Hes not of primary concern unless he is a big fish himself. He shouldnt be able to continue with 1pair hands once you 3bet jam the flop.

The fish who made the initial raise will have by far the highest calling frequency of the two players.

I cant really fault any street here. Every decision was reasonable. What I would take away from this hand is that villain is a pretty big fish. His call with T7o is terribad. I would adjust to this by 3betting him very wide for value from pretty much all positions, rarely bluffing him when I have showdown value and valuebetting thinly. You should own this guy playing this way.

i can't see a guy who plays t7o that way being good enough to play poker for a living.

you can't really fault any street? that surprises me. Don't you think it's a bit ambitious for our Hero to run a turn/river bluff against a guy who knows we're capable of betting with air? How is bluffing (after checking back flop) a reasonable decision when our line makes no sense, and our opponent is suspicious of us? I don't see what value-hands our Hero has that plays this way (except for maybe exactly JJ) In my opinion, I can't fault the villain for calling down with his pair. I think the Villain's pre-flop decisions were flawed, don't get me wrong. But I like how he played his hand post-flop. I think our Hero is the player that made a mistake.

Just because our opponent has seen us bluff doesn't mean he should click call in every spot. We have no idea how our opponent perceives our range in this spot.
Our hand has almost no showdown value on the turn and we spike the second best card for our range. It just seems reasonble to bluff here and put pressure on the bulk of villains range which isnt tp+.

I would expect most regs to check back AK on the flop a large % of the time btw.

I dont think its a great spot or anything. I just think its reasonable

Obviously my view on this is skewed because I didn't think this was that horrible to check back a hand like AK, KQ or monster. Really surprised that you don't think people check back AK on flops like this? I certainly don't do it every time when I'm heads up to the flop, but when against a thinking player that is thinking about my perceived range along with me thinking about their range, I'll check board like this at times. Frequency would probably be 75% c-bet, but still times I check. Interested to hear your additional thoughts on this.

Which in turn leads to why you think the story makes no sense and I'd also like to hear more thoughts on.

Could I have not had a hand even like 88,99,TT that I think I may be turning into a bluff? Just a thought.

I don't a large %, is player dependant and how many handed we are to the flop obviously. Didn't think this was totally unreasonable to tell a story of Kx type hand?

Agree I don't think it's a great spot, but thought it was one that made some sense, anyway, make these style bets with value hands too, just need to be aware of the frequency I bluff in this spot I guess.

Cheers Mac

This years numbers so far... Little short on hours... Will make it up in February...





Cheers Mac

Online regs will check back AK alot. If thats not part of the meta in your live games then bluffing doesnt make much sense.

Oh and why is that dude with the T7o considered a proffesional?

Are you saying it's equally important what the norm is at the table as to how I play? I.e. If the majority of players don't check back AK but I do that means I am unlikely to get credit for AK?

Meaning essentially people pay more attention to what the general tendencies of the game are rather than the tenancies of each opponent?




Just makes a living from the game is my understanding. Anyone that makes a living from something has that as their profession.

Sent from my SM-N900 using 2+2 Forums

If no one has seen you check down AK then they will probably rely on the player pool tendancies.

Understanding what people perceive as standard is very important for repping hands. Obviously once they've seen your actual range all that will go out the window.



Yeah but is there any proof that he actually does this for a living or is that just what he tells people?
Its really hard to believe this guy beats poker when he plays T7o like that preflop.

yes AK is 100% standard check on that board, I play HU so cbet range is skewed, but would cbet this board ~50% of the time its too difficult to defend vs c/r or turn leads if cbet more. I realize that this is live poker so theory goes out the window somewhat but you shouldn't be cbetting alot on boards that hit villains range more than you.

and the t7o hand is really bad, its a ~50% equity hand probably same in playability, shouldn't' even be an open less a defend.

I wasn't suggesting that checking back flop with Kx is a horrible play. I wasn't even suggesting that it was non-standard. My only issue is that I think it's too presumptuous to assume that our opponent will anticipate we'd check-back with air. Judging from the info you gave on game-flow, it sounds like the table suspects you to attack spots with a wide-range. So when you don't, it's likely to raise further doubt in your opponents, which will then make it harder to plausibly "rep" a strong hand. That's why I really like the line you took IF the turn brought an Ace, because your opponent will expect you to c-bet with your Ax hands more often than not.

Now if you told me that we were playing like a nit-b*tch, only showing the nuts and never bluffing, then I LOVE the way this hand was played because it effectively exploits our-tight image and our FE is through the roof. But the table sees us as a bit of a clown, getting out of line, etc. So I don't love the turn/river bets.

I don't think this is a hand that should be looked at in a vacuum nor should it be compared with online "standard". Doing so doesn't really offer much help since you HAVE information available to you, relevant information. I think this hand is really about being cognisant of our image, rather than debating if this is a +EV bluff.

I didnt realise 2barrel bluffing makes us a maniac.

Its hard to say how those bluffs affected our image given the info we have.

maybe not a "maniac" but it doesn't give us a lot of credit....

Be lying if I said there weren't some nerves. Speed vs Power! I've done the work now to get the career off to a 1-1-0 record!



Sent from my SM-N900 using 2+2 Forums

Good luck brah

What Im saying is that we dont know the context of those 2barrels.

Certain 2barrels could actually make us look like a nit

Also if hero voluntarily showed a 2barrel bluff some players at the table might assume hell be less likely to bluff next time.

that's a very good point. Aren't levelling wars fun :P It's a pity this villain wasn't one-level below the hero.

Update?

The at vs 107 hand.
You bet about half pot turn and 3/4pot riv. I feel the reverse is more believable in that spot.

Wet board on turn and i would think you would bet around 3/4 on that kind of turn with KQ or ak, which you are repping.

I lost the fight if you wanted an update on that haha. It was a split decision, I clearly won the first round but two judges gave him the last two.

On the poker front, everything is chugging along nicely, have been able to maintain the win rate of just over $50 p/h. Been in a bit of weird headspace of late when on the tables. I think it's because I'm suffering a bit of burn out. I am going to Bali for 10 days with the GF on the 24th of Feb. In order to get in the hours I need before leaving, I haven't had a day off in the last 8 or 9 days.

I think if it starts to affect my game in a serious way, going to have to just take a night off I guess, regardless of the fact that I won't get in enough hours in the month then.

Cheers Mac

Fair enough, sizing issues against thinking players is something I'm more mindful of since playing this hand actually. Thanks for your input.