BRAG: TP is a bigger donkey than me
 

:D

Full Tilt Poker Game #2903776128: Table Jasper (6 max) - $1/$2 - No Limit Hold'em - 3:19:51 ET - 2007/07/10
Seat 1: DrGiggy ($229.45)
Seat 2: NigelWinters ($200)
Seat 3: zybomb ($293.95)
Seat 4: teachingboy9 ($305.50)
Seat 5: happyjaypee ($262.15)
Seat 6: Troll Pie ($243.70)
DrGiggy posts the small blind of $1
NigelWinters has 5 seconds left to act
NigelWinters posts the big blind of $2
The button is in seat #6
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to zybomb [5h 5d]
zybomb raises to $7
teachingboy9 folds
happyjaypee has 15 seconds left to act
happyjaypee folds
Troll Pie raises to $24
DrGiggy folds
NigelWinters folds
zybomb calls $17
*** FLOP *** [Kc 3c 5s]
zybomb checks
Troll Pie bets $34
zybomb raises to $99
Troll Pie raises to $219.70, and is all in
zybomb calls $120.70
Troll Pie shows [4c 6c]
zybomb shows [5h 5d]
*** TURN *** [Kc 3c 5s] [Th] Huh? :confused: It didn't come? :confused:
*** RIVER *** [Kc 3c 5s Th] [7d] Ahh, that's better :mad:
Troll Pie shows a straight, Seven high
zybomb: nh
zybomb shows three of a kind, Fives
Troll Pie wins the pot ($487.40) with a straight, Seven high
Troll Pie: woot

I think it's safe to say no one would ever accuse us of collusion after that slugfest.

And I won, so CLEARLY it is YOU who is the :donkey!

P.S. teachingboy9 is horrible, so naturally he's killing me.

I like calling a lot in this spot (in position) and getting the $$ in on the turn , which could potentially fold u out -- regardless it may not have mattered

If you check/called the flop, you very easily could have taken this from me on the turn. Depends how expensive it got and how much was already in the pot.... but I'm thinking an all in check raise would have done the trick.... unless of course I checked behind and then shoved over your river bet, which you would have had to call.

Then again, had we played it like that, the cards would have been different anyway, what with the continuous shuffke and all. Shame you didn't wait one more split second before calling my shove. :D

This is why I raised the flop -- although, I'll call and then lead the turn a lot also... but what I was trying to say in my original post (unclearly) was that WITH position, I liked a smooth call followed by a turn raise all-in (assuming you bet again OOP) a lot

Oh yea and ...
:eek::mad::talktothehand

@#$%#@!%#@%#!$!$!#@$#$@!%%$%!@#$

Calling with 55 there OOP to a 3bet preflop is very -EV.

Really? I'll call that too a good percentage of the time - always against bad opponents, and rarely against opponents who I think are capable of getting off an overpair. I guezz Zy gives me no respect.

Anyway, where do you draw the line for calling 3 bets OOP then? Roughly...

Would it be generally -EV value if it was limit? Implied odds in NL would make this very callable in the right situation (as you have said)

It would be much lower EV in limit than in NL, since the implied odds are a fraction as much as they are in NL.

I'm sure Zy would say that he puts TP on a wide 3bet range... seeing has how he's a huge donkey and all. :cheers: :donkey

There are no implied odds if the guy 3bets a lot.

Please explain. I understood that the implied odds are in the additional money that can be won if you hit your set. How do you factor in 3 bet frequency?

If he is 3betting alot he is doing so with much more than high pocket pairs. The implied odds come from getting his whole stack in the middle which wont happen often if his 3betting range is wide, as he wont be connecting with many flops with which he will comfortably get his whole stack in postflop.

And "getting his whole stack in" is VERY difficult to do in limit.

Implied odds in NL >>> Implied odds in limit.

They are a lot easier to calculate in limit though.

Does that mean implied odds realy (at least in part) with wanting him to have an over pair to the board?

Think about it... Do you think you are more likely to get action from a guy who has AA on a J84 board, or from a guy who has KJ, or 98, or something like that?

I realize that. It's just that my current NL strategy for small pocket pairs really didn't factor in the looseness of the villain. Just something else to factor in.