Borgata 1-2. Prob around 7 o clock saturday night.
Effect stacks of $300.

Nitty asian woman limps in EP, another somewhat nitty player limps, Hero raises to 10 in MP with 88.

Folds to BB who makes it 30. Villain is around 30ish and has a thick new jersey accent. He and his friend are talking as if they are the better players at the table. But in reality, he seems to be playing a pretty nitty, unimaginative style- playing fit or fold for the most part. He doesn't raise IP as much as he should and doesn't attack/ defend post flop. This is his first 3bet.

Hero calls the 3bet

65ish in pot:

3x5s6s (hero doesn't have the BDFD)

Villain bets 45. Hero???

What's your plan? If you advocate calling, what do you do when turn brings:

Ts
Ax
7x

Thanks in advance,

I don't have a plan for the turn, because I'm folding right now.

Easy fold. Next hand please.

Its a thin set mine but probably profitable, especially if he doesnt cbet a whiffed AK. Time to fold in the flop.

Your read that you are a better player than him is probably wrong.

If you did not fold the flop, it is definitely wrong.

Set mining is fine here. First 3bet = really strong range. Means that we get paid when we hit.

Fold flop.

Nh.

The correctness of the second sentence does not support the conclusions in the other two sentences.

why?

Raise to $16 pre to get it heads up or just limp. Calling the 3bet is marginally profitable at best. Is he always 3betting AK pre flop AND cbetting flop always? If so, call flop and fold any turn to aggression. If not, then fold flop.

The reason I'm saying your read that you are better than him is "probably" wrong is because of this:

It's not your description of his playing style, but the fact that you need to be derogatory about it, that tells me you are not as good as you think you are. That doesn't mean he is a good player either--the fact that he is talking up his own game at the table is clear proof that he's probably not--but if you can't come on the forum and give a dispassionate analysis, it does not speak well for your game.

So you are not as good as you think you are; he is not as good as he thinks he is; and I'm guessing (hence why I said "probably") that if you want to be derogatory about a player that plays a style that wins in the long term (not saying he plays that style well, just that it is a winning method), you are probably worse than the nits you deride.

Ok, so this guy doesn't understand position, doesn't attack/defend postflop (are you including not cbetting in this?), and just 3bet for the first time. What is his range? Probably something like QQ/KK/AA and some combos of AK. Calling his 3b IP to mostly setmine 150bb deep is fine. He then leads out ~2/3 pot on a low wet flop. Based on reads, he's sometimes going to check AK, meaning his range here is something on the order of 70-90% overpairs. That makes it a very clear fold.

What is Hero's image, btw? Even at 1/2, there is some chance that might affect how Villain plays

A) please explain how my descriptions are derogatory, or I should say, any more derogatory than every other post that describes villain as "bad LAG" or "Bad TAG" or "bad nit"?
B) You're right, I'm probably not as good I as I think I am.
That's why I'm here, trying to learn through posting hands. Reading posts, and thinking critically about poker.
But when someone posts a response simply telling someone they are probably not as good as they think they are, without any clear reasoning why, or constructive comments on how to get better, or real analysis of the actual hand, it doesn't help does it?

I think he actually phrased it very very well: but if you can't come on the forum and give a dispassionate analysis, it does not speak well for your game

Unless we get results-oriented the best thing we can do is check why you did what you did. There's absolutely nothing in your post that explained why you haven't folded preflop or on the flop.

They are not much more derogatory than those, and those descriptions raise the red flag for me too. But I don't always post in those threads.

The real issue is when you describe his style as "unimaginative". If I'm sitting at a table watching someone play very few hands and not showing a lot of aggression, that's not really enough time for me to know whether the player is actually "unimaginative", or if he's just card-dead, or if he's consciously avoiding over-aggressive play because he thinks it's not the optimal way to beat the table he's at. You probably don't have enough information to conclude that either way, but you seem to have jumped to the conclusion.

This might or might not have anything to do with the actual hand; it just has to do with a mindset that could get you in trouble. For example, many times I've seen players who get it into their heads that they are better than a certain opponent, and they then decide that they deserve to win pots from that opponent because they are "better". That leads to spew when their opponent picks up a hand.

This thread is all about stuff like that: http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/17...t-dew-1339655/

I'm fine with people checking what I did. That's in fact why I posted the hand in the first place.

My issue is when someone starts to flame the poster because he doesn't like an adjective the poster used. It's one to say "I disagree with your descriptive of an opponent for XYZ" or "that description doesn't help me help you". BUt that's not what CallmeVernon said. He initially posted:

"Your read that you are a better player than him is probably wrong.

If you did not fold the flop, it is definitely wrong."

It's funny that he's calling me out for being too derogatory because that's exactly what his initial post was. There's nothing insightful or constructive or valuable with that above quote. It's just mean.

And all of his reasoning for not liking my descriptions of villain (which by the way, I think are really interesting and worth diving into) only came about afterwards when I essentially called him out.

My whole issue here comes down to a matter of civility. If you want people to listen to your argument, i'd recommend showing a little class. You'll get more people to listen to you.

I didn't mean to sound mean. But usually when I tell someone their read sounds like it's wrong, they just ignore me and don't care about why. Since you did ask why, I explained, but I didn't want to waste time if you weren't going to listen.

Believe me, when I'm "flaming" someone, it's much less succinct. I've only ever done it once. You'd know.

Limp pre, or raise bigger to try to get it heads up.
AP: Fold on flop.

I appreciate your explanation. and I appreciate your reasoning on why you don't like the term "unimaginative" (though I might disagree with you about whether it was a good description esp with this specific villain...and obv on the part about me being better than him )

But you can also understand how someone new to these forums could read your initial post and completely shut down to a comment like that right?

Now, I'm really glad I asked why, but I could see a lot of new posters not asking why and ignoring the comment, which in fact would be the opposite of what you wanted.