What Thought Process Allowed Patrick Antonius Make This Call Against Phil Laak With Only 4s?
11-12-2011
, 03:30 PM
11-12-2011
, 03:58 PM
Phil Laak is a gigantic nit so he's extremely polarized in this spot, even more so than a lot of other opponents would be 3 barreling this board.
The only way Phil Laak can have KQ there is if it's K
Q. He isn't betting K high like that into 2 players, either of whom could've been set mining and have a made hand. He's too much of a nit.
I think KK and QQ are the only two value hands he expects to see there.
The only way Phil Laak can have KQ there is if it's K
Q. He isn't betting K high like that into 2 players, either of whom could've been set mining and have a made hand. He's too much of a nit.I think KK and QQ are the only two value hands he expects to see there.
11-12-2011
, 04:20 PM
Quote:
Phil Laak is a gigantic nit so he's extremely polarized in this spot, even more so than a lot of other opponents would be 3 barreling this board.
The only way Phil Laak can have KQ there is if it's KQ. He isn't betting K high like that into 2 players, either of whom could've been set mining and have a made hand. He's too much of a nit.
I think KK and QQ are the only two value hands he expects to see there.
The only way Phil Laak can have KQ there is if it's K
Q. He isn't betting K high like that into 2 players, either of whom could've been set mining and have a made hand. He's too much of a nit.I think KK and QQ are the only two value hands he expects to see there.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwnpv_am6IY
Robl explains it here. Basically KQ and KK became his only value hands and I'm guessing that was combined with Antonius having a strong gut feeling/read that Laak was bluffing.
11-12-2011
, 04:22 PM
Quote:
Phil Laak is a gigantic nit so he's extremely polarized in this spot, even more so than a lot of other opponents would be 3 barreling this board.
The only way Phil Laak can have KQ there is if it's KQ. He isn't betting K high like that into 2 players, either of whom could've been set mining and have a made hand. He's too much of a nit.
The only way Phil Laak can have KQ there is if it's K
Q. He isn't betting K high like that into 2 players, either of whom could've been set mining and have a made hand. He's too much of a nit.
And Howard is going to be a huge nit with Antonious left to act.
Antonious is protecting his straddle--he is going to miss the flop more often than not.
If Laak is not capable of c-betting with air (KQ) how is he capable of betting the river with air?
(I think the straddle from a player oop increases the likelihood he opens with 22, 33, 44, A5s, and 56s)
11-12-2011
, 04:34 PM
I'm saying that Laak bet like 3/4 pot into 2 players, isn't he trying to rep a big overpair here? I didn't mean that he was trying to rep a set.
As Robl said, there are also a lot of awful turns for Lederer, does he want to just passively call down two more barrels with 88?
Of course, as you said PA behind him is a big factor as well.
Certainly, but this is Phil Laak we're talking about. 
And I think he wants to get to showdown with strong one pair hands. Neither draw got there - so what is PA going to call him with that isn't crushing one pair?
As Robl said, there are also a lot of awful turns for Lederer, does he want to just passively call down two more barrels with 88?
Of course, as you said PA behind him is a big factor as well.
Quote:
22, 33, 44 AK, AA, A5s, 56s?
(I think the straddle from a player oop increases the likelihood he opens with 22, 33, 44, A5s, and 56s)
(I think the straddle from a player oop increases the likelihood he opens with 22, 33, 44, A5s, and 56s)
And I think he wants to get to showdown with strong one pair hands. Neither draw got there - so what is PA going to call him with that isn't crushing one pair?
11-12-2011
, 10:22 PM
11-13-2011
, 12:40 AM
11-15-2011
, 06:02 PM
11-18-2011
, 01:30 AM
