KJs riv flush 600nl vs Leatherass - Page 3

On August 30 2007 12:41 TalentedTom wrote: I think it's important to note here - against a UTG limper leatherass is tight to a degree where he does not isolate with suited connectors like 98s, 87s etc..

Tom,

What's your action on this river? It seems that you're saying fold since his only possible holding is AQss?

On August 31 2007 02:21 Baal wrote: i think we are missing the big picture here... if he really is folding a low flush here we are playing TERRIBLE poker and we should use that ridiculously nitty image to abuse leatherass beyond belief...

Same question for Baal - would you call a shove here w/ 4s5s by a solid player that isn't out of line if you were Leatherass? If you would I won't call that terrible poker, but I think it's just being optimistic.

I agree it's a push as well, I also agree that if you single this hand out and don't look at the effects it might have or the image you have built up with him that it's probably best to flat call.

However in this situation I will often bluff A7d etc to make sure if I didn't have the best hand before I'm at least going to win the pot here by making him think I have the flush. This is one reason why I would also shove KJs, another is the fact that if you flat call KJs here how is he going to give you credit to your raises in the future? I like to have people folding to my raises because it makes me more money then people that pay off, but if I flat call monsters like this and I'm raising Leatherass a good amount he will know something weird is going on and play back more which is something I want to avoid at all times. By pushing here, even if he calls it will give credit to my future hand range, and that is besides the fact that KJs is of course a semi-monster here.

This is a perfectly fine spot for him to be folding lower flushes btw totally does not mean we have been doing something wrong so far, but that's also what makes it such an effective spot to bluff. In this situation people pushing over the top of your 200 bet will have higher flushes than 45s 95% of the time and calling there would be plain bad. Reg vs reg is different, but still.

If you're calling 45s you should also be calling sets, two pair and KA/QA/JA. Because these hands are all above the hands that someone will flat call the flop with and exploit the river to bluff you on. If you're calling pushes here with those hands you're going to be broke in no time, it's not viable. If someone has the balls to bluff you here you just gotta admit you're being outplayed and fold anyways.

On August 31 2007 02:21 Baal wrote: "a lower flush is going to fold" i think we are missing the big picture here... if he really is folding a low flush here we are playing TERRIBLE poker and we should use that ridiculously nitty image to abuse leatherass beyond belief...

I think you misunderstood my post.

I meant a lower flush is not going to fold.

syhaowvne

Tomson... do i call with 45s here? it depends on villian and the flow of a game, i insta call or insta fold... the thing is, if i insta-fold its because villian is a terrible predictable nit.

And that is the whole point of my argument... if we are considering to flat call here then we are playing terrible poker, but BEFORE this hand. if i had such image i would float him on every board representing any draw that hits and steal so many pots until he catches up.


Just think about it, if he is folding ANY hand except A / K high flush shoving with any 2 cards on this river is ridiculously EV+


Nazgul, i agree that 2 pair is as good as 45s here... but if you just "admit you are being outplayed" and fold anyway... well thats the whole point, we are trying to outplay him and make him consider calling next time with weaker holdings because we arent as predictable as we were before when we were flat calling the 2nd nuts.

do i call with 45s here? it depends on villian and the flow of a game, i insta call or insta fold... the thing is, if i insta-fold its because villian is a terrible predictable nit.

So you only fold 4s5s to extreme nits and not to,lets say, good, solid players who aren't out of line? I think that's bad.

Just think about it, if he is folding ANY hand except A / K high flush shoving with any 2 cards on this river is ridiculously EV+

Geezus, I hate constantly repeating myself. So pay attention, because I'm about to say something important:

The reason we're talking about the possibility of calling here is, because our holding itself takes away 3 possible flushes from villains range (K hi flush, Q hi flush, J hi flush). It's not that he will fold anything besides the nuts here (I would definitely advocate calling with a Q hi and probably J hi flush here), it's that thanks to our own holding we can narrow down his calling range to either a weak flush or the nut flush. My assumption is that he is capable of folding a weak flush to a push, because he definitely should consider it when a solid player is passive and all of a sudden becomes active when the flush hits and shoves over a raise. I think that's common sense. And I just know this player will fold a small flush a decent amount of time unless he's tilted or my image is absolutely horrible.

On 2+2 and here there are people (everywhere I guess) who are stuck in paradigms that when you have a great hand you should just go with it and abstract from everything else. And if someone confronts that statement they laugh at him and say it's weak and exploitable. Fuck that. It's only exploitable when there's a realistic chance of someone bluffing. There is close to no chance that we are bluff-shoving over his bet here. Calling is weak? Who cares what it looks like, it only matters if it's correct. If I think it is then I don't care what he might think of me (like I said I prefer min-raise, fold to shove, but I think calling is better than shoving). You think he will start bluffing people like that? It's not like he can use this against me. I'm perfectly aware good players like him are capable of bluffs and I don't necessarily have very high standards for playing big pots.

To be honest, I feel that I'm just wasting my time giving detailed arguments to defend my view when people are not even trying to confront them, instead they give me one-liner responses "shoving is best" - yeah, thanks for making a point. I don't feel like writing a dozen posts to squeeze out more than a sentence from people that have a different view. If you're not gonna give any effort to substantiate your views then neither should I. If nobody is gonna try here then this won't improve my game and I don't get anything from helping other people out.

