You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.
You might need to refresh your page afterwards.
You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.
You might need to refresh your page afterwards.
Comments
So ok Don raises to £1.74 and 3 get 3 callers.
Turn 9 of hearts. How do we play from here.
We arent talking about thinking players who care about the money, we get 3bet on flop with 8h flush draw for goodness sake.
We cant protect our hand against people who dont care. But equally trying to extract maximum value here is a tad kamikaze.
If we were playing NL50/100/200 I'd be more aligned with your POV Doh, but people will not fold here (as seen) so I dont think we should be playing our hand quite so ambitiously
It is perfectly reasonable to suspect 1 opponent has a flush already. I dont love racing A2/A4 of hearts either.
Being 5 way I am happier to keep everyone in a fillup dirt cheap. Dont have to win or lose a big pot here. Can pot control.
Raising denies us the opportunity to improme to 5's full multiway which wont be seen. I hate the Idea of making it 1.74 to fold turn. Also I believe whoever calls the 1.74 will hold out til river so its pretty moot.
I have tried to remove 60/40 flips from my game. I agree that a shove here does have the potential to be profitable over time, but I dont agree that we have to take this route.
I think its a tad cavalier making these spots auto stack offs. To just blindly forge ahead and be happy getting it in here is reckless IMO.
Sure we can do it. But we dont have to is my point. I'm not saying I fold either. It would be dynamic/stack dependant. But I would rather keep this pot managable and under my control. Just as jamming here is potentially profitable, an argument can easily be made for keeping it multiway and filling up on value then extrecting value from the field, but equally losing the min vs opponents who wont even considor folding when not filling. So we trade the marginal edge getting it on flop vs maybe 1 opponent with made flush, Ah or Kh, for the significant value of keeping it multiway managing the pot with 3/1 to fillup. Both lines being profitable.
Am simply advocating that we dont have to get it in when we flop a set on such a threatening board limped multiway.
Amy seriously people DO NOT think at this level they barely look at their own hand, they load up their 2/4 quid, limp EVERY hand and basically generate rake for Sky Poker, I'll just reiterate they DO NOT think, and one more time they DO NOT think, phew.
Why would you want to play GOOD players who KNOW how to play and can 3bet you light pre, float you, basically out play you. If I could play the same players at NL4 but for NL100 stakes I would be in heaven.
Exactly and thats my point. If you think this is a good spot to go allin vs multiple opponents who'll call that bet with raggy hearts then be my guest. The math is very bad. Plus don doesnt even have the best hand here, and when he does he only has a 12% edgefor a hugely disproportionate pot when called.
So to simplify: Pot size and stacksize vs likely equity in hand when called aiof. Were generating a huge pot with 1 BB invested when a stacked caller can have as much as 39.6% equity in the hand (that we know are hugely unlikely to fold). Plus we are also dealing with a variety of stack sizes that have left themselves very little FE.
Dont now about you but I'm not happy shifting 100+ bigs across the line with 1bb invested with a 10% edge
I actually said that I'd take a reserved line looking to fillup on value multiway and extract value from the field when filling up.
If we were playing against opponents that could fold a flush draw I would be looking to be seriously more aggro, but they wont, so whats the point?
Doh, yes I agree it is slightly risk averse. But tat is a large slice of my game. There alot of easier spots than this. I've never advocated fold. I've advocated caution. We get it in on flop here were likely 60/40 or <30/70. We dont have to make this a huge pot. Am happy letting a card come off at these stakes as we are likely calling when getting 3bet jammed on. We can protect our hand at turn when fields odds are halved while giving ourselves a chance to improve cheaply and gaining value from the other 4 seats.
I personally dont like getting the money in on flop. I'm not saying its wrong. Am simply saying there are numerous ways to skin a cat while managing variance.
shoving on flop all day, folding to turn
your odds are slightly better of hitting full house if you shove flop and get called by ready made flush.
get it in on flop save the hastle
Looks like you applying your own limit thinking to this kind of situation.
Up the limits you can play with caution and but in all honestly playing passive on this flop
with a set seems like bad play.
You could play it looking for a safe turn card and maybe it's a more safe route looking for a better percentage spot.
But if a safe card comes how do you get all the money in the middle from a draw when infact you
will have to play the turn passive. The guy with the big heart draw will sureley get it in on the flop with better odds than go ahead on turn faciing a chunky bet. The bet you make on the turn in itself will have to extract some value and make it marginal enough so they call, you want them to call right? Your not giving away free river cards are you. So maybe we are beat already but hey we are only taking ourselves to value town on river or on flop either you play it right ?
Heart come on turn, are we c/f this spot ?
if we assume that you are correct and don has 60% equity, then to not want to get stacks in when he's going to be getting much much better than evens on his money is just stupid imo