Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Is it true

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Is it true

    That you should not turn your marginal hand into a bluff when you think you win more than 10% of showdowns

    and that you with a bluff catcher almost always should call a one street bet

    most of the time call 2 street bets

    and almOst never call a 3 street bet ?

    this is referred to normal size bets not tiny bets

  • #2
    No. None of this is true, but then again, not all of this is false.

    1) Your marginal hands, that can be used as a bluff catcher have to be in relation to the pot odds and the size of the bet. Your bluff catcher should either meet pot odds requirements or MDF requirements depending on which setup you are using for a hand and the specific villain.

    2) Your marginal hands can bluff catch for 3 streets. But you have to be aware of the changing value of the hands based on the board run out and the betting line and betting sizes of the opponent. What may be a marginal hand on the flop might be a junk hand by the river. What may be a value hand on the flop might turn into a marginal bluff catcher by the river. Additionally, a marginal hand on the flop might still be a marginal bluff catcher on the river depending on the opponent.

    3) You should be cognizant that in standard situations all of your range categories should be shrinking on a street by street basis. For instance, if you have 20 value hands, 40 bluff hands and 30 marginal hands on the flop. That number would then typically shrink to 15 value hands on the turn, 15 bluffs, and 20 marginal hands on the turn. Then maybe 10 value haves, 5 bluffs and 10 marginal hands on the river. (All of these numbers were just made up as a simplified example and may not reflect a real situation).

    Comment


    • #3
      Is it true that you should almost never with top pair top kicker check raise on flop oop but sometimes raise flops in position with that holding because you can easily control size of the pot later by checking behind on turn or river or betting small ?

      Comment


      • #4
        That all depends on the player. You are now stepping into an advanced topic called value targeting. I think I discussed it in one of your posts previously. But if not here goes:

        Value targeting is when you target specific hands in your opponents range to get paid. For instance you have AQ and call on the button, your opponent c-bets. Can you raise AQ?

        What you want to do here is very opponent dependent.

        First think of the second best hand you want them to have here. KQ would be that hand. If your opponent has KQ, how many bets will he put in the pot post flop? Also taking into consideration, he already put one bet in himself. Will he put 1 more bet? 2 more? Will he put 3 bets in?

        In the past and in some weak games now, you might be able to get 3 more bets out of the calling station villains who cannot fold top pair. So if the answer is 3bets, you can and should raise.

        If the answer is only 1 or 2 more bets, then you should just call.

        The value of your hand is directly affected by what they perceive the value of their hand that you still beat.

        In present day poker, more and more villains are able to get away from hands like KQ to action.

        In general, I would not raise top pair. This goes back to the one piece of advice someone told me 12 years ago that turned my game around. This one piece of advice once I understood it turned me from a break even player to a winning player.

        Big hands = big pots, small hands = small pots and one pair is a small hand.
        Raising is when you want to create big pots. You cannot raise and pot control at the same time.

        Comment


        • #5
          I almost never raise top pair on the flop. I will want to get more value on future streets. When you raise, you result in villain folding correctly when they are way behind, or calling (or raising) correctly when you are way behind.

          Unless they are a calling station. Then I shove bottom pair no kicker on the flop and get ready for a big payday :-)

          I would review your range on the range analyser on FTT - assess what is your value to draw ratio on various boards

          Comment


          • #6
            I basically never raise top pair but recently I heard several voices that say you should implement it to your game especially in position and under the right circumstances . If you never do it you become exploitable by yourself

            Comment


            • #7
              As always it depends on the villain, and your image.

              I would never raise top pair good kicker in position vs a maniac as they will likely bluff several streets.

              vs a nit, it would also be a bad idea as they will possibly only continue when you are beat.

              As you mention, under the right circumstances it could be fine, but that would be very opponent dependant.
              Last edited by Ben88AU; 11-08-2018, 07:21 AM.

              Comment


              • #8
                If I remember correctly JL has once in a training video told you should some of the KQ and KJ raise when you hit top pair (to mix it up and to be more deceptive ) but not the KA or KT for instance . And I think with KQ and KJ if you happen to get raised over the top your decision is easier

                Comment


                • #9
                  Is it true that it is better in close spots to bluff catch in position rather than oop ?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I knew about the complexities and dangers of loans, but I took it anyway because there was no other way ((I live in another city, rent an apartment, even there was nothing to hand over to a pawnshop except a laptop. Here I could choose the amount and the term, although the terms here and not the biggest in just 30 days. But paid out of the nearest salary. My first experience was not the easiest, but good that I could close. Now I want to check over here, maybe their conditions for issuing short-term loans are much better, don’t you know?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by fiools View Post
                      I knew about the complexities and dangers of loans, but I took it anyway because there was no other way ((I live in another city, rent an apartment, even there was nothing to hand over to a pawnshop except a laptop. Here I could choose the amount and the term, although the terms here and not the biggest in just 30 days. But paid out of the nearest salary. My first experience was not the easiest, but good that I could close. Now I want to check over here, maybe their conditions for issuing short-term loans are much better, don’t you know?
                      This guys keeps spamming and I keep flagging. Does this forum even have any mods?

                      Comment


                      • CrazyEddie
                        CrazyEddie commented
                        Editing a comment
                        no, I am guessing Jon little has given up on this ... and stopped paying that guy.

                    • #12
                      Jon little says that he started off as a nit ... so does doug polk , I don't know who else... Evan Jarvis /

                      is it true the loose players don't end up coaching ?

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X