glad i finally looked at this again...this is pretty eye opening.

the above and below are somewhere between marginally and quite contradictory. you either think "this is a good part of your my game, i should use it to balance" or "this is, in all likelihood, the best play in a vacuum" and i feel like you're trying to say both, and defend it somehow. neither should be true, if you ask me.

i'll say it again, i don't really understand the argument for "two bets go in on the flop, we have the lead, confusion and deepness and unrepability- which is nice!" verses "we've induced, it's a bad board to multi barrel, and now two bets have gone in and it's the river- which is ideal because we've got a hand that wants to get to showdown"

honestly.. i just don't get it. there are a few good players argueing the opposite though, i suppose so maybe i should be more open minded. but again, at 5-10, where fps will be the downfall, this seems like terribadly confusedness, aka spew. imo 5-10 is the place not to have to have these kinds of pair into semi-bluffs hands where there is literally no real history except tightness.


in conclusion, with the entire last post quoted, i'd just like to say (because how can someone not point it out): "so you were raising for information... ooooo iiiii gettt ittt."

wtf is going on here

i just can't explain this any better. i might not be doing a good job doing it but ive tried and i give up. the best way i can sum it up is that there isn't just one reason for making this raise, there are a few situational dependent benefits that led me to feeling this was the best play to make in that given sitaution.

aejones, i agree, especially after reading this thread, that MSNL is not the place to be making this type of play. it's interesting to me that there is a clear divide here as to whether or not this is a good play. just about every math player or someone i would call a "poker theorist" hates on this play, but some/most of the HSNL players who are much more "feel" players seem to think it's at the worst okay, at the best good. im surprised after reading this thread, because i consider you to be a very good player with a good feel for the game, that you have the opinion that you do about this play (and seemingly my play in general).

gl,
tc

I don't mind the play the thing I still have a problem w/ is why are you checkraising this hand while folding some % of your air hands (referring to your earlier post)?

If I was checkraising this hand, I'd be checkraising every hand in my range weaker than this one as well.

don't you think checkraising the ~66% of flops when you have air would be a bit much?

tc

I don't mean always I mean this hand.

Checkcalling w/ AT is going to profitable against a guy you said was cbetting like 80% of his range on this flop so why would you bluff raise w/ a profitable bluff catching hand while folding air?

well we've been over that part over and over again. the short answer is that i contend when a player will never 3bet me with air (or period, really), and is unlikely to float (meaning I know where I stand when he does call) me, and is likely to bet the turn with an unclear, but wide range, and we are 150 BB's deep, checkraising will be profitable as well. it will also provide some other benefits, like in the few times we get to showdown, the WTF factor, and the fact that hands he holds that have a fair amt of equity vs our hand can't get there. obviously, there will be times that i'm putting in money in the flop behind, and that's the drawback (just like the times when i check call the flop, then check/eval/call the turn and i'm behind, and have a horrible river decision facing a bet).

i imagine check/calling will be profitable as well, fwiw. there isn't always only one way to play a hand that is profitable.

tc

oh yeah, to your question, i'll be raising air here too some percentage of the time. i dont know, maybe 15-20% of the time.

Ya I guess that's where I just disagree.

If both checkraising and checkcalling is going to be profitable (which I agree with) then checkraising AT while folding air makes no sense to me.

Sure you played the hand profitably w/ AT but you didn't play your entire range in the most profitable manner IMO which is most important.

craig, he said that he'd be check-raising this flop sometimes with air. The reason it's not the best play to do it all the time is because opponents will be able to catch on, it's difficult to represent a strong hand on such a dry board that will more often than not favor the PFR (even if it's for the simple fact that he is a PFR). It's the same reason you don't always raise a suited connector in EP.

he's talking about this very hand. and craig, i think you're right, i should be raising with air here (this hand, with this dynamic) more than i first said.

tc

You really think I'm not aware of this?

Again I'm only talking about this one hand.

If a flop raise is going to be profitable w/ AT IN THIS HAND, then it will be profitable w/ 22. Also, I do realize that AT has more EV than 22 but I think the flop raise w/ AT is profitable even w/o the extra EV (based on Taylor's read).

Again, if you don't want to raise this flop w/ such a wide range because you don't want to exhaust your Fold Equity, then why would you choose a profitable bluff catching hand to do it with and not air. That's my point.

agree, edit - i dont know about with a 22 type hand, id have to think about it, but generally, agree and i'd pick hands with better equity than small pairs or w/e

Ya there's definitely different things to consider w/ EV being the most important on what hands to add to your flop raising range.

sweet thread, everyones right...(wat, is that possible?)

fwiw i find myself agreeing more so with TC and raptor though

one word: range

range? this makes as much sense as not betting the turn.

It is obvious no one is really thinking the hand through, I know I do not explain myself that well but I will give it one last try.

