anybody consider that Villain's min-raise is a 'freeze play?' He often has a hand that has showdown value and he wishes to get there cheaply (possibly a medium PP.) That said, I don't like ur bet sizing. $40 into $44 on that board is too much (and I might have even considered a crai.) $25-$30 would have been as effective (taking the pot down just as many times.) I don't like to float OOP so after he min-raises this is a re-bluff or a fold and u've gone this far so I think going to $200 is fine.

[200/(44+40+80+200)=~55%] <- Math lol
If he folds more than 55% of the time u show an instant profit. With all his 'phony' tells I think that number is easily obtainable. Now whether it's profitable to spend $260 to win ~$105 over any extended period of time is debatable.

EDIT: Just read the spoiler... $225 is slight overkill and actually increases the percentage u need to fold out this villain to show a profit. Do u think that $25 will get u 3% more folds and is it worth it?

Right, no math in live poker. everyone's solid

Wait, what? Are you serious that this forum should not have math in the strategy discussion?

Then you don't understand the math.

This post is the perfect example of why 2+2 is such a chore to read. So far this forum is going along pretty well. Do we really need to turn it into the noise-fest of the rest of the board so soon?

We're trying to get some conversation going. It's possible to be critical without being dismissive. If this is all you have to contribute, please don't post.

I did think that post was a little strong as well.

Before I read the spoiler: I think he's trying to make a play here. I think he woke up to the fact that you've got your own personal ATM machine at the table and wants a part. Disappointed that he folded pre, he's now going to try to take your chips to make up for it. I'd 3-bet and wait for his 4-bet to get worried. While normally I agree that a min raise is a dangerous signal, I think in this situation he's using that to induce your fold.

Cutting out the chips pre was probably him realizing that raising would knock out the ATM. So he either changed his mind or was trying to set you up or both. (knowing you're a player that would notice these things)

Post flop chip molestation was just trying to scare you.

How fast did he raise and what did he do after?

Level 1 player in a level 3 thread.

These are exactly the kinds of posts I was hoping to find in this forum. All the trolls can go back to playing online with their HUDs.

Fast, and then leaned back a little in his chair, nice and comfortable like.

3000% this, why would you tangle with a player you seem to think is very good when you have nothing and there are lots of marks around the table? You don't really rep that much that's very strong by 3betting this flop anyway, and you have no equity when you get action. You going to the casino to show everyone your giant cojones or win $?

Yup. Figured. In terms of this one particular hand, he should have shoved over the top, but chickened out. But like others have said, there wasn't any kind of bracelet going to be given to the winner. And I get the feeling you would might have called it.

Why do I get the feeling you have played with me before...

We're all there to win $. But I think this thread really illustrates how you need to always be adjusting your play live.

Is it just me or does it seem like a lot of people don't get it? If you want to play ABC poker, then by all means do so. Don't crap on the threads where some of us want to discuss playing beyond that.

being comfortable is a sign of strength fwiw

i'm not trying to crap on your fancy play threads. i'm just saying that i don't think it's +ev and even if it is, it's only very slightly profitable, and given the variance associated with live poker, it's entirely unnecessary. there will be much better spots (i.e. where you have any equity whatsoever) to make plays.

Neither...

last point before i vacate this thread: abc poker crushes the hell out of live low-limit nlhe.

Yes it is. If you'd read the OP carefully, you'd see it was a setup from the beginning. If you didn't see that it was a setup, then you could have read his spoiler and know that it was.

I know you are a mod, and coach and all that, but please read the whole thread before firing off random rounds at fellow 2+2 members...

Also agreed. And I play ABC 80-90% of the time. But I believe that if you only play that way, someone is going to push you off a big pot more often than you'd think with the worst hand. That and you'll never really move up to high stakes, which is what I'd like to do eventually.

i'm going to apologize for being slightly drunk and abrasive, but i'm not going to apologize for not reading something that wasn't in the op.

and in any case, my points still stand. you're almost certainly overrating live tells and the such if you think that can swing this to a call or 3bet.

The key word here is "like", as in, seemingly, or acting...

IME when someone takes an aggressive action in a game, like a RR or a river open shove when OOP, and then flops back in their seat, acting all comfortable, they are anything but. It is another strong is weak tell...

If he was truly comfortable, not only is that a true "strong is strong" tell, it depending on the situation/player is often the stone cold nuts... Much a kin to the classic head out the window tell when someone flops quads...

wish you hadn't quoted me!

agree and agree and agree but you can start adjusting when you move up to high stakes or get involved when you have solid reasoning and good equity. if you're not getting pushed off big pots when you have the best hand, well, you're either playing guys who never bluff in big pots, or you're not folding enough. if they've got the skills to make a big bluff, they're likely well-balanced - just let them have the pot, however much it hurts.

Let me ask you a question here. Let's say hypothetically I enter a satellite and win said tournament for an entry into some 10K buy in main event somewhere. Should I play that event to make it into the money because 186th place pays out 10X what my bankroll is? Or should I play to take it all down?

That depends on a couple of other factors, but mostly you should just be playing for the mincash.

I had the feeling that would be your answer. Don't take this as a personal shot, I wouldn't want you as a poker coach. It's got nothing to do with your knowledge or skill. I thought of this question after you said "just let them have the pot", which didn't sit well with me at all. Sorry I can't put it into words better than that.

It seems like we're misunderstanding each other somehow in this thread. I believe that adjusting after you move up is a mistake. There's no reason a person can't learn more advanced topics now. Just because my bankroll doesn't allow me to play high stakes doesn't mean I shouldn't study and discuss it. I understand that I will probably never get to use these advanced ideas in my "regular" game.

But what if the situation in my above question did happen? What if I did get deep into a tournament with a 1st place prize that was for more cash than I could only imagine seeing? Should I just check the batteries in my luckbox and pray? How do you suppose some pros make it to the high stakes level? I'm quite certain that some people do it by studying the game beyond their current bankroll limitations.

And what would everyone like to do with even that 10X you're advocating playing for? They'd love to put it in their bankroll and move up in limits. Heck, there was a thread just the other day by someone who won a local tourney and now has 10X his bankroll. That particular poster asked if he should move up. Guess what everyone had to tell him?

But what if he had studied the game extensively and thought levels beyond where he's been playing? He wouldn't have even asked if he should move up. He'd just do it because he was ready for it.