I don't see the point.

You've proven that you are capable of being flat-out factually incorrect about the actual state of the hand, posthumously contorting your language and employing misdirection in order to save face. So if the point is to have an earnest discussion about the correctness of the play, you've already demonstrated an unwillingness to be part of that discussion, or even be intellectually honest.

If your goal is to show that I, too, can give incorrect advice, I can beat you to the punch; I grunch posts more for my own benefit than others so I can commit myself to a thought and then catch myself employing bad logic. My game is horrible. So good luck with that.

Mela, my interest in this thread, and you, is over. Has been for days. You should consider moving on.

Each time you bump this thread you simply embarrass yourself futher.

Rule of Holes: When you're in one, stop digging.

Well, you don't seem to be getting it. I asked you a very simple question (e.g. are you gonna fold 86o in BB vs min raise ~17bb deep?), which is related to poker strategy, yet you simply ignored it a few times. You have not only given a bad advice that was based on wrong reasoning, but you picked on me with that logic too. Did you see the sticky in this forum that says "don't troll in strat threads?"

And now, who is being unwilling to be part of this discussion? Basically all you did was to say something about SPR, refusing to answer my question, and then saying something more to save your face. Why, was that a hard question to answer to? I doubt it, the answer you could choose from fold, call, or raise. Earnest discussion about the correctness of the play? Lol, that was a good laugh sir. I really don't care if you're employing bad logic or whatever, but just because you are doing so doesn't mean you are free to instill it into other players too. This is a strat thread where people post strat advice, not for grunching posts for your own benefit than others. If you think your game is horrible as you said (which I don't know anything about), you might want to consider thinking twice before posting something ITT.

For the sake of the thread, if you don't always fold 86o in BB vs minraise ~17bb, yet thinking we have to fold in the hand OP posted, you're doing it wrong. Why is that? Well, because we'll be getting the same SPR postflop, which was your sole reasoning for advocating a fold, and we're getting 3-to-1 odds in both cases for a preflop call. Sure, you can argue that his opening range is much wider than his 3bet range, but instead we're OOP in this hand and most of the time we'll have to c/f with our 8 high anyway, so that kind of evens out.

I would like to ask how a "terrible" player can say with such a certainty that the post ITT was "factually incorrect," but it's whatever. I am not posting this for you, dude, if that's what you were thinking about.

Your propensity for self-immolation is truly dizzying.

Oh, alright, I'l bite.

You wrote:
"Preflop we're getting 3 to 1 odds IP with a semi playable hand and not too high SPR..."

Mela, if 3.5 is "not too high SPR" for 86o OOP, what would be an example of "too high SPR?"

Notice that this does not require any kind of long discussion or paragraphs of response, it requires a single number, and nothing else. If you are honest, and not seeking to wiggle out of your own statement, you will reply with a number.

What is that number?

Honestly I have no idea what you guys are arguing about, but I think OP played this hand optimally, and mostly agree with mela for the reasons why, also osef, if you can win 80-90% of HUSNG's please coach me.

WP. I don't see myself folding too often pre, and def shipping this flop.

At 11% 3bet prior to this hand, he has a lot of broadways. Pretty sure this guy plays KT like in OP.

Against this player, I think I can win at minimum 7 out of 10.

Don't you think it's just a little bit far-fetched that shoving there is ev+ while calling the shove is ev-? Like, we're basing our match on this guy's ability to fold two overs after he has overbet the flop, when he has already clearly shown us that he likes to call, and that he bets weak when he doesn't like his hand?

Am I really the only one who has a problem with this?

i´d probably fold pre against some1 who seems pretty passive preflop otherwise unless we have gameflow reasons to believe he might get frustrated.He seems like he will get himself in a ton of bad spots if we avoid paying him off those few times he actually has a strong hand.


Once we called his overbet indicates overcards because most fish dont play there overpairs like that.And against overcards and most paires we have somewhere between 40 and 50% equity. Adding the money already in the pot, a fold would be like burning money. There´s more than a third of a buyin worth of chips in the pot and you can either flip for them or give them to your opponent...
Not a very hard decison.

If he does this with an overpair he´s a freak of nature and you need to adjust your play,assuming you meet him again.

Classy response sir. Still not saying anything about the question I asked but throwing a new question at me instead. Which is not the major point of the discussion anyway. Lol.

