Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke0424
Not sure why you posted this if you're going to defend this terrible play to the death when literally not one poster has said this is even close to an ok line
Your reason for eliminating AK is "I just didn't put him on that." Good reasoning.
Your reason for elimating KK and JJ is because you think he'd check top set to induce. LOL, bro you're a calling station. If I have a set against you I'm bombing three streets.
Every other hand I watched you play was also very poorly played. Lol at you saying calling raises OOP with J8s is +EV.
I posted this for the purpose of seeing what people thought. I got what I wanted out of it. I am trying to justify the play, but if it is not justifiable, then alright, that's why I made this thread.
Thanks everyone for your opinions. I posted this to determine if it really was a bad play, explained my thought process throughout the hand, and concluded it clearly was not the best play, regardless of the situation. I'm just a situational player and figured it to be a decent spot.
Duke, if you seriously think I'm saying calling with J-8 suited or not is +EV, when I'm making sarcasm, then please loosen dafuq up. I know internet text is hard to distinguish a joke from a real post, but come on.
Also, you just 'lol' at my points about eliminating his value range. Okay, you haven't had a time where a hand that does make sense, you just don't put an opponent on? There's no good reason, but you're making a read. And sure, you might flop a set against me, turn a boat, bomb every street, and could get me to pay you off. Then again, you may not. So those times you don't, would you then understand my reasoning for why general players in $1/$2 rarely bomb 3 streets with such strong hands? People try to trap monsters.
Now I do value your opinion. You seem like a solid player that just kept getting coolered, if you're the one I am thinking you are. Seat 9 in that game?
Part of my explaining or justifying actually has clearly admitted it wasn't the most proper play, but I was also trying to figure why ALWAYS and NEVER seem to be it. I've found it profitable to call later streets light against certain opponents.
Now my style of play I know does not work for probably a high percentage of players, but I buy on to cash games deeper, specifically so I can play pots. I know what I am doing later streets. A big part of my game is to trust my post-flop play, use implied odds to my advantage, and get myself sticking the money in as a favorite. Sure, I make very questionable plays early, but I make a lot of good assessments on the flop-and-later.
Other than the apparent A-Q bomb, which sure maybe I was trying to be too much of a hero and fire money into the abyss (still can't recall details of that hand, but I'll own up to it) . . . I got the money in with the best hand. That's what I keep as important in whether I played fine or not.
I should look more into bet sizing in relation to effective stacks. I always try to keep in my head what any opponent I'm up against has roughly behind, and how they've played or acted at the table recently.
For the record, I did call down every street and he had ace-high. Believe it was a spew or actually was my read of the situation. I'm not concerned either way. I got what I wanted out of this thread and will learn from it moving forward.