Full Tilt Poker Game #549357139: Table Promenade (6 max) - $2/$4 - No Limit Hold'em - 17:11:26 ET - 2006/04/06
Seat 2: BraveJayhawk ($700.50), is sitting out
Seat 3: Petoria ($1,078.10)
Seat 4: ransom1357 ($223.60)
Seat 5: Shaner9 ($142.30)
Seat 6: richde54 ($628.70)
richde54 posts the small blind of $2
Petoria posts the big blind of $4
The button is in seat #5
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to Petoria [6d Ad]
ransom1357 folds
Shaner9 folds
richde54 calls $2
Petoria checks
*** FLOP *** [4d 8d 2d]
richde54 checks
thnkUcomeAgain sits down
Petoria checks
*** TURN *** [4d 8d 2d] [9c]
richde54 checks
thnkUcomeAgain adds $160
Petoria bets $8
richde54 calls $8
*** RIVER *** [4d 8d 2d 9c] [9d]
richde54 checks
Petoria bets $20
richde54 raises to $616.70, and is all in
Petoria has 15 seconds left to act
Petoria folds
Uncalled bet of $596.70 returned to richde54
richde54 shows [8h 9s] (a full house, Nines full of Eights)
richde54 wins the pot ($62)


This is a situation where he could get a call by making a moderate sized raise, but instead, he decided to move all in and get me to fold a good hand.

I know there was a debate about it last week, so I decided to post this example of why it shouldnt be used.

Boy oh boy that's a tough laydown. I'm not sure I could ever make that one. What if he had Kd?

Certainly depends on the opponent.

I will not pretend to be an expert at $2/$4 online, since it's way out of my league, but at the lower stakes and at comparable stakes live, 90% of the players will not put down their nut flush, thus making the huge overbet a better option.

I can see diminishing returns depending on the stakes as you get higher.

2 observations..


1st, the massive overbet is no good here b/c we can put you on a hand that isn't necessarily the nut flush or even a flush, so really we're up against too many marginal holdings to get this paid off.

2nd, I BY FAR see the massive-overbet technique used most often on Full Tilt. Every once in a while on Party, never on UB or Pokerroom/FCP.

To tell you the truth, I found the laydown to be fairly standard at 2/4.

There arent many donks who are going to overbet the pot 6x over with anything other than the nuts.

Maybe at .25/.50, overbets should be called more often, but it's more about knowing your opponent. There are good players at .25/.50 who know that people think that overbets are obscenely weak.

I think that the overbet at .25/.50 NL is much tougher to play against, than the overbet at 2/4 NL.

If he had the K he made an astoundingly poor bet. He has a flush, but he might as well have nothing. Nobody he's beating can call that bet.

Laydown is pretty standard here with the board pairing and him hoping ur chasing a diamond with the ace only. Well played.

Like I said in the previous thread, unless you have a specific read on your opponent as a complete retard, the massive overbet is a huge mistake. That said, when you *do* have that read, failing to make it is a pretty substantial leak, as those that call it (say at $0.25-$0.50) will give you an insane amount of value.

At $2-$4 I'd say it's just idiotic. Players can't be counted on to be that stupid at that level.

Nice laydown. Pretty standard at that level I would say (I don't play that high, but I generally make that laydown at $0.50-$1.00 too). Still hurts to dump that nut flush though.