bbbgawd 's avatar


1 points

Not sure where to post this, but it would be cool if we could get a new video of a live play n explain of an anonymous pool like Ignition. I know ben recently put out a .10/.25 vid, but I would like to see more vids like that.

Nov. 30, 2019 | 12:02 a.m.

Hand History | bbbgawd posted in PLO: [PLO1000] AA 3bp
Blinds: $5.00/$10.00 (5 Players) UTG: $1368.41 (Hero)
CO: $2033.59
BN: $1426.00
SB: $1082.24
BB: $1190.87
Preflop ($15.00) Hero is UTG with A 8 A Q
Hero calls $10.00, CO calls $10.00, BN raises to $55.00, 2 folds, Hero raises to $190.00, CO folds, BN calls $135.00
so standard play pf is def open, I decided to limp because co (whale) was very crazy and opening a lot (playing 84/45 with 3b of 30). btn/vill is a solid reg (hint: he won the wsop main event)
Flop ($405.00) 5 6 9
Hero bets $402.00, BN calls $402.00
with spr about 3 i think i played this way too aggressively. i think the right play is to check? and continue vs a sizing that isnt too large?
Turn ($1209.00) 5 6 9 2
Hero bets $776.41 and is all in, BN calls $776.41
River ($2761.82) 5 6 9 2 K

Nov. 5, 2018 | 2:53 p.m.

Is the smallish x/r sizing with the KQcc at 6:00 part of an exploitative framework or does it work as a range play? I ask because your comment about forcing continues with hands we crush only matters when we have value combos. Obviously we get a better price on bluffs but the population(that I play with) seems pretty nutted in general when they choose to size down in these spots because they want to force continues, but then don't back it up by bluffing the same size.

Dec. 1, 2017 | 9:46 p.m.

Note: this is just observational and off-the-cuff, I'm sure people have much better insights than I do on this topic

The way I've been made to understand card removal when it comes to making calls is something like "you want to unblock your opponents' bluffs, so calling down with Q3 on Q9742 is superior to calling down with QJ or QT", but it seems as if the opposite is being taught/practiced in terms of the hands one chooses to bluff/3barrel with. On that same board, one might advocate not 3barrel bluffing a hand like JT because we block the hands opponents will call twice and then fold with. By this logic, shouldn't a hand like QJ or QT come back into the fold as good bluff catchers since we unblock the hands our opponents will want to go for 3 with?

Alternatively, is the Q3 > QJ, QT line of thought just a product of the fact that most opponents are not constructing their bluffing ranges in the above manner? This has probably been discussed before but as I've put more thought into how I'm constructing river calling and bluffing ranges, these two modes of thinking seem to be at odds.

Nov. 16, 2017 | 9:35 p.m.

Comment | bbbgawd commented on Very Deep 1/3 with KK

This game sounds like free money with a triple straddle lol. Btn just flatted pre and was getting pretty good odds with any suited connectors/gappers, as well as pocket pairs. I dont think he is 3 betting 99s or 1010s pre just because how inflated the pot already is. I dont think he would flat QQ there especially knowing how the blinds/straddles are a spewy calling station.
I just dont think your ever good in this situation with just KKs. Did the turn put a backdoor draw up? I think the pot is already way too inflated. I dont mind the turn re-raise, but it might be just a little larger on the size. I dont like the river bet, and im almost always folding river because there are virtually no bluffs in his range that call-call-shove when the pot is this big. Your getting 5.8:1 on a river call, so he would never bluff. I would rather check evaluate river depending on bet size

Oct. 7, 2016 | 2:38 p.m.

Load more uses cookies to give you the best experience. Learn more about our Cookie Policy