KJs riv flush 600nl vs Leatherass

villian is leatherass very solid... my image is probably taggish around 21/18...My question is simply this.
Is there any merit to shoving this river?
I took a lot of heat on 2p2 for this hand but I think that if you are openminded enough you will see my thinking.
I have a 513$ behind
Submitted by : Jamie217

POKERSTARS GAME #11760108372: HOLD'EM NO LIMIT ($3/$6) - 2007/08/29 - 16:36:58 (ET)
Table 'Mashona' 6-max Seat #5 is the button
Seat 1: EdGonzo ($539 in chips)
Seat 2: BIG Y 007 ($456 in chips)
Seat 3: Sherman1400 ($237.30 in chips)
Seat 4: Leatherass9 ($894.80 in chips)
Seat 5: Jamie217 ($856.50 in chips)
Seat 6: AideenO ($1527.30 in chips)
AideenO: posts small blind $3
EdGonzo: posts big blind $6

Holecards
Dealt to Jamie217
BIG Y 007: calls $6
Sherman1400: folds
Leatherass9: raises $24 to $30
Jamie217 : calls $30
AideenO: folds
EdGonzo: calls $24
BIG Y 007: calls $24

Flop (Pot : $123.00)

   
EdGonzo: checks
BIG Y 007: checks
Leatherass9: bets $95
Jamie217 : calls $95
EdGonzo: folds
BIG Y 007: folds

Turn (Pot : $313.00)

   
Leatherass9: checks
Jamie217 : checks

River (Pot : $313.00)

   
Leatherass9: bets $200

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..

I think I'd need a hell of an instinct not to shove the river. If you're very conservative postflop and he knows that, I suppose you could call.

flat call here if you've never made a play on the river in your life which is probably the case seeing how you want to flat call here LOL

I like minraise, fold to a push best.

I gave some more detailed thoughts here - http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sho...Number=11883977&page=0&fpart=all&vc=1

On August 30 2007 13:00 tomson wrote: I like minraise, fold to a push best. I gave some more detailed thoughts here - http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sho...977&page=0&fpart=all&vc=1

Thats probably the best play in a vacuum but I would push here for image considerations and peace of mind.

god, that thread reminds me of how horrible 2p2 is

That topic fucking pisses me off. 2+2 mods are a disgrace.

On August 30 2007 13:38 tomson wrote: That topic fucking pisses me off. 2+2 mods are a disgrace.

so frustrating on 2p2

lol tomson

Two plus two mods in the mid and high stakes NL forums are actually for the most part deservedly recognized, accomplished players. And they're there on the forums to express their opinion, not agree with you. You can discuss hands with them. You don't win anything by proving that you're right. Forums are mainly used for sharing information and discussing points of view, not for singing in unison.

You got their thoughts. Now it's your job to evaluate and form a final opinion on this matter. Nothing else is owed to you

Being a mod warrants some kind of standards. If I ask for a kind discussion and the very next thing he does is laugh at my face that shows he's not fit for the job. Also when I point that out and he says in a patronising way that I'm clueless (I'm most likely better than he is, but that isn't the point), now that just shows you what a disgrace he is.

I'm probably taking this shit too serious, but that tilted me a bit.

2+2 is retards, seriously they all post stupid shit unless its in the HSNL forum, and even then u really don't get good responses.

I think you should shove this river, although its not as clear cut as everyone says. I shove this river because I have a maniac image (at 5/10 at least) vs leatherass9, and I think he would call any flush vs me, along with even AsTx or something like that. Plus it really protects if I ever wanted to bluff this river, which would be possible since he bet only 200 into the 300 pot, if he made a full pot bet i'd have a much tougher time bluff raising on the river I think.

Really his line does look alot like AsXs, but you make up for the times you're coolered with the times that he calls with worse/you avoid showdown and keep an aggressive image that keeps him guessing.

I wouldn't fault you too hard at all for flatting here, especially if your image is that of a solid conservative player toward leatherass, because then I think he has alot of trouble calling with worse considering theres not many QsXs in his range

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.

On August 30 2007 14:16 MezmerizePLZ wrote: I wouldn't fault you too hard at all for flatting here, especially if your image is that of a solid conservative player toward leatherass, because then I think he has alot of trouble calling with worse considering theres not many QsXs in his range

I think that this would be my main arguement for flatting. However as ppl like Tomson and Adam have brought to my attention the best line is most likely a min R and fold to a shove

because you often minraise with 2p and bluffs there?

