So this month has been overall pretty good in terms of profit but really bad for volume. Mainly due to the fact i've been spending a lot of time with notecaddy and this has really hampered my play due to computer lag etc. Also a failed 400nl shot set me back slightly.
vs a solid reg. Upon review this bluff wasn't great but he did time down to 1 sec and fold so i assume he has KQ or A4 which at the time i was trying to fold out, but tbh folding KQ here isn't good as he blocks so many of my nutted combos:
hahaha just had an insanely sick whale, almost as bad as the one i had in january... didn't run good this time though. Starting the month in the negative
rki gf bday today so going out tonight. Games have been so so good today so gl!
Really interesting hand vs a aggro reg. After the hand he typed, 'very well played'. Not sure if he was being sarcastic or serious but upon review with some good regs we feel that my line is optimal:
I'd check the 77 on the turn.
If you lead this and some bluffs your checking range is like 88-QQ? so what do you do, call TT+ and fold all but QQ on the river? I just feel like it's ugly to split our range like this, could well be wrong though, I generally am pretty adverse to splitting my range especially in spots like this where it's so narrow anyway.
Also more obviously at 200nl it's probably villain specific, vs a ton of people I would lead here, just not vs anyone decent.
I'd check the 77 on the turn.
If you lead this and some bluffs your checking range is like 88-QQ? so what do you do, call TT+ and fold all but QQ on the river? I just feel like it's ugly to split our range like this, could well be wrong though, I generally am pretty adverse to splitting my range especially in spots like this where it's so narrow anyway.
Also more obviously at 200nl it's probably villain specific, vs a ton of people I would lead here, just not vs anyone decent.
Thanks for your thoughts, and vs this specific villain i think leading was definitely best
Quote:
Originally Posted by ...|...
really like the "good reg" then you show him 3betting a fish with 64s oop..
good humor!
haha, ok, well winning reg... not all winners are good players i guess!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scorpp
nice progress Ben! makes me wana grind FR again
Come back then and thanks although today's session sucked
Couldn't get anything going, constantly running into the best hand mixed with some bad call downs vs fish that i wouldn't normally make:
Preflop: Hero is BTN with J 9
MP1 folds, MP2 raises to $2, 2 folds, Hero calls $2, SB folds, BB calls $1
Flop: ($6.50) 2 8 7 (3 players)
BB checks, MP2 bets $8, Hero raises to $18, BB folds, MP2 raises to $28, Hero raises to $98 and is all-in, MP2 calls $70
Turn: ($202.50) 2 (2 players, 1 is all-in) River: ($202.50) 7 (2 players, 1 is all-in)
Spoiler:
Results: $202.50 pot ($2.80 rake)
Final Board: 2 8 7 2 7
Hero showed J 9 and lost (-$100 net)
BB mucked and lost (-$2 net)
MP2 showed 8 8 and won $199.70 ($99.70 net)
Can you tell me in that j9dd hand why you think raising a fish is a good idea
Usually raising draws is for -> fold equity/protecting
Fish = no fold equity
I never had the opportunity to ask a reg why they keep raising fishes with draws. Fish will stack off a good hand even if the draw hits, if their hand suck they'll just fold it on the flop and you'll lose value from their bluffs.
Hey mate. If i had a bare FD then i'd prob just call given that he's over potted flop. With this specific fish, he had very low agg freq on all streets so i felt that if he had a 1 pair hand (which is most likely as he doesnt bet the flop much) then i could bloat the pot now with and take my super good equity.
but he overbet the flop. Makes absolutely no sense. In my eyes i only see you isolating yourself against a strong range with a average to decent hand and you're pushing out every weaker hands he has. He's a fish he cant exploit you
i ran a filter in stove to see how we do vs his stacking off range and we're almost exactly 50/50. Not to mention the times he folds or calls flop and folds turn.
I definitely see your point btw and i think after my session i'll look into it in more depth and do a proper analysis of it.