37 replies to this topic

[7s7c]

Acid_Knight, on Monday, January 21st, 2008, 10:36 AM, said:

I don't know if you get him to fold a pair often enough in this situation to show a profit. Basically, I think that if he's calling the turn (after you've shown a willingness to fire mostly 1 bullet) then you're gonna get called on the river by 99 or JJ here a lot, even though all he's beating is AK/AQ type hands.

[mtdesmoines]

To summarize: 20 posts of ZEEBO Theorum.

[Sheiky]

I thought it was the Baluga theorum?If not, then what the hell am i thinking of?

[mtdesmoines]

Sheiky, on Monday, January 21st, 2008, 1:15 PM, said:

I thought it was the Baluga theorum?If not, then what the hell am i thinking of?

"Baluga theorum basically just says that in a hand that was raised PF, a turn raise indicates that one pair is no good."Anyway, what I'm saying is that no PP is going to fold to this bet once it's called PF, on the flop and the turn.

[Royal_Tour]

mtdesmoines, on Monday, January 21st, 2008, 1:36 PM, said:

"Baluga theorum basically just says that in a hand that was raised PF, a turn raise indicates that one pair is no good."Anyway, what I'm saying is that no PP is going to fold to this bet once it's called PF, on the flop and the turn.

meh,zeebo theorem is overrated IMO.i have trouble believeing someone would call with a 5 on a board of 2,5,8,2,2

[TB17]

Royal_Tour, on Monday, January 21st, 2008, 2:44 PM, said:

meh,zeebo theorem is overrated IMO.i have trouble believeing someone would call with a 5 on a board of 2,5,8,2,2

Play more online and you'll see how people will call with a 5 there like it's the 2nd nuts.I dont think he folded a T or anything better than a T, so I dont think he has 66-99 enough to make the shove better. Also I raise a lot less pf

[CobaltBlue]

mtdesmoines, on Monday, January 21st, 2008, 3:09 PM, said:

To summarize: 20 posts of ZEEBO Theorum.

Zeebo theorem is probably correct 99% of the time. You shouldn't make a frequent point of trying to make people fold full houses. That said, this opportunity presented itself.To be honest, on the river, the only reasonable hand that I'm scared of is TT. I know it sounds a little crazy, but aren't QQ-55 (excluding TT/77) almost the same hands by that point? (There's a tad bit of difference...but not a lot.)

[Zach6668]

I can't imagine a thinking player calling here with say 66-JJ (non-sets).His range must be super small here given preflop, what are we giving him?

[Acid_Knight]

Zach6668, on Monday, January 21st, 2008, 3:09 PM, said:

I can't imagine a thinking player calling here with say 66-JJ (non-sets).His range must be super small here given preflop, what are we giving him?

He basically has to have a pair here. Given that Cobalt hasn't been double barreling (according to the OP) then I think that he's probably getting called down here by JJ.I say it to myself all of the time that "they can't call here becuase they can't beat anything" and then get consistently called.

[CobaltBlue]

Acid_Knight, on Monday, January 21st, 2008, 5:21 PM, said:

He basically has to have a pair here. Given that Cobalt hasn't been double barreling (according to the OP) then I think that he's probably getting called down here by JJ.I say it to myself all of the time that "they can't call here becuase they can't beat anything" and then get consistently called.

My read by the river is that he has JJ...maybe 99/88. It'd be odd for him to show up here with ATs/JTs, but I suppose those are possible too.Also, we make an amazing amount of money by getting players to call down light and overvalue hands. I'd say that's where the majority of the money comes from. That's why bluffing in big pots doesn't need to be used often. I don't think I'd ever try something like this below 3/6 NL.

[krup24]

Acid_Knight, on Monday, January 21st, 2008, 6:21 PM, said:

He basically has to have a pair here. Given that Cobalt hasn't been double barreling (according to the OP) then I think that he's probably getting called down here by JJ.I say it to myself all of the time that "they can't call here becuase they can't beat anything" and then get consistently called.

i think he definitely gets called by JJ

[mtdesmoines]

CobaltBlue, on Monday, January 21st, 2008, 2:43 PM, said:

Zeebo theorem is probably correct 99% of the time. You shouldn't make a frequent point of trying to make people fold full houses. That said, this opportunity presented itself.To be honest, on the river, the only reasonable hand that I'm scared of is TT. I know it sounds a little crazy, but aren't QQ-55 (excluding TT/77) almost the same hands by that point? (There's a tad bit of difference...but not a lot.)

I think this boils down to being entirely villain-based. So let's revisit:

CobaltBlue, on Monday, January 21st, 2008, 9:34 AM, said:

... My image is likely TAG, but I have shown enough hesitancy post-flop (backing off with checks and c/fs after c-bets) to potentially give off some impression of weak-tight. ... CO seems a little on the loose side. ... None of the players are idiots.Pre-flop:UTG calls, MP raises to $40, CO calls, Cobalt re-raises to $200, 4 folds, CO callsFlop ($490): (2 players)CO checks, Cobalt bets $250, CO callsTurn ($990): (2 players)CO checks, Cobalt bets $500, CO callsRiver ($1990): (2 players)CO checks, Cobalt goes all-in for $1257

OK, so you overbet the pot PF with a big raise and bet 50% pot on the flop and 50% on the turn. This is where the villain is collecting his informaition about the strength of your hand, and he's not buying it. I think the river is time to abandon the hand. results?

[David_Nicoson]

mtdesmoines, on Monday, January 21st, 2008, 11:36 PM, said:

I think this boils down to being entirely villain-based. So let's revisit: OK, so you overbet the pot PF with a big raise and bet 50% pot on the flop and 50% on the turn. This is where the villain is collecting his informaition about the strength of your hand, and he's not buying it. I think the river is time to abandon the hand. results?

A pot-sized raise preflop is to 210. This line gets him all-in comfortably on the river, so I don't think it's especially weak-looking.

[krup24]

results it's also time.

[CobaltBlue]

Maybe it was a ridiculous read/assumption on my part, but I felt that while the villain was stubborn, I "knew" what he had (JJ/Tx/99). I also knew that he knew that I knew. I'm selling AA/KK...I don't think he had either...so I'm really only worried about getting trapped by TT or getting called by a freak 77. Any other hand he has...yes, they're boats...but he can only beat a bluff. There are very few players here that are going to show up on this river (particularly with my image at the time) with a 4-barreled AK/AQ. If he can't fold, so be it...I reload and continue. I strongly believe that we've got to go with reads and we've got to test our opponents. I put him on JJ, and I thought that he'd fold this river over 75% of the time. Maybe that's foolhardy.He hestitated for a while after my bet, typed "we both have boats...tough laydown," and folded.Maybe he merely had 55 or something. It's still the biggest bluff I've ever pulled.

[Sheiky]

Tbh i think my one against a villain with three kings was more impressive Nice hand.

[Acid_Knight]

Obvious brag post.Ban

[Zach6668]

I really like your thought process in this hand. It really is a leveling game.