Soft Severed Deep Nuts With Action

[Acid_Knight 2]

It is my experience that the Broadway flop makes lots of people lose their minds and play level 0 poker. It hits everything. People over-count their outs by considering their gut-shot draw to go with their pair, even though the pair is obviously no good and, as in this case, a gut-shot draw is to a split. A typical reaction (and I'm not saying that this is entirely wrong), is to ship all those chips in there and not try to discern which outs are good and which are not, particularly from out of position. If he makes a brilliant play here and lays down bottom set, there's still a clear upside to us in that he gives up his equity in the pot.The hands we really don't want to fold are AK and AQ. And it's not clear to me that the villain will be more willing to commit with those hands after a brick turn than on the flop.

For the record, I hate shoving. I think shoving IS his chance to fold AK or AQ which he very well might play like this. I really think that with stack sizes, the minraise is the best play here. We really tie those AK/AQ hands to the pot since (who folds to minraises anyway, Zach?) they'll figure that they have a gutshot plus possible 2 pair outs (good analysis there David) and then when the turn comes, the pot will be large in relation to the stacks and we can stick it in or just bet half of their stack again. This makes sure that we get the most value from AK/AQ which I feel he will hold more often than a bluff here.

[David_Nicoson 1]

For the record, I hate shoving. I think shoving IS his chance to fold AK or AQ which he very well might play like this.

I think I muddied the waters with a hypothetical position change. The villain would want to shove a lot of stuff, particularly if he were OOP.I'm not saying we should shove. If we raise to $90 or something and he calls, he'll discover he can't really fold the turn.

[Acid_Knight 2]

I'm not saying we should shove. If we raise to $90 or something and he calls, he'll discover he can't really fold the turn.

This is my thinking as well. Many people don't think far enough ahead. They see that they got minraised and if they have like TPTK and a gutshot, they figure they can't possibly fold. Then the turn comes off and they're getting shoved on and the pot's so big and their stack is so small, they realize they're kind of stuck.

[Sheiky 0]

If you dont understand the point i was making, I cant help youhere try watching this old High stakes hand vs too LAG players. everyone feel free to watchNotice the line DN takes with a monster. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojeRwWIdQBM

Added to what others have already pointed out, they are playing a lot deeper than this hand and the board is completely different.

[Royal_Tour 0]

Can we just get Cwik in here to post results so I can see it was JJ vs Kq and none of this matters anyways cuz the money goes in anyways.

[Acid_Knight 2]

Can we just get Cwik in here to post results so I can see it was JJ vs Kq and none of this matters anyways cuz the money goes in anyways.

Cwik shoved and the guy folded.I don't remember, but I think he said that he's pretty sure the small reraise (minreraise) was probably correct. He can correct me if I'm wrong.

[TB17 0]

calling or pushing doesnt change the outcome of the cards. If we're prepared to stack off on the flop, why should we change on the turn?he is a lag, he has a large range and could be doing this lots of hands that dont fill up if the board pairsthe bottom line is that villain is LAG, has been there a while.. probably breaking down, and now made a type of min raise 3 bet on a rainbowflop.I have trouble believing this is a Big hand from villain.

so if the board pairs you're willing to stack off? Why should we get it in dead? what makes you so sure that he's willing to stick it in without a set? Zach specifically stated that he HASNT been there a while, so I dunno where you got the fact that he is "breaking down"In position, this is a clear call. Out of position, EVEN if he has a hand like 89/Q9/AQ/AK, theres a small chance any more money goes in if he doesnt get there.Also LOL at comparing 100 NL to High Stakes Poker.