But in regards to your question, "too high" of a SPR in husng would be about > 1:5.5. Say stacks are 1.5k and you min raise to 40, villain 3bets to 120, and you call. Now the pot = 240 and stacks behind = 1380, so that's slightly above 5.5, and you can defend with a fairly wide range. If you decide whether to call or not preflop solely depending on that though, you're doing it wrong, for all those reasons mentioned above. In husng I'll defend this hand (86o) as long as villain didn't make a large 3bet (like, 3x 3bet) and the SPR is higher than ~1:2.5.

Oh, and forget about your 1:13 SPR argument, because that's simply NOT gonna happen in husng. Even in the extreme case where you min raise to 40 and he min 3bets to 60, if you call this the pot is gonna be 120 and stacks = 1440, which corresponds to 1:12 SPR. Yeah, this is too low for us to call with 86o, right? So according to you, we have to mr/fold vs his min 3bet ~75bb deep. Which just doesn't seem right.

I really don't know where you brought this SPR argument from, but please think twice before posting.

Now we're getting somewhere!

Your argument is that when holding 86o, an SPR of 3.5 is better ("not too high") than ~5.5 ("too high").

Can you explain why this is true?

Man, I'm not sure if you're being serious. When did I say that in the above posting? I said at ~5.5 you can defend with a fairly wide range, and I'll defend 86o as long as the SPR is higher than 2.5, which means I will fold this hand if the SPR is too low (<2.5). So how come that leads to 86o is better at 3.5 than 5.5?

Let me clarify and adjust my question so there is no confusion.

First you said the SPR of 3.5 created by the call in the OP hand was acceptable and "not too high" in your list of reasons to support that call:

OK, so far we know that 3.5 is acceptable but we don't know if any higher or lower is also acceptable.

Then you posited 2.5 as being the lower bound of an acceptible SPR for this spot:

Therefore we now know that you feel an SPR below 2.5 is bad and between 2.5 and 3.5 is acceptable, but we still don't know about SPRs greater than 3.5.

Luckily, in the same post, you clarified that the upper bounds of an acceptible SPR for this spot was ~5.5:

Therefore we can conclude that your boundaries for an acceptable SPR are as follows:

• 0.0 - 2.5 == too low [1]
• 2.5 - 5.5 == acceptable [2]
• 5.5 - inf == too high [3]

So I pose the question again, adjusted slightly...

Can you exlain why, holding 86o, an SPR of 3.5 is better ("not too high") than 6.0 ("too high").

Sigh. So when did I tell you 3.5 is better than 6.0 for 86o? The "too high" SPR region is of little interest here, not because we can't flat 86o anymore in that region, but because of quite the opposite. In your earlier post you said we need some lol high SPR like 13:1 for playing these hands, and I'm saying 5.5-6.0 is already too high NOT to play these hands. In other words, in this "too high" SPR region you can call 3bet quite wide, and those criteria don't have to be 13:1 or some nonsense in husng. Hope this makes sense. Please.

So to answer your question, no, SPR of 3.5 is NOT better than 6.0 for playing 86o. If this does not follow from above, oh well, gg gl sir.

Why are you being so cartesian quux? Fold or call pre are going to be pretty close imo. Then we pick up an OESD again a villain who has shown aggressiveness prior to the hand. Just ship it. Yes it's an overbet, but who says that an overbet is 100% strong when you're against a donk? (http://www.boomplayer.com/poker-hand...918_6AF1C7BB95)

No, I cited 13:1 as being an example of a number larger than 3.5. "Eg" is from the latin exempli gratia, it means "example," not "requirement."

That's ...just awesome.

You realise, of course, that in English, appending (or prepending) a statement with the word "NOT" makes it mean the precise opposite of what it meant prior to that word being added, yes?

(shoot self in face)

/thread

Oh yeah, super convenient excuse. "It was just an example." But that example was not only wrong but also impractical in husng.

And yeah I do realise the use of NOT in English, 5.5-6.0 and higher we're not folding it was what I said. Too high to pass up. Too high not to play it. Hope that makes sense to you.

All you did ITT was to parrot some SPR argument that doesn't even apply to husng as it is, and nitpick on me. And when I asked a question about it, you didn't even bother to reply.

Oh well, don't troll in post threads sir.