Quote:
I give you A9/Axdd but not a bunch of aces. It's a good card for his range and therefore perceived to be a good bluffing card but he is unlikely to be blindly barreling all his Acex versus the BB (especially on the paired turn). So he really should not have too much Acex.
He should be betting 1010+ on the river but I think it unlikely just given on how micros players don't go thin for value often enough.
So I think his value range is often something like 44,99,A9,66,AA (can proba add a few others in). So blocking the 9 it's not that many combos we lose and given that he can and will still have bluffs we can see that a call is very reasonable when our range is this capped.
Of course the call is reasonable, are you ever folding this exact hand played in NL50z? F K NO
Issue is calling three streets with the 9 at NL2 and winning at shwdown. how often does that happen ? I know there are other factors here but still
Flop to turn 10+ pocket pair along with your river value hands can be played the exact same way. And if had to pick #1. V is value betting overpairs then bluffing on the river when the ace showed up(or thin value) or #2. V is semibluffing flop, turn and also river with air or #3. V is betting 3 streets with a hand that crushes me I'm picking #1. and #3. ... just because its NL2
Some people start off playing balanced then they deviate from that to exploit, I play the population and then I go from there. Maybe when I get on a table with OTB and Linus I'll start off balanced but in the lower micros def not
Played again I would fold this in NL2 and NL5 unless I have solid HUD stats, reads etc because fit or fold in general is one of my population reads. I could easily be wrong about the pop but Id rather be told that, not trying to be an a shole but it's more helpful/insightful? then being told a call is reasonable here
Last edited by GodforsakenDwan; 10-08-2019 at 03:01 PM.