Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisV
I think it's actually better to take this line with a pure bluff and not sure I'm a fan of this with 89dd this deep. It's a disaster against a set if he shoves, you can't call and you've set fire to both $200 and a shedload of equity. Obviously it helps to have 89dd if he flats AK or something, but if he flats AK then the raise is probably unwise in the first place. Raising 87dd would be ok since you can stack off vs a shove.
I'd still call it off with 8d7d if he shoves. We'd be calling 475 to win 920, so we need 34% equity. Against sets we have 33%, so if he ever does this with anything but a set we have a +EV call. However I don't think that is much of a reason for or against raising it. Getting shoved on sucks for both hands.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Badreg2017
Why shouldn't he be holding AK? Maybe you personally don't think AK should be 3 bet pre or bet on the flop but plenty of competent people disagree with you. More importantly, regardless of if he should or not he absolutely does.
Villain also want a huge station and even people who play too loose would seriously consider folding to a raise of this size and if it im still flipping.
I also don't think "bluffing is ballsy" I think that it's an interesting spot to use a large raise sizing since our opponent won't have a lot of nutted type hands but we can. Bluffing might be standard but the sizing isn't. I definitely don't think I'm a genius or I'd be playing 5/10.
I said "folding" not "holding."
I'm not really criticizing the play. That's a good reason to use the large sizing. I'm criticizing the use of the reverse hand history.
If your opponent is a station, though, you should have called the bet because you have much more value in implied odds than fold equity. It's a miracle he folded or he's not really a station.