Soy Un Looser (sh) (2/4)

[Acid_Knight 2]

Acid,I've reread this whole mess a few times, and I think I understand the disconnect point. I think there are two different ideas:

1. Sometimes it's appropriate to bluff with a hand with medium absolute ranking because we think we're behind to our opponent's holding but we can represent a hand that beats him.
2. It's important to make wagers with medium strength hands in order to simultaneously bet for value against the hero call (or at least threaten to do so) and also bluff against the rest of his range.

A is easy to understand. B is not, as you can tell from the imprecision of the language in B.

There's a thread in 2p2 about the "Mythical 2-Way Bet" that is allegedly both a value bet and a bluff at the same time. The whole idea behind it is that there are just some instances where you have a medium strength hand and you make a bet, but you're not really sure if the intent is to get a better hand to fold or a worse one to call since you don't really know where your opponent is at well enough to make that distinction. I'll try and find the thread.

[Acid_Knight 2]

I'll try and find the thread.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat...part=1&vc=1That's the thread I was looking for.

[No_Neck 0]

interesting read... definately a different way of looking at things.

[mtdesmoines 3]

There's a thread in 2p2 about the "Mythical 2-Way Bet" that is allegedly both a value bet and a bluff at the same time. The whole idea behind it is that there are just some instances where you have a medium strength hand and you make a bet, but you're not really sure if the intent is to get a better hand to fold or a worse one to call since you don't really know where your opponent is at well enough to make that distinction. I'll try and find the thread.

This is a leak in my game that I identified this summer. I've been experimenting with making the bets bigger and have been taking down a lot more pots. Losing some. But if you take down 60%, lose 25% and win 15% (?!) of those you get called on, it seems like a winner.20 of my last 22 sessions have been winners.

[No_Neck 0]

This is a leak in my game that I identified this summer. I've been experimenting with making the bets bigger and have been taking down a lot more pots. Losing some. But if you take down 60%, lose 25% and win 15% (?!) of those you get called on, it seems like a winner.20 of my last 22 sessions have been winners.

so the leak was making a bet or not making a bet?

[David_Nicoson 1]

I actually agree with most of the people on that thread that it's generally a fold. I have a strong dislike for medium overpairs on a very coordinated board.

You have to admit it's better than hoping to catch a medium pair on a coordinated board. Right?

I think the decision gets closer when you get into the AA/KK/QQ range though. We'll have put in a large percentage of our stack just calling this min-raise...and we're very rarely far ahead...if we're ahead.In my hand, I had a much stronger feeling that I knew where I was at. Obviously, I wasn't putting him on an exact hand, but I knew I was behind (odds-wise) and I gave him a medium pair 75% of the time with a draw making up the remainder. Unless he had A4/44/33, I didn't imagine he'd have connected particularly strongly with this flop.

You have better information at the time you call the min raise, but you have less information playing the turn OOP.