dougl - gj being a dick only to me and responding to others logically. You continue to make 2p2 a wonderful place for others to learn. If you don't like "pearz and A-hi", say so the first time instead of being a condescending prick.

Captain - wanted to address each of the points you made:

"The problem with slowplaying this flop is that a lot of scare cards can come on the turn that slow down the action."

I thought about this and thought it was mitigated by the fact that BB doesn't slow down on any turn card.

"Also, getting another bet out of the CO on the flop is dubious, as he may not even call the flop, and if you raise, the BB is at least calling, so you're getting the same 2 bets (vs. going for the overcall) if you raise vs. just calling, if not more."

I think this is where the heart of the debate lies. Wouldn't it seem like CO is the type of player who may peel for 1 and fold for two? And similarly, on the big streets, he'll peel for 1 but only call two cold with the best of his draws and made hands?

Munga - err, did you want it more explicit? 22-77,AK-AJ. The weaker the ace, the more I'm going to want some semi-bluff equity to back it up (not sure if this is sound). This is a spot where I'd like a logic check. I don't quite understand the general dislike of the free-showdown raise. It seems like here, peeling gives us a good idea of the strength of CO's hand. Raising the turn for a free-showdown can fold out both better hands (I can't see how CO calls with 55 on the turn) and 6-outers in CO's range.

Xhad - I don't quite get the "more opponents" = slowplay more. Am I wrong here too? Seems like we should fastplay with more opponents, slowplay with fewer (not to say we should slowplay that often at all, of course). I agree with you on missing bets if BB has AA, and this is a very good reason to fastplay. Just thought maybe collecting weak calls from CO may be more +EV (and I don't know if it is, hence the thread).

General question about slowplaying: If we use the logic "never slowplay", then that means our turn raises are very narrow. From a balance perspective, that means we only have hands that improved and are worth raising for value, semibluffs and air (and perhaps weird thin-value raises). This means our range is much weaker on average on the turn, and our opponents can profitably barrel multiple streets against us.

Is this right? If so, then is it bad poker? Relating to PJ's post, what is more profitable? (i.e. never slowplay--> semi-bluff less on the turn? Does one imply the other?)

don't go off on Doug, especially after he already apologized; he gave you a legitimate suggestion and you ignored it. I wasn't being sarcastic when I complimented him on his jab; seeing someone call Doug a dick and not me actually makes me wonder if I've really lost my edge that badly

Regarding the overcall thing, think about what you're actually trying to do. If you go for N overcalls, obviously you make more when N is large than when N is small. Here N = ONE. ONE BET. As I said:

Emphasis added. BB is not folding the flop. You can already get ONE bet by raising. Calling to make CO overcall means you are getting ONE OR LESS instead of ONE OR MORE.

If you check your option 7-handed with Q3 and flop QQ3 and the SB bets, there's some merit in flatting because it's quite likely no one has anything and you'll often get 2 or 3 loose flop peels that way in the event no one has a great hand. Also occasionally SB has something like 55 or even some random lolbluff and folds to the flop raise anyway. When you're actually talking about getting more money in the pot, then it's different. Otherwise it's just fancy for the sake of fancy.

Example: http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/17.../66-hand-9066/

(and no this is not anything so silly as a simple rule of "more opponents = slowplay more". You're right that it's usually the opposite. But on truly terrible boards against weak ranges I think it can make sense)

If you want to defend Doug, go for it. Please don't get in my way, OTOH. He constantly acts the part of a condescending prick, and it's really not helpful for discussion. He misread my post, proceeded to recommend that I provide thought processes that were provided, then decides to jeer some more.

I don't agree with one of your statements: "Calling to make CO overcall means you are getting ONE OR LESS instead of ONE OR MORE." If we string CO along, he may pay more bets on the turn/river. Of course, there's heavy emphasis on the "may." As an aside, I am simply defending my thought process and am not making any statements to being right or wrong. Please help me understand your thought process.

Please stop with the DougL is or is not such a jerk discussion. Enjoy hand talking about.

ive seen the same thing at 4/8 up to 15/30 a few times

As someone who sometimes vehemently disagrees with DougL about various aspects of LHE, I will nonetheless say:

LOL at anyone who calls him a prick or unhelpful. The guy knows his **** and puts a lot of time in on these boards.

I think these two are related. You constantly argue with people about your thought process, and most people interpret this as "you are arguing that your position is correct". As a result, you come across as if you are ignoring the advice people are giving you.

If you ask for advice and then routinely seem to ignore and battle people when they disagree, then they're going to make snide remarks because you appear to not care about people's responses. Remember that when people respond to your threads, they're taking time out of their lives to try to provide thoughtful insight for free. I think most people understand the arguments you're making. If you agree with their arguments and don't actually think your position is correct and then still argue, then...

wth?

Personally, I don't think you're a douchebag, but I do think you ask for strat advice with the premeditated intention to argue with how you know people will respond. I don't think I've ever seen you end a thread with "thanks, that makes sense guys, I agree with you.".

standard swiftarrow thread:

Swift: hay guys look at my weird line. what do you think

Poster: it doesnt make sense

Swift: actually it does, try again

throw in random flaming and there you have it

OK. Let's take any of the rest of this to the NC thread.

SA posted a hand. We got derailed. Let's get back to poker strategy. Any more discussion to be had about the cards/plays?

u need to do whatever gets the most $ in pot