Statistics: Posted by Kuso — Mon Nov 21, 2005 12:04 am
]]>
a hand at martin's $50 6-max:
i had e35 (set got river by a 4-flush board and i didn't have time to reload). villain has e65 or so.
I got ATo and limp from MP, Villain calls from LP and BB checks (pot e1.75). board comes 3-flush to my ace. BB checks, I check, and Villain bets e1.50. BB folds. i do NOT have proper pot odds to peel one off, but i call. pot e4.75. turn is a blank, i check, Villain bets e2, and I call again without proper pot odds. pot e8.75 4th flush card hits on the river. i bet e5 as a value bet. he pushes and it amounts to about an e26 raise (the rest of my stack).
i call and take it down. he had a made J-high flush on the flop and screwed the pooch in a major way.even if he had just called my river bet, i would have had decent implied odds (call e2 to win existing e6 pot plus e5 on the river). in retrospect, i probably should have bet e6 or e7 on the river to get better odds... but still. the fact that these guys get married to their hand and want to double up makes them vulnerable to plays like this.
another example...
I had AJ and checked or called (can't recall) in the BB. Flop gives me a gutter for the broadway str8 and middle pair. with pot about e2, i check and LP bets a euro. i call, and everyone else dumps. again, poor pot odds for me. blank on the turn, I check and Villain bets e1. i'm about 11-1 to hit the str8 (not counting hitting 2nd pr or trips as those may put me behind), but a call is 5-1 (or so). I call. River comes a K to complete the str8. I check, Villain wakes up and bets e10. I min-raise, fully expecting to split the pot or have Villain fold. He calls with QQ down and a flopped set. I win and take down an e45 pot.
in retrospect, chasing the gutter was probably not the best idea, as my trips would have made a boat possible and a second pair would have made the str8 possible for villain. anyway, the point is that these clowns will pay off big with a strong non-nut hand -- and they give you proper implied odds to chase. my oesds and flush draws have rewarded me nicely.
Statistics: Posted by Kuso — Mon Nov 21, 2005 12:03 am
]]>
]]>
]]>
]]>
]]>
]]>
]]>
My thoughts were it is like being a pro playing at the WSOP now. You know one on one you can beat the new guy; however, when the whole table will play crazy, now THAT's tough to beat. Sooner or later someone hits a lucky card on you and its bye bye stack. If you want to counter act that you have to be willing to play big pots with the best hand but not necessarily the nuts (say TPTK) which is exactly the opposite of what Kuso said ( and I agree with him).
Statistics: Posted by T-Rod — Sun Nov 20, 2005 7:45 am
]]>
how much do you try to bluff?
if you get enough calling stations who call down with any part of the board (chasing 2pr, trips, or runner-runner something), then your bluffs won't work until maybe the river. even then, you almost fall into their trap if they hit 2pr or better.
i like to show these guys a hand. when i have position, i use free card plays to chase OESDs and flush draws -- and to induce bluffs when i hit on the river. if i flop a monster or hit on the turn, i bet out, as they seem more than willing to pay me off.
how much of your stack are you willing to put in w/ TP?
when i first started playing, there were some guys who would let me bet my TPTK all the way to the river and then pop me for a raise at the end when they flopped a set or some other decent holding. i was giving them great implied odds. i sucked out sometimes when i was betting on the come or had a redraw, but still.
a BTPer (name witheld to protect his strategy) suggested not to put in more than a certain percentage of buy-in with TP. i think this is an interesting idea -- although certainly not necessarily a hard and fast rule.
how much are you folding?
since i've resumed playing nlhe at martin's, i've found that i can often let them do the betting when i am oop and just have a weak hand (e.g., 1st or 2nd pr). the amazing thing is that they give me great pot and implied odds to chase a stronger hand with their small bets when they are (usually) holding weak hands (e.g., overcards, 2nd or 3rd pr, etc.). on the other hand, they typically define their hand by how much they bet, so it's easy for me to get out cheaply when they hit a monster.
my point is that a lot of these clowns will pay you off by calling a big bet on the end. if this is the case, chasing is not always a bad idea.
a lot of my comments aren't really "textbook" play, but i don't think there have been any good books written on how to play the typical party game. i definitely feel like it is different from other sites, but the best strategy may be simply to get a hand and value bet like crazy. occasional bluffs and stealing orphan pots is necessary, of course, but i don't think that it needs to be a large part of your profits.
these are my thoughts about martins, and they may be WAY off base. what specific problems are you having? what kinds of hands are you getting sucked out with?
Statistics: Posted by Kuso — Sun Nov 20, 2005 3:49 am
]]>
]]>
Here's my theory. We all have bad beats and that's part of the odds. However, if you are sitting at a table with 6 idiots who will call anything with 2nd pair, etc. then you WILL lose long-term b/c your chances of having a bad beat go up exponentially when 6 guys are playing nutzo (i.e., 6 times as many chances of a bad beat). When you have the bad beat, its for a huge pot. You of course, don't play stupid hands so you never put the same number of bad beats on the table. Long-term -EV vs the table while perhaps +EV vs just 1 nutso.
Thoughts?
Statistics: Posted by T-Rod — Sun Nov 20, 2005 1:16 am
]]>