[Royal_Tour 0]

so if the board pairs you're willing to stack off? Why should we get it in dead? what makes you so sure that he's willing to stick it in without a set? Zach specifically stated that he HASNT been there a while, so I dunno where you got the fact that he is "breaking down"In position, this is a clear call. Out of position, EVEN if he has a hand like 89/Q9/AQ/AK, theres a small chance any more money goes in if he doesnt get there.Also LOL at comparing 100 NL to High Stakes Poker.

teddy teddy... you're right about the mistaje i made on the "breaking down"i think someone wrote that in another topic and i just had it in my mind for this hand for some reason.also, Not sure the significance of us getting our money in on the turn vs a flopped set, or on the flop. Regardless, turns out Cwik 4bet all in and villain folded. So, i guess that very very small % of the time that he 3bets with a weak holding happened to come up here. But I wouldnt worry about analyzing the situation and the outcomeLOL @ you thinking i'm comparing 100NL to high stakes. I was giving an example of how hands can be played out. Dissecting hands, regardless of stakes or situations is always a good way to expand your skill set and add other tactics to your arsenal Its a game of cards with betting chips. There is no reason to be 1 dimensional when applying thought to a hand.also, how did you do in vegas when you were here? just wondering.

[Royal_Tour 0]

Depending on our hand, he could have the following outsIf we have JT: 9 outsIf we have AT: 7 outsIf we have AJ: 7 outs

FYP.u were refering to himhaving Ak,AQ right?

[Acid_Knight 2]

FYP.u were refering to himhaving Ak,AQ right?

Yeah, I added an extra out somewhere against JT.Against AT, we have 10 outs though, you're forgetting that 3 the 3 jacks win for us.

[Royal_Tour 0]

Yeah, I added an extra out somewhere against JT.Against AT, we have 10 outs though, you're forgetting that 3 the 3 jacks win for us.

right. well your mistake counterfeits my mistake, so its nullvoid.

[TB17 0]

teddy teddy... you're right about the mistaje i made on the "breaking down"i think someone wrote that in another topic and i just had it in my mind for this hand for some reason.also, Not sure the significance of us getting our money in on the turn vs a flopped set, or on the flop. Regardless, turns out Cwik 4bet all in and villain folded. So, i guess that very very small % of the time that he 3bets with a weak holding happened to come up here. But I wouldnt worry about analyzing the situation and the outcomeLOL @ you thinking i'm comparing 100NL to high stakes. I was giving an example of how hands can be played out. Dissecting hands, regardless of stakes or situations is always a good way to expand your skill set and add other tactics to your arsenal Its a game of cards with betting chips. There is no reason to be 1 dimensional when applying thought to a hand.also, how did you do in vegas when you were here? just wondering.

How do you not understand the significance of us getting our money in on the turn? The fact that his range is a lot stronger if you call, and the board pairs, and he bets out again. Instead of getting it in as a favourite, we're possibly getting it in dead, and we'll never ever have anyone completely dead.For HSP, if Gus has 78 instead of 55, then it has some merit, but the way this hand played out is quite different. If gus has 78, are you getting it in after the turn? "what does it matter" right?Also the fact that if he does have a weak holding we probably arent getting more money regardless.You say I'm being one dimensional but everyone has weighed the options of calling over raising. No one is thinking one-dimensional, I've considered your play, and don't agree with it that's all. I've said numerous times that I like it if we were in position. Out of position I feel we don't get enough value because it's very tough for him to fire another bullet on the turn when we flat the 3 bet. Because if he is bluffing, this is a spot to give upAlso I didn't realize that having a bad Vegas trip had anything to do with this.

[Acid_Knight 2]

LOL @ you thinking i'm comparing 100NL to high stakes. I was giving an example of how hands can be played out. Dissecting hands, regardless of stakes or situations is always a good way to expand your skill set and add other tactics to your arsenal

Explain how you're not comparing the 2 when you said "here's an example of what I'm talking about" as you link a thread of a game that except for it being called "NLHE" has nothing in common with the game played in the OP.

[tskillz187 0]

Also I didn't realize that having a bad Vegas trip had anything to do with this.

I don't really need to defend RT at all, and I pretty much disagree with everything he's saying here. But I'm pretty sure he actually was just wondering how you did, I highly doubt he was trying to rub anything in.But, I've been wrong before.

[Acid_Knight 2]

I don't really need to defend RT at all, and I pretty much disagree with everything he's saying here. But I'm pretty sure he actually was just wondering how you did, I highly doubt he was trying to rub anything in.But, I've been wrong before.

I kind of thought the same thing. His timing is poor at best considering the discussion here and the fact that it might even be taken that way, but I really didn't think he meant to pour salt on any wounds there.

