JaoTi

I think your hand is better in a vacuum Tim as an example. But the fact is that people are going to reply saying "LOL YOU HAS AN OVERPAIR STACKOFFFFFF" without considering that as far as one-pair hands go, this is a bluffcatcher. So I think it runs the risk of reinforcing incorrect ideas (which I think it did as shown by RT's reply). Mine, while containing marginal/wtf decisions I think still displays more of a necessity for a range analysis. Though I could be wrong and it'll reinforce "LOL TOPPEST PAIR STACKOFFF" thoughts.You have a remarkable ability to impart a lot of information in parent

You're good at pissing off fighter, which makes you somebody in my book. Well it would if you weren't... dead to me...again

We'll be turning that shit around in a matter of days sir.

Would you like to borrow my double facepalm picture?Something I always find interesting with the whole sizing problem, is that when people size to make the river a shove I'm way more likely to snap them off because it's a bluff more often. But you're getting such good odds with a poorly sized river bet that it also becomes easy to call. That is some lowdown circular shiznit. Dead to me

FYP, if he barreled the river you would have found a way to fold

Agreed.Yeah I wrote out a really long reply on Monday and as I was about to finish my laptop died and I haven't had any access to a pc since then. I forget what stance I really had on this hand, because the pre-flop call is questionable, but a spot that I think is somewhat +ev in the right spot (this probably not being one of them). I think the more interesting decisions are postflop though and I guess the object of this hand was to make sure you always consider ranges and possibilities rather than just making a decision; whether or not it's correct in this case seems to be the point of conten

I'm glad that we're playing one street poker. Considering any other decisions made would definitely be a waste of energy.

They are, well I don't know about msnl but 200nl is certainly way different across the two sites. And I think it's a good squeeze spot because unless he 4bets you can just barrel UTG+1 off most hands on almost any board. Unless they're a station like me. But yeah results, for anyone who cares, was a tanked and realised there weren't many value combos of hands here, like 12 or something, so I called and he flipped over Q9o

I really don't understand what you're trying to say here Royal. You're working from at least as many blind assumptions as I am.

It isn't always, but it's normally an indication. I have met the odd multitabling fish, who are gifts from heaven. And I am certainly not talking backwards.We don't credibly rep any hands by 4betting, BTN folds sometimes sure, but they also flat or 5bet sometimes too because I don't rep much and people hate to fold. So I am losing all value with AQ and turning it into a bluff. Our EV is higher not 4betting in my mind, and I think that's relatively clear that in terms of EV it's probably fold/flat (both close and stylistic a lot) >>>>> 4bet.

Still in the $75 40k and the $6.50 super turbooooooo

Hang on...I'm not from brea...?dead to me

Yep, that's the one Well I think I mentioned it before, but I still think it's too small and probably more bluffy than say $90, which makes a river shove more sexy. The shove on the river seemed way closer to pot at the time too. I assume because rake was taken out or I can't read or something. And what is 'folding top pair'? I've never heard of it. Is that where you click call even faster than normal?

Yeah it's a relatively sexy shove by him if he does that. Of course I will flat aces sometimes in that spot if I know that somebody behind me is really squeeze happy, but the person behind me doesn't know that and I have no info on the person behind me either; except I feel that when he does squeeze it's often as a bluff. And sometimes he might even flat the 4bet which would make me cry