]]>
]]>
]]>
]]>
]]>
]]>
Statistics: Posted by GooperMC — Tue Feb 21, 2006 11:18 am
]]>
]]>
]]>
]]>
]]>
Not a particularly good book for fundamentals, as I say, but I feel I got more out of it than any other books i've read because by the time I got to ciaffone etc a couple of years back I already knew 99% of it from having played a little bit.
You're correct that some of his plays are a bit odd, and like you I do disagree with a few of them, but I think it's a nicely presented book and it got me thinking more about the mechanics of the game than anything else i've read.
You just need to remember in BIG CAPITAL LETTERS, the proviso that the game he plays is VERY DIFFERENT to the online environment and thus much of the book is not applicable directly, but serves more as a conduit to more in-depth thinking about the game. That's what I got from it, anyway.
Have been interested to read about your early PLO progress, CJ, hope it works out for ya!
Statistics: Posted by Felonius_Monk — Sun Jan 22, 2006 8:52 am
]]>
CJ
Statistics: Posted by Cactus Jack — Sun Jan 22, 2006 8:44 am
]]>
The game structure in Reuben is very different to what you find online so you have to filter the wheat from the chaff to some extent. His hand selection is far too loose preflop for a typical online game. Most everybody in these games is half decent and knows the basics very well so to make money you have to deviate and do unusual things sometimes, in a huge stack game I think raising out of the SB with that hand has a lot of disguise value, and may lose an opponent or two which is never a bad thing. The big decisions in such huge stack games will tend to be weighted more to the latter streets, as well, so PF is less of a factor.
Bare in mind he plays with stacks 1000BB+.
Statistics: Posted by Felonius_Monk — Sun Jan 22, 2006 8:30 am
]]>
![[Kh]](https://livepokerforum.com/images/smilies/Kh.gif "The King of Hearts")
![[Kd]](https://livepokerforum.com/images/smilies/Kd.gif "The King of Diamonds")
![[7c]](https://livepokerforum.com/images/smilies/7c.gif "The Seven of Clubs")
![[2h]](https://livepokerforum.com/images/smilies/2h.gif "The Two of Hearts")
UTG Call, and six callers.
Flop
![[Jh]](https://livepokerforum.com/images/smilies/Jh.gif "The Jack of Hearts")
![[8h]](https://livepokerforum.com/images/smilies/8h.gif "The Eight of Hearts")
![[3h]](https://livepokerforum.com/images/smilies/3h.gif "The Three of Hearts")
We both checked. Button bets 30, the pot. He calls, I reraise. He says the button is much too good a player. If he's bluffing, he will reraise. If he has a lower flush, he'll fold. Ok, what's wrong with either scenario? If he reraises and is bluffing, I'll give him credit for having position on me. If he folds, I'll take the pot. I'm out of position. Sucks to be me.
Turn
![[6s]](https://livepokerforum.com/images/smilies/6s.gif "The Six of Spades")
Button bets the pot and is called.
River
![[3d]](https://livepokerforum.com/images/smilies/3d.gif "The Three of Diamonds")
He bets 150 into a 240 pot and button calls. Final outcome is button has the A high flush and we lose 390. And he says position isn't important.
On the river, he bets about half the pot and button calls. With the nut flush? Granted a 3 came on the river, but what hands could we have that he'd be worried about a full house? Did the half-pot bet scare him? Our play is so passive that it might be tricky or it might just be weak.
He says, "Unless he has a full house himself, it's unlikely (button) will bet. (HUH???) Thus the pot will be checked out. (HUH?????) However, I might have held perhaps JJ. Then it would be logical to bet 150 rather than the full 240, tempting my opponent into a call. If I choose this line, then I've saving 90 if he does call or raise me."
Sorry, but I don't get this at all. He makes what is really a bluff bet and he's worried about saving 90 when he could have saved a lot more had he raised on the flop and gotten the same result? He's dead to the FH or the nut flush and out of position.
Is it me, or is this just terrible playing?
CJ
Statistics: Posted by Cactus Jack — Sun Jan 22, 2006 8:17 am
]]>