Fuck this. I'm just gonna write one-liners from now on and not give a damn what others wrote.

Baal is an ignorant fool stuck on 1/2...

i got alot of ideas about the hand but dunno really what to do.

- I like a shove here for the reasons mez and naz gave, you give him a hard time, and even if there is close to zero value from a worse hand, if he folds ure winning some value on ur future value shoves.

- If u flat call, whatever happens, youre setting up a really tight image on you river moves, and you'll have to use that later to bluff him, do u have the balls to bluff shove him later on ?

- Is that guy really NEVER EVER isolating utg limper with 89s 78s ? Maybe but if he can do it sometimes, it really changes the hand.

- Is he also always checking the turn with AXss ? Because it's pretty obvious on the flop that you don't have a set or two pairs (u'd protect) and he can semibluff u off a weak ace because its obvious ure not strong (u'd repop AQ AK preflop (maybe he is too tight and stupid to realize that))

It's impossible he was controlling the pot size on the turn coz he'd never value bet this river (or maybe as a bluff). So he either missed a checkraise or hit his flush.
Problem is that he'd not often value bet the hand he missed the checkraise on the turn with because he is a nit. And if he was value betting it, I think the betsize would be a little smaller like a blocking bet trying to get a small value hoping not to get raised.

So he has a flush, or he is bluffing. It's really close but if you put into his range hands like 89s 78s, a push becomes profitable.
The flow of the game also depends, if he's stuck, losing alot of hands, or if the utg guy has been limping all the time, then he might do something different than he usually does...
Also to take in consideration the image you want to setup for future hands against this reg, and for that I love the river shove.

On August 30 2007 14:26 BBM wrote: You probably are taking this shit too serious, Tomson. I'll be honest, about a year ago, I got into huge arguments with 2+2 over insignificant hands and it seemed like proving myself right mattered a lot. When everyone disagreed with me, I'd keep arguing and just have everyone laugh at me. I'd still believe I was right. Maybe I even was right sometimes. It's unlikely though, because a lot of the posters on 2+2 are very experienced players. Later I realized that I used the forum wrong, and that I was creating dumb arguments. The best attitude there is to post, have a bit of discussion and collect data. Once they disagree, you're probably not going to be able to "educate" them so you shouldn't waste time trying.

Sorry if this is off topic, but i find my self in that exact situation on LP.

On August 31 2007 02:22 tomson wrote: Show nested quote + On August 30 2007 20:43 Fraser wrote: regardless of how jamie plays this hand, I think we can all agree that he should he shoving with the naked As here everytime given whats been said about leatherass and jamie's image vs him. You're saying Jamie should be shoving the naked As here as a bluff every time? You're missing the point of the hand then. Jamie having KsJs excludes K hi, Q hi and J hi flushes from Leatherass range and dramatically lowers his calling range.

Ok this is a good point, a push from us with say K2ss would be much more profitable than KJss here.

You also said in another post that you would advocate the villain calling a push with a J-high flush though? seems to me that we're not value pushing worse than J-high flushes here, so J-high is much like 8 high to the villain, no?

whats up with all this bowing down, u have a very strong hand just go all in.

"He's a very good, thinking player very capable of making big laydowns"

I disagree here, I think he's a good solid player but he's not the type to make big laydowns. He shortstacks 10/20 and 25/50 and imo plays a very formulaic game. He's the type that tries to avoid tough and tricky decisions. The way to beat players like that is to just play solid poker and extract max value from your made hands, especially when you have 2 pair or better beat.

Also if you aren't sembluffing, floating, or raising for value when you hit in this hand you should just be folding preflop. You're behind his range and I wouldn't be calling unless I had a postflop plan.

You also said in another post that you would advocate the villain calling a push with a J-high flush though? seems to me that we're not value pushing worse than J-high flushes here, so J-high is much like 8 high to the villain, no?

I said 'probably J hi flush'. That is close to borderline for me.

I disagree here, I think he's a good solid player but he's not the type to make big laydowns.

I know that he is very good and heard he recently posted a big laydown on 2+2. In all honesty I wouldn't think much about folding 4s5s here against Jamie, it doesn't seem like a big laydown for me at all.

Also if you aren't sembluffing, floating, or raising for value when you hit in this hand you should just be folding preflop. You're behind his range and I wouldn't be calling unless I had a postflop plan.

I'm so tired of repeating myself to refute this fallacy......

Re-read the topic.

He occasionally shortstacks 10/20 and 25/50. He plays mostly 2/4-5/10 and fullstacks.

I thought you'd know that since he's a regular in your game?

I just recently started playing PS again.

i mean really if its borderline obv its a shove for image purposes
the only reason it wouldnt be a shove is if we think his calling range is Axss too often
if you think hes calling small flushes usually then its an easy easy shove. if hes often folding them then i dont see how shove is profitable even in the long run

One thing that I haven't noticed before is that I'm fairly certain that with these stacks he bets 4s5s (straight) on turn. So this narrows his range of flushes even more.

if your not going to shove i dont see why you should even call

this is the easiest shove ever imo, do you not bluff rivers ever?

what do we even have the option of bluffing here???