[TB17 0]

I kind of thought the same thing. His timing is poor at best considering the discussion here and the fact that it might even be taken that way, but I really didn't think he meant to pour salt on any wounds there.

I know he's just busting my balls but he knows how poorly I did. I know it's nothing but a joke so it's not too serious, just sorta out of left field

[Royal_Tour 0]

How do you not understand the significance of us getting our money in on the turn? The fact that his range is a lot stronger if you call, and the board pairs, and he bets out again. Instead of getting it in as a favourite, we're possibly getting it in dead, and we'll never ever have anyone completely dead.For HSP, if Gus has 78 instead of 55, then it has some merit, but the way this hand played out is quite different. If gus has 78, are you getting it in after the turn? "what does it matter" right?Also the fact that if he does have a weak holding we probably arent getting more money regardless.You say I'm being one dimensional but everyone has weighed the options of calling over raising. No one is thinking one-dimensional, I've considered your play, and don't agree with it that's all. I've said numerous times that I like it if we were in position. Out of position I feel we don't get enough value because it's very tough for him to fire another bullet on the turn when we flat the 3 bet. Because if he is bluffing, this is a spot to give upAlso I didn't realize that having a bad Vegas trip had anything to do with this.

The vegas thing was a joke. relax. stop being the bob safai of FCP Teddy. what points are you trying to make that Matt didnt already discuss? So we want to get our money in good, thats obvious. What else, we want to minimize any mistakes on our part. also obvious.If we could guarantee that we can get all the money in on the flop, I would say "Go For It!!" You guys act like i'm saying, getting your money in on the flop with the nutz is bad. My whoooooole point in this thread has been, trying to explain to some of you, that we can trap here, because A- Our read tells us he is lag, B- I dont agree 100% that he will stack off on the flop with his the way the hand has been played.You guys are looking waaay to in depth at the example of DN and Gus.. I guess i should know better than to post something like that, because everyone just jumps at the 1st thing they notice (a comparison of High stakes vs 100nl )

Explain how you're not comparing the 2 when you said "here's an example of what I'm talking about" as you link a thread of a game that except for it being called "NLHE" has nothing in common with the game played in the OP.

I know you argued for a raise to 99. I argued for a flat call/ check trap play. is anyone wrong? I dunno. Is anyone more right? I dunno. again, forget about the video posting. I thought it might be a useful way of helping my point, but i guess not.I have a feeling tho, that you're just arguing my posts because villain did infact fold the flop

I don't really need to defend RT at all, and I pretty much disagree with everything he's saying here. But I'm pretty sure he actually was just wondering how you did, I highly doubt he was trying to rub anything in.But, I've been wrong before.

I was poking fun at teddy, because after a bad run of cards, he even had a bad run of chicken fingers too. And i honestly fet really bad for him during everything. He couldnt catch a break. But i love Teddy, he knows that.In conclusion, since i am now finished with this thread. I will state the following. In this situation. With the following Observations : Villain is new, he is LAG donk. He makes small bets and raises, and his range is Large.Right now, His frame of mind consists of, "I'm a pro, I am betting and raising" I have position, I re-raised preflop, I now 3 bet his flop c/r. I am showing strength like an american gladiator out to get Mark's metro body. Hero 4 bets. That immediately changes villain frame of mind too, wtf? how can he bet after al that i've done. Hero flats, and check turn : Villain's frame of mind will remain on par with its current thought process and proceed to think, Hero isnt that strong, he's appearing weak now and might end up giving up if i bet.The turn bet by this villain would probably be in the 50 range, and that would allow us to really milk in the chips in this hand

[Acid_Knight 2]

again, forget about the video posting. I thought it might be a useful way of helping my point, but i guess not.

The video was really showing the opposite of what you wanted to show since Gus was OOP and flopped the best hand (from his persepctive anyway) and took the lead with it since he was OOP. He c/rs the flop and bets the turn. He's not counting on DN to do his work for him. His logic for his river c/r was explained in DN's cardplayers article.