On the flop the OP raised it and TC called his bet, if he had AK or a pocket pair TC would most likely re-raised so I am discounting that.
On the flop TC hit middle pair and figures the OP would make a c-bet and if he re-raised him he would lay it down if he hit nothing, if he called most of the time he hit his K. I really like the c/r on the flop, this does work to a player that always c-bets. I wouldn't do it every time but I have done it before, maybe 10-15% of the time and sometimes with nothing but with middle pair and top kicker it is a nice play, the only hand that would call here is what the OP had or better. Now we know almost exactly what he has.

When he checked the turn you have to think he knows he is behind, so that is why I would bet the turn. If he had 2 pair or a set he would have bet just in case the OP was on a draw. If he made that move with a draw or middle pair he should lay it down, if he has the sac to re-raise me again I have to give him credit for out playing me and lay it down.

Now on the river, sense the OP didn't bet the turn he had to be thinking he had either 2 pair because if we put him on a K we have him out kicked and should have bet and if we felt he was on a draw he should have bet not wanting to give him a free card. When TC bet out you have to be thinking he has made a bigger hand or missed his draw and was bluffing, but we didn't put him on a draw so that should be out and the K we already felt he didn't have sense we didn't bet the turn.

This is how I would have played the hand, I think I would have won it on the turn. I wouldn't have re-raised the flop because I feel that the turn would give me more info, if he bet out I would have a much harder decision to make. But the way it is played I would have bet out about 3/4 pot to the full pot

Noteye, stop posting strategy. You suck at poker or you're a giant troll, I can't even tell which anymore.

TC,

I "get" your reasoning and have from the beginning, I just do not agree with it for the most part. If he is not capable of floating or 3betting this flop with air, then why are we so concerned that he is going to be following through on the turn and river a bunch? I realize that floating is more of an advanced play than double/triple barrelling, but still. Hitting an effective two outer and getting paid off made your play look almost genius-like, but what happens when you hit an ace and are still behind, and you're forced to bet the river which will be costly. I'm just saying it's not like checkraising the flop and improving to two pair can't backfire tremendously the same way that that rivering trips turned out to be a gem here. Even worse if you improve to a second best hand on the turn as opposed to the river.

I am not the one with over 8000 post of total trash, that would be you. I have never seen a half way descent response from you, all you like to do is flame, are you a flaming ***? Now that is a bet I would make.

17 pages about one MSNL hand? wtf? no hu-for-rollz yet? probably will take another 3-4 pages then..

I've seen this several times in this thread by different people, am I missing something or did Taylor have 5 outs?

I know an ace isn't necessarily a clean out but most of the time it's going to give Taylor the best hand.

Great thread btw

Because this topic has been beaten to death in this thread, I'm going to avoid giving a long, in-depth response:

I am basing my opinions here on a tough 6-max table (whether it be 5/10-25/50), and not this hand specifically. Overall, I completely agree w/ AEJones and Jsnipes when I say that c/c the flop here is virtually always the best line to take here against someone who you think is good, but don't have any major history with. The fact that I will call here w/ Kx and better sometimes is more than enough balance for me. Jsnipes argument about the same guy who will make your life difficult by firing 3 barrels is the same guy who is going to float your flop c/r is a very good one; I haven't seen anyone provide a logical counterargument to this point.

Overall, I disagree w/ TC, but if his long list of assumptions are all correct regarding the villian in the OP, then clearly his flop play has merit.

Surprisingly, I pretty much disagree with a large amount of what raptor said in his long post much earlier in this thread (fwiw, I think raptor is sick good, please don't flame me fanboys). Specifically, I am a firm believer in knowing whether or not you are bluffing or value betting any time you put money in the pot. Of course sometimes you get called by worse when bluffing etc. etc., but not really knowing the purpose of a bet both in theory and in practice seems like a pseudo-HSNL/higher-thinking justification for making an illogical bet to me.

Noteye, I've made at least 5 good posts of my > 8k total. You have made none, and by my calculations that makes me a better poster than you. Also, you suck at poker and everybody laughs at you when you post strategy because it's so mindblowinly ******ed.

BlackShuck, I'm reffering to the fact that the only card Taylor gets paid off on is probably a T. If he hits an ace then Kx almost always folds to a bet anyways, yet when OP has AK/QJ which are big parts of his range then the A is going to be a huge "reverse out" so to speak. So while he will have 5 outs a decent amount of the time for sure but 3 of his outs are very badly tainted.

Gman, good post agree with all of it.

But your only good post are in the "call of duty" thread, so go back to your video game and continue living in your fantasy world. You are such a dik.

I bet you think your the best video gamer too.

Make fun of Call of Duty all you want, but we're fighting a war out there bro, I've had to kill thousands of 12 year olds.