[Closed] NL100 T7s freeplay

Hey RahXephon1,

even if there are only 40 hands I would usually look at villain's WTS and if it's high I would just c/f the hand although it's a nice board to bluff.

As played, I would raise flop some more, 1.5-2$ for higher FE. And since you took initiative on the flop the turn really brings you a nice scare card and gives you additional outs, so I find the second barrel well played.

In general though, I don't like making many special moves against 42/24 players and play ABC value poker instead.

I'll leave this open for second judge, because I'm not sure if taking a stab on the flop is better than c/f against random fish.

Regards,
burek2000

i would agree with burek and play tight against this type of opponent as its just hard to make them lay down a hand, sometimes and its crap when they out draw u on the river

I don't really see much more fold equity on flop with a bigger bet and the 1$ one is usually enough to make opponets fold with the hands that missed completely. Because of the betsize i don't need it to be successfull more than 30% of the times which is possible IMO. If the board was drawy I would just check fold. Also if I was holding a Q there is no way I would bet 1-5/2 I think.

I don't really like min-bets tbh, Rahx, even though it might create FE against some opponents, in general I think it shows too little strength. Besides, it gets hard to balance it out when you actually want to get value.

As Burek said, the opponent is really loose and might be calling us too often here. However, his range is probably so ridiculously wide on this flop that he'll just have to fold often enough for the bet to work, and you can also expect to get a from time to time, giving you some outs to play with. So I think betting isn't bad either.

If you want this player to fold within 2 barrels bet $2 Flop and bet 65% on the Turn.

I don't like barrel one time and then give it up especially not against a loose type of player

- Gerv

Originally posted by RahXephon1
I don't really see much more fold equity on flop with a bigger bet and the 1$ one is usually enough to make opponets fold with the hands that missed completely. Because of the betsize i don't need it to be successfull more than 30% of the times which is possible IMO. If the board was drawy I would just check fold. Also if I was holding a Q there is no way I would bet 1-5/2 I think.

LOL. you funny.

flop: check/raise flop if you wanna bluff the spot, check/fold if not. Depends on your mood.
turn: 2e barrel 2/3pot on any two after check/raise. If he has check behind flop, bet2/3pot / fold on any2 if you wanna bluff (good spot).
river: depends

So now, your mindonkbet 1$ on 2.5$... Realize that's a fishy move and never do that again on such a board if you want someday to be more than a rakeback player. If I was your opponent there, I would have raise you with any2 cause your betsizing clearly means nothing.

Originally posted by tigerK

Originally posted by RahXephon1
I don't really see much more fold equity on flop with a bigger bet and the 1$ one is usually enough to make opponets fold with the hands that missed completely. Because of the betsize i don't need it to be successfull more than 30% of the times which is possible IMO. If the board was drawy I would just check fold. Also if I was holding a Q there is no way I would bet 1-5/2 I think.

LOL. you funny.

So now, your mindonkbet 1$ on 2.5$... Realize that's a fishy move and never do that again on such a board if you want someday to be more than a rakeback player. If I was your opponent there, I would have raise you with any2 cause your betsizing clearly means nothing.

i dont think thats fair to say and rather condescending way to say it. a min bet is often a sign of strength. in fact many players use it to entice a bet from an agressive opponent.

minbet for raise induce is much less efficient than check for bet induce, sorry but for me it's a fishy moove. And often a monster minbet is more likely to be 0.5$ (1bb) minbet that 1$ (2bb) minbet.

I do apology for my condescending way to write, but as you can see, I'm not posting for just blaming or being mean, i try to make him think about the best line to adopt. There's many way to do it: you can be kind and supportive, that's the best way, but I don't have the time for it, so I chose to be sharp as nasty.

To finish, "in fact many players use it to entice a bet from an agressive opponent". I understand your point, but to say the truth I don't think many players do so. That's part of the SSS's paranoïa to think that vilains are always trying to exploit you. Particularly in NL100.

Let me explain why the min bet.

-I need just little fold equity for it to be profitable
-The board is so dry, that hands that didn't hit will have a really hard time continuing
-The pot is small, there is no emotional attachment to it from the opponent. Just imagine yourself in his position. Would you be doing any special moves on this flop with air? The only hand I see that maybe stays in the hand is Ace high, other hands would call/fold anyways regardless of betsize.
-The bet size is perfect for representing the Queen
-with 2 dollars bet I need 60% FE to be profitable

All in all I think a bet like this on a board like this is still slightly EV+

I think I see your point. I do prefer being more aggressively in general, and keeping that style balanced, so I always attack the pot with bigger bets. The one thing I'm really not sure about is whether you can actually creat enough FE with minbets. For instance, I tend to play back at min bets on freeplays very often, nearly 100% of the times in HU. But you can surely get a feel for that as you play and also depending on the players you are facing, so if you think it is working it surely is a move that comes out cheaper.