$30 Hypers - Board pairs on the turn

[stone75]

^
i did the same HEM query after seeing a video and reading the ebook. I have a very big database and i did the calculations where i grouped hands like 87,86,96,T7 etc, and i did it for every single hand, and I can say exactly that with 96o i am losing 0.65 BB opposed to 1BB. That is great and reason enough to call a minraise at those stacks.

Of course there are opponents where I fold, but they really have to open a low% to do that.

[stone75]

Originally Posted by l'enfant

wtf are you talking about? If you are in the habit of playing hands like 96o OOP at these stacks, then you play >65% of hands OOP, then please come play me or tell me your SN and I'll come hunt you down for action.

I fold pre. As played, I c/f. Way too drawy a board to assume dbarreling will work against him. If a player tries this against me, I'm not sure I fold Kx.

Too many assumptions by Stone and some others.

Yeah, you got very close, against a loose button i play 62% of my hands oop, and i am doing fine with this hands.

[genher]

Originally Posted by Benjamin the Donk

Sorry to hijack the thread but could someone please explain?

I assume this isn't trolling

Are we 3betting to polarise our range and get paid off later? Or is it because the hand plays ok post flop and we get credit on pretty much all A and K high boards?

What are we 3betting to? 120?

Thanks

just one of the great thing about the ebook, when a reg 3 bets you these days, they have junk 2/3 of the time.

[l'enfant]

Originally Posted by stone75

Yeah, you got very close, against a loose button i play 62% of my hands oop, and i am doing fine with this hands.

Mers ebook figures are for jamming against one 70% minraiser (a bit on the high side for ST atm) and 96o for him comes out to be -0.8. Since this is based on actual hands and not theory, it's not so cut and dry that it's better than folding, as this figure will fluctuate up and down based on individual and stake played. This was also 1/2 a year ago, villain tendencies have changed a bit. Stone, u get -0.65, some will get -1.1, -1, -0.6, -0.8, this is where I have a bit of problem accepting blindly someone else's figures. But if it works this well for you then so be it. What stake do you play?

Originally Posted by genher

just one of the great thing about the ebook, when a reg 3 bets you these days, they have junk 2/3 of the time.

I do love the tendency of people to follow the ebook blindly too!

[stone75]

Stone, u get -0.65, some will get -1.1, -1, -0.6, -0.8

I am not that good at poker, so i can't picture others than really losing players doing much worse than -0.65BB

[I<3Poker]

There is a myth that if you play these sorts of hands, you have to be Mr. All-Star postflop, check/raise bluffing a ton and making your opponent fold the best hand. In reality, my flop play was pretty pedestrian: Check/folding over half the time with a low check/raise percentage, only winning the pot postflop around 31% of the time. That means a large majority of the time I called and lost postflop.

- Mers

I think 96o is also at the bottom of the OOP flat to minraise range chadders recommends.

[Freakg]

so, no one likes overbetting turn instead of betting turn+river?

[tigerjack89]

Originally Posted by Freakg

so, no one likes overbetting turn instead of betting turn+river?

If we want to overbet, isn't better to overbet OTR? ie, 55/80 OTT + 375/190 OTR

[coffeeyay]

Originally Posted by l'enfant

wtf are you talking about? If you are in the habit of playing hands like 96o OOP at these stacks, then you play >65% of hands OOP, then please come play me or tell me your SN and I'll come hunt you down for action.

Hunt me

96o is a flat and it's not close. 54o is close :P

also 62% is pretty nitty (you nit)

[genher]

my 96o call in BB is +0.43 but 96s -1.49

[stone75]

^
let me guess, small sample size with the suited one?

@coffee
finally someone recognizes that my 62% oop is nitty style

[JSpazz]

Originally Posted by l'enfant

wtf are you talking about? If you are in the habit of playing hands like 96o OOP at these stacks, then you play >65% of hands OOP,

is that supposed to be bad?

as played bet turn, barrell depends on what is on river

[Freakg]

Originally Posted by tigerjack89

If we want to overbet, isn't better to overbet OTR? ie, 55/80 OTT + 375/190 OTR

i think overbetting turn is cheaper than betting normal size on turn and river, it looks stronger (or at least more suspicious), makes him be more careful with his checkback range. The point is that in that board is checking backrange is crap because even 2p has to bet for value, theres a gazillion draws so he might bet them a high % of the time because is an A high board and he can rep that better than you.

[tigerjack89]

Originally Posted by Freakg

i think overbetting turn is cheaper than betting normal size on turn and river, it looks stronger (or at least more suspicious), makes him be more careful with his checkback range. The point is that in that board is checking backrange is crap because even 2p has to bet for value, theres a gazillion draws so he might bet them a high % of the time because is an A high board and he can rep that better than you.

My point in betting smaller OTT is to get called by all the crap that check OTF, then bomb river to make fold just this hands. Well, maybe also a little smaller, like 30-40 OTT + 150-200 OTR. What do you think?

[Freakg]

if u bet smaller u could induce a shove/spazz, and his checkback range keeps unaffected