Because it makes it more likely he'll call with worse flushes and sets and saves us a bit of money if he has the AsXs (we will be getting insane odds, but he's not doing that without the A hi flush).

But he is a disciplined and a calculating player, so if he calls the minraise here with a weak flush or a set, I guess it's because he believes that you'll minraise there with 2p, baby flushes, and bluffs? Is that true?

Bottom line is, you can't fault anyone for not knowing the other player well, or your image, or your history with him. But an optimal playing style by majority seems to mean being capable of plays on the river and not playing transparently, which would sway the decision here towards a shove.

The reason i tihnk we need to shove, is because obv if he folds he doesn't know we didn't bluff, so for future hands we are more likely called, but i think most important is that we aren't taking into consideration the human factor, and that he will hero call here enough imo for it to be profitable. minraise and fold to a shove imo isn't steller because its much less likely we are bluffing with a minraise, it just wont be as profitable as shoving. Imo Shoving >calling >minraise fold to a shove. its a real sick spot though =|

this is a ultra easy nitty power insta shove for value.

seems like a pretty standard push.

scream yatzee!! as you shove... seriously every hand you have posted is you second guessing the most trivial and obvious shove only because you got a cooler... leave that to 25nl players ok?



BTW if you think he folds a low-flush here isnt he potentially the most profitable player ever?

theres a difference between exploitable and exploited baal

but yeah i agree easy shove

On August 30 2007 13:00 tomson wrote: I like minraise, fold to a push best. I gave some more detailed thoughts here - http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sho...977&page=0&fpart=all&vc=1

wow i just finished reading that thread

every once in awhile i try to give 2+2 a chance but posts like the one's in Jamie's thread tilt me so hard

On August 30 2007 16:37 Baal wrote: scream yatzee!! as you shove... seriously every hand you have posted is you second guessing the most trivial and obvious shove only because you got a cooler... leave that to 25nl players ok? BTW if you think he folds a low-flush here isnt he potentially the most profitable player ever?

hey hey 25NL players like me are kinda good..... sorta

haha j/k

i think if we look at the hand from vilian's point of view, if we got a read jamie is never bluffing here, its clear we are folding low flushes and it therefore could possilbly be a bit better to flat.

but if vilian have a read ur never bluffing here i think ur doing something wrong?

the point about the hand is this:


when youre playing you shove this every time because it looks like an easy shove, and really nobody is going to flat call here in the moment.

but when you look closely at the hand you begin to realize its very possible shove is not the best play and you start thinking about calling

then the more you look at it you realize that minraise fold to a shove looks terrible and fishy but is by far the best play because hes not going to be rebluff shoving with the naked As that often and you get enough value from lower flushes and maybe some sets to make it worthwhile

its just a really interesting hand to think about for a while but its almost impossible to apply a lot of the stuff you learn from this hand because theres so much involved and its way too much to think through when youre like 6 tabling and have a timebank to worry about

daut for president

On August 30 2007 19:01 adam001 wrote: daut for president

This is probably the best point in this thread... with Dauts post a close 2nd

im crying right now due to daut's and tomson's responses...this is a shove.

On August 30 2007 18:52 Daut wrote: then the more you look at it you realize that minraise fold to a shove looks terrible and fishy but is by far the best play because hes not going to be rebluff shoving with the naked As that often and you get enough value from lower flushes and maybe some sets to make it worthwhile

The problem with this play is you make it with no other hands than the one you have so it only works in a vacuum. =

but our calling/raising range on the river is sooooo limited
i dont think anyone is going to be floating the 4 way flop when he bets big and then check behind the turn
i mean AK is reraised pre, AQ often is, AJ often folded pre or on the flop, how often do we really have ANY hands on the river

i dont think it matters that we dont show up with many other hands besides the KJss hand in thie specific spot because given the setup, there arent really many hands in our range to begin with

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.
If leatherass is as good as you say then isn't he going to see right through the minraise for what it is? Or are we thinking that the small amount of additional pot odds he would be getting would change things despite the transparency of our play?
I guess I think that if your image vs leatherass is definitely such that he folds all worse hands to a push, then you should flat call here. But that you should also be bluffing more to exploit him. If/when he realizes hes being exploited, and starts calling more than this becomes an easy push.

