seat #5 is the button
Seat 1: whoops33 ($192 in chips)
Seat 2: JonnyCosMo ($400 in chips)
Seat 3: hammer_6161 ($94 in chips)
Seat 4: saperlip59 ($155 in chips)
Seat 5: willybeer22 ($995.40 in chips)
Seat 6: jsndvtt01 ($441.75 in chips)
jsndvtt01: posts small blind $2
whoops33: posts big blind $4

Holecards
Dealt to JonnyCosMo
JonnyCosMo : folds
hammer_6161: folds
saperlip59: calls $4
willybeer22: folds
jsndvtt01: raises $16 to $20
whoops33: folds
saperlip59: raises $58 to $78
jsndvtt01: raises $363.75 to $441.75 and is all-in
saperlip59: calls $77 and is all-in

Flop (Pot : $314.00)

   

Turn (Pot : $314.00)

   

River (Pot : $314.00)

   

Showdown
jsndvtt01: shows (high card Ace)
saperlip59: shows (three of a kind, Fives)
saperlip59 collected $311 from pot

I guess that if hes really completely fuckbad all in every hand stupid you should call. If he just seems dumb and you have seen him make a bad bluff once or twice, fold. Theres a big diffrence bewteen making stupid bluffs and bluffing in this spot. Even when hes doing something really really stupid theres still a minraiser in between who could have you beat.

ah yeah gosh this is a lot tougher cuz it seems like mopao is minraising to see where he is at and jsn most likely has nothing.... i just can't call.... tough spot vs exploitable donkeys >>>> wait for a better chance to take their money cuz if they win they will insta leave table

lol there's no way i'm folding this

On January 12 2008 11:50 SakiSaki wrote: Show nested quote + On January 12 2008 11:43 JonnyCosMo wrote: Got some player reads: jsndvtt01 is a super donk/fish/moron playing 88/42/6 he has sooo many combinations of 6x here.

as well as air and Jx combinations

god this spot really sucks
i think i probably call JUST b/c I would hate myself if i folded and the fish has air and mapao shows up with Jx and takes it down

SakiSaki, this guy will overplay a jack the same way. He was sick aggro monkey

This isn't even a re-raised pot and you got called by two calling/idiots/fishy/moron stations. One has already moved in and one still to act. I'd fold this because like Saki said, one of them is very likely to have a 6x. And even if jsndvtt01 is overplaying a J you can't eliminate the other fish behind you playing 32/10/3...

if you're really sure he can have a jack then get it in all day

lol it would be more awesome if jvs called and then (if you flatted too) led for like 20 on the turn

depends whether you are confident that the minraiser isn't 6x+ strong

not that it matters a lot, but if they are very fishy stations, why aren't you raising to $16 preflop?

Myth why am I not raising to $16 preflop anymore?

On January 12 2008 13:56 JonnyCosMo wrote: SakiSaki, this guy will overplay a jack the same way. He was sick aggro monkey

Seems like a pretty easy shove then.

i'm not explaining the 3x open but it's better

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.