[Royal_Tour 0]

The video was really showing the opposite of what you wanted to show since Gus was OOP and flopped the best hand (from his persepctive anyway) and took the lead with it since he was OOP. He c/rs the flop and bets the turn. He's not counting on DN to do his work for him. His logic for his river c/r was explained in DN's cardplayers article.

No, actually, the video was illustrating how gus 3 bets, and DN decides to flat it. which to me says DN is trying to rep a hand like 10,10 - KK.I also think Gus fuked the river up royaly. I've never read any replies on that hand from DN or anyone in strat, but for gus to check that river is silly. Any hand that DN would bet with, he would surely raise with also.DN's range is fairly wide, but with the way the PF ad flop action went, it looks like an overpair. and he would surely check behind with an over pair

[Acid_Knight 2]

No, actually, the video was illustrating how gus 3 bets, and DN decides to flat it. which to me says DN is trying to rep a hand like 10,10 - KK.I also think Gus fuked the river up royaly. I've never read any replies on that hand from DN or anyone in strat, but for gus to check that river is silly. Any hand that DN would bet with, he would surely raise with also.DN's range is fairly wide, but with the way the PF ad flop action went, it looks like an overpair. and he would surely check behind with an over pair

Daniel HAS POSITION. We are OOP in this thread which is what is admittedly driving Teddy and myself to insisit that 4-betting the flop is better than flat calling.At the bottom of DN's article, he quotes Gus as basically saying that the only reason that he checked the river was because he thought DN had AA or KK and would be more likely to bet with it than he would to call a bet from Gus on a board that was 56958. According to Daniel, Gus was wrong in that regard, but Gus still made the move becuase he had a read on DN and a plan for what he thought DN would do with his hand if he checked.

[fdsafdsa 0]

No, actually, the video was illustrating how gus 3 bets, and DN decides to flat it.

Gus never 3-bets at any point during the hand, just FYI.

[Acid_Knight 2]

Gus never 3-bets at any point during the hand, just FYI.

Double checkraise FTW!!!!Naismith tried for a triple checkraise during his LHE punishment after TB lost in the playoffs. He only got 2 in and was very disappointed.

[Royal_Tour 0]

Daniel HAS POSITION. We are OOP in this thread which is what is admittedly driving Teddy and myself to insisit that 4-betting the flop is better than flat calling.At the bottom of DN's article, he quotes Gus as basically saying that the only reason that he checked the river was because he thought DN had AA or KK and would be more likely to bet with it than he would to call a bet from Gus on a board that was 56958. According to Daniel, Gus was wrong in that regard, but Gus still made the move becuase he had a read on DN and a plan for what he thought DN would do with his hand if he checked.

ya i just read your link to it.I think DN is saying Gus played it like a tard but was lucky that DN had what he had.Are you scared that if we flat the flop OOP and check, that it checks through on the turn? that is the only downside to being OOP and trying this trapping play.You cant honestly say that its night and day between a trap with position or this trap OOP

[Royal_Tour 0]

Gus never 3-bets at any point during the hand, just FYI.

weird. why did i think Gus lead out the flop.....oh well. the video is a poor comparison to this hand anyways. It wasnt meant to be an exact high stakes replica. Just a clip of lag's trapping lags

[Acid_Knight 2]

You cant honestly say that its night and day between a trap with position or this trap OOP

Yes, I actually can. When the money is deep and we have the nuts and want to stack our opponent if he's got a hand, we need to make sure that we find a way to get all of the money into the pot. OOP, when we decide to trap, he may see a bad turn card or check behind a harmelss turn card with a strong but vulnerable holding for pot control. Then we arrive on the river with a pot that is too small to allow us to stack him unless we can bet/3bet or we try to c/r him again.In position, every street is guaranteed to get bet. We allow him to hang himself because he is OOP and must make poorer decisions because he has less information.FWIW, I think that DN checks back an overpair almost always on that board since it's just too likely that Gus has it beaten. That being said, Gus is a better player than I am (dumbest clarification ever) and has played a lot with DN so he had reasons for doing what he did. I think if he bet, DN would find a fold with KK there a lot, although he was quite the station on HSP for a while there.