err....i think it's just as simple as rekrul said...automatic shove here, because KsXs is a necessary component of a good shoving range on this river. why is this hand any more difficult than that?

don't even consider "the vacuum" when playing against a regular with whom you will someday have a lot of history. who cares

On August 30 2007 21:07 [vital]Myth wrote: don't even consider "the vacuum" when playing against a regular with whom you will someday have a lot of history. who cares

great post as always

On August 30 2007 18:52 Daut wrote: the point about the hand is this: when youre playing you shove this every time because it looks like an easy shove, and really nobody is going to flat call here in the moment. but when you look closely at the hand you begin to realize its very possible shove is not the best play and you start thinking about calling then the more you look at it you realize that minraise fold to a shove looks terrible and fishy but is by far the best play because hes not going to be rebluff shoving with the naked As that often and you get enough value from lower flushes and maybe some sets to make it worthwhile its just a really interesting hand to think about for a while but its almost impossible to apply a lot of the stuff you learn from this hand because theres so much involved and its way too much to think through when youre like 6 tabling and have a timebank to worry about

i think its clear push is best
like a lower flush is going to fold

"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...

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.

Here are some points I don't agree with you people:

but if vilian have a read ur never bluffing here i think ur doing something wrong?

His calling range is limited, because of the board and the cards we have. The best hand that he can have that we beat is 8s7s.

There are just some spots in poker where you have the 2nd nut hand, but you still shouldn't raise for value and it has nothing to do with being transparent as a player. An easier example (and please don't try to disaprove it, because I didn't spend much time looking for one) would be a A4443 board when the opponent bet the flop, you called, both checked the turn and now he leads 2/3 of the pot on the river. You have an Ace. Nobody raises here with worse than a Ace therefore you are gonna be flatting, because there's no value in raising and there is the possibility that he has a 4.

Now we're talking about a hand that is a bit more complicated than that, but the point still stays the same. He folds out weaker hands to a shove, because nobody is bluffing here with worse than a flush when they're shoving (unless there is some serious metagame, hero is crazy and decided to change his hand with showdown value into a bluff, which isn't be the case in these games, with these players).

i think its clear push is best like a lower flush is going to fold

I think Leatherass folds small flushes at least most of the time here. Why is that so difficult to grasp? He's a very good, thinking player very capable of making big laydowns. Would you call a shove in his spot with a hand like 4s5s? If so I think you're making a mistake.

On August 30 2007 13:00 tomson wrote: I like minraise, fold to a push best. I gave some more detailed thoughts here - http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sho...977&page=0&fpart=all&vc=1

I really dont understand this line, I feel anything he is betting on the river like 99 AA AsXs and maybe 22 and A9 he is shoving over ur min raise. It doesnt tighten his range to only the nut flush.

To me this looks like a no brainer shove on the river.

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???

Tomson your posts are well thought out and very detailed but its hard for people to counter your arguments in a detailed way when the answer is pretty simple. Leatherass or your average 3/6 grinder just isn't good enough to be folding smaller flushes that often here and I think he'll even sometimes call with sets and sometimes worse. If he was good enough to make that kind of laydown more often than not then I would probably agree with your strategy, but I've played against him thousands of hands and I just don't get that impression.

ya i agree mcnasty, but i still think its close in either direction (based purely on EV and in a vacuum) and obviously since its close the fact that we need a non trivial shoving range on any river pushes it into the shove column

I love these threads... Daut's words are like magic to my ears.

what the hell does magic do for ears?

I think you guys vastly overrate leatherass skill. He's usually short stacking 5/10 and 10/20 for a clear reason : he's just not good enough to beat these games.

It's clearly a super + EV shove to me, and i think even if you have a tight image, it has to be +EV for you too, especially considering meta game possibilities that this shove opens if you get called. Then everytime you call a flop of this kind of texture with a straight draw and check behind the turn, you could shove over him when flush hits, ....

If we are flatting K high flush here why do you expect him to call with J high flush if we shove? i think its pretty clear we would never shove something worse than J high flush maybe Q high... given that shoving on a float with AsX should be great because we will expect to fold pretty much anything according to his calling range.. because 45s is as good as Q high flush for him because we are flatting weak flushes.

I am not saying about this particular hand where flatting is not bad, im talking about the situation that leades us to flat call with the 2nd nuts, its ridiculous.

