I played three sessions... first one I lost. Second I absolutely crushed. And the third session of the day I lost again to break even.
It was interesting seeing how some opponents reacted to my more aggressive play. In general, I'll say that I don't think people adapted nearly as much as I thought they would.
It does suck to run bad when playing LAG cuz the money disappears quickly... as I found out in my final session of the day. It's so disappointing working up your image to open up people's felting range vs you pre-flop, then get dealt a high pair but lose vs a lower pair that you got all in pre-flop with. That happened a lot today, as well as a bunch of spots where people would have felted much worse vs me and I ended up getting coolered.
I made some mistakes... a few bad call downs and one random spew, but other than that I thought I played OK. I ended up pretty much even for the day though, but whatever... I'm going to 100% quit caring about day to day results.
Posts
Good to see you winning again Eric.
ReplyDeleteWhat do you think of this hand I played today?
Villain is 27/17/1.3 3bet: 15, Fold to Cbet: 0! hands: 147
and he 3 bet me a couple times earlier after I min raised pf like this, i was hoping he'd do it again here so i can come over the top.
http://www.pokerhand.org/?4027881
Hey Adam.
ReplyDeleteThat's a pretty tough spot, just because I think he's going to flat your minraise with a lot more crap (suited connectors, small suited one and 2 gappers) than he would if you just raised to 3xs the BB. I normally don't open minraise, unless there are shortstacks in the SB or BB. I guess if you thought he's more likely to 3-bet your minraise than a standard raise, then it was OK in this hand.
Anyways, as played this is really a spur of the moment type hand. I'd almost have to be at the table watching the dynamic between you two in order to give a 100% correct answer to this hand.
Even though it's a small sample, I think his AF is pretty low and possibly something to take note of. With the low AF it may be less likely he's going to pull big bluff... but lots of his draws bricked on the river.
I think it's a pretty close spot on the river (I like the way you played it up to this point). You probably aren't losing or gaining much by folding or calling. Each play probably has pretty close to the same EV.
P.S. I just looked at the results after writing what I wrote above and it looks like you made the right play! nice hand!
Thanks for the analysis Eric. Here's my analysis of the hand.
ReplyDeleteI like to mini raise once in awhile preflop to throw people off. I like to try and take advantage of a player's weakness, so I try new things to find out more about my opponents. There are no hard fast rules on what to do preflop i don't think.
OK, here's why I called him down. It wasn't because I "can't fold JJ", I put a lot of thought into what the most +EV play is.
First off - his fold to C bet was zero, that takes away a lot of credibility right there.
His huge check raise on the flop either means he has a monster made hand (2 pair +) or a draw. I decided to call and evaluate on the turn.
His turn bet is what gave it away to me that my JJ was good. He insta bet $77 on the turn into a $108 pot, after he C/r so big on the flop. With such a drawy board, and a K coming on the turn, if he had a monster like a set, he would've put a little more thought into his turn bet, and would probably have bet more. I'm no nit, so i could easily have a straight draw, flush draw, or both, and that would leave a set vulnerable.
Then the 7 came on the river, and that makes the chance of him having 2 pair with a 7 (like 76) less likely. And he wouldn't play that way so far with only a pair of 7s. Also, if he had a monster and planned on going all in on the river, he would've bet more on the turn to commit me for an all in river shove.
All of these factors put together makes a call on the river a +EV play.
very nice Adam. After reading your thoughts, I definitely agree with you. Good point with the fact that he didn't set up his river bet to commit you.
ReplyDelete