Also i cant image what a terrible image you would get when you turn upside down your K high flush.

baal i sidebet my whole roll he never calls with a jack high flush when we shove here (before slow people start calling me a dumb nit its because we have the !)

competely agree with daut in that this looks like an autoshove in the heat of the moment because second nuts is a powerful hand in unlimited texas hold them. but when you look at it more you realise shove isnt actually as massively +ev as it first appears because hes probably most often bet/folding for value with anything that isnt a flush and there really arent that many possible lower flushes compared to "normal" because the K J T 9 are already out (he'd have to have Q8s 67s 56s etc, hands he's less likely to isolate a non-fullstack preflop with than premiums/Axs)

nonetheless i still think shoving is best since there probably is some value in it although it might be kinda thin. i tend not to use "unbalanced" lines vs regulars like the value minraise/fold to shove suggestion since I'm never going to wanna minraise when i decide to bluff riv. I'm always bluff shoving if i bluff so I'll value shove too.

i def use small value raise intending to fold to shove line in different situations vs non-regular unknown fish - although id never consider doing it with this hand on this board against an unknown, the only thing im trying to say is these "fancy" lines can have merit against the right predictable soft players when you dont care about balance/unreadableness/unexploitability vs them

On August 31 2007 06:19 Cutsss wrote: 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.

- 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 ?

You cant use that to your advantage AT ALL. You dont push river with second nuts, how are you going to represent anything? I thought great bluffs required thin value betting, not nitty calls.

Btw, if he played Axs this way, hed often check river. And Axs is not a big part of his range at all.
And this is a very EV+ push, as well have him beat like 90% of the time here and Im pretty sure well have him beat more than 50% after his call.

Tomson laid out some good reasons, but miniraising is awful and call is also bad.
I dont believe hell fold a set and a low flush often enough here to make a push unprofitable.

it's pretty simple

the only way this is a flat call is if you don't bluff rivers.


THERE QUESTION SOLVED

nope, u think a guy named leatherass is gunna fold a loww flushhh??

plus someone who hits the nuts will bet more than 200$ on river

On September 02 2007 13:35 WiseAdvice wrote: plus someone who hits the nuts will bet more than 200$ on river

Butttttt he didnt....
I obv shoved not even thinking twice about it... then I was just thinking about it later and I thoguht it was closer than it looked b/c of mostly tomsons reasoning who Ive talked w/ this hand a lot. Anyways I think this hand just shows that if you need to have a very openmind when you think about poker and be willing to accept any sort of different play. He snapped w/ AsQs fwiw

There is another reason why shove, your image is probably very tight flatting here with K high would set the most ridiculous tight image... that would be good if you were a loosey goose and steal pots from him later on, but that simply isnt in your style of play and it will be harder for you to adapt to it than if you shove here and get a better image that might get u paid off next river.

On September 01 2007 22:39 Ket wrote: baal i sidebet my whole roll he never calls with a jack high flush when we shove here (before slow people start calling me a dumb nit its because we have the !) competely agree with daut in that this looks like an autoshove in the heat of the moment because second nuts is a powerful hand in unlimited texas hold them. but when you look at it more you realise shove isnt actually as massively +ev as it first appears because hes probably most often bet/folding for value with anything that isnt a flush and there really arent that many possible lower flushes compared to "normal" because the K J T 9 are already out (he'd have to have Q8s 67s 56s etc, hands he's less likely to isolate a non-fullstack preflop with than premiums/Axs) nonetheless i still think shoving is best since there probably is some value in it although it might be kinda thin. i tend not to use "unbalanced" lines vs regulars like the value minraise/fold to shove suggestion since I'm never going to wanna minraise when i decide to bluff riv. I'm always bluff shoving if i bluff so I'll value shove too. i def use small value raise intending to fold to shove line in different situations vs non-regular unknown fish - although id never consider doing it with this hand on this board against an unknown, the only thing im trying to say is these "fancy" lines can have merit against the right predictable soft players when you dont care about balance/unreadableness/unexploitability vs them

Ket i wasnt talking in this hand... i meant that if every time we shove here (with any 2)he folds anything from J high flush and below we should be bluffing this guy on almost any flush river while we float him with shit... 45s has the same value as JTs when shoved by Jamie if he is flatting K high flush, he would never shove T high flush.