| Author |
Message |
|
Posted: Sat, 31 Dec 2005, 2:04pm Post subject: Would you show this down? |
|
|
Straight
Joined: 14 Oct 2005
Posts: 118
WPP: 209
Location: Oxford, PA
|
|
MP1 is 49/0/0.31
MP3 is 51/1/0/92
PokerStars 0.25/0.50 Hold'em (10 handed) FTR Hand History Converter
Preflop: Hero is MP2 with K , A.
1 fold, UTG+1 calls, 1 fold, MP1 calls, Hero raises, MP3 calls, 2 folds, SB calls, 1 fold, UTG+1 calls, MP1 calls.
Flop: (11 SB) 8 , 5, K (5 players)
SB checks, UTG+1 checks, MP1 bets, Hero raises, MP3 3-bets, SB folds, UTG+1 folds, MP1 calls, Hero caps, MP3 calls, MP1 calls.
Turn: (11.50 BB) 9 (3 players)
MP1 checks, Hero bets, MP3 raises, MP1 calls, Hero calls.
River: (17.50 BB) 7 (3 players)
MP1 checks, Hero checks, MP3 bets, MP1 calls, Hero calls.
Final Pot: 20.50 BB |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat, 31 Dec 2005, 2:27pm Post subject: |
|
|
Full House
Joined: 15 Oct 2004
Posts: 666
WPP: 95
Location: Decatur, IL
|
|
| I'm definately not folding at any point here |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat, 31 Dec 2005, 2:34pm Post subject: |
|
|
Full House
Joined: 14 Aug 2004
Posts: 1174
WPP: 77
Location: Louisiana
|
|
| Did MP3 have 88? PS your table selection = sucks. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat, 31 Dec 2005, 2:42pm Post subject: |
|
|
Straight
Joined: 14 Oct 2005
Posts: 118
WPP: 209
Location: Oxford, PA
|
|
| ihategnomes wrote: | | PS your table selection = sucks. |
It's because I had a loose person to my left, correct?
I've been having trouble with good tables at PokerStars. If I find a table with a good amount of people seeing the flop, then the available seats suck. If I find a good seat, no one sees the flop.
Should I really just tough it out until I find that optimal seat, even if it takes half an hour? I'm asking because if it will help me get out of my downswing, then I will try it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat, 31 Dec 2005, 2:47pm Post subject: |
|
|
Full House
Joined: 14 Aug 2004
Posts: 1174
WPP: 77
Location: Louisiana
|
|
| Personally I hate having the loose players to the left, they cold call a lot, thus you cant buy the button and have position on more marginal hands and marginal players. Not too mention isolating attempts gone bad, wait. Ive never played .25/.50 so I am not too sure what a typical table dynamic might look like. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat, 31 Dec 2005, 4:11pm Post subject: |
|
|
Full House
Joined: 15 Oct 2004
Posts: 666
WPP: 95
Location: Decatur, IL
|
|
| ihategnomes wrote: | | Did MP3 have 88? PS your table selection = sucks. |
If you have 2 people at a table that play that many hands and are that passive, I don't care what positions you have on them, you are in a profitable situation. Given that one of the players is directly on his right, I think his table selection isn't bad at all. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat, 31 Dec 2005, 4:23pm Post subject: |
|
|
Full House
Joined: 05 Jan 2005
Posts: 1340
WPP: 55
|
|
I'm raising the turn because there are so many draws and if I'm beat I'm beat.
The good thing is I can still suck out on two pair.
I've seen K2 pull this line at my stakes. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon, 02 Jan 2006, 1:21pm Post subject: |
|
|
Full House
Joined: 14 Aug 2004
Posts: 1174
WPP: 77
Location: Louisiana
|
|
| Quote: | | I think his table selection isn't bad at all. |
Tell me how having a loose player on your left will benefit you. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon, 02 Jan 2006, 1:54pm Post subject: |
|
|
Full House
Joined: 15 Oct 2004
Posts: 666
WPP: 95
Location: Decatur, IL
|
|
| ihategnomes wrote: | | Quote: | | I think his table selection isn't bad at all. |
Tell me how having a loose player on your left will benefit you. |
For one, the guy is obviously a horrible player. Ideally you will have him on your right, but it benefits you to have horrible players at the table no matter where they are sitting. And he does have another horrible player sitting directly on his right anyway. So we know stats on 2 players at the table, both of whom are horrible and one of whom we have great position on and you want to say it's a bad situation to be in? I can't follow that thinking at all. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon, 02 Jan 2006, 2:15pm Post subject: |
|
|
i wouldn't mind a change...
Joined: 12 Jul 2004
Posts: 4571
WPP: 87
Location: TagFish
|
|
| Nehmer wrote: | | ihategnomes wrote: | | Quote: | | I think his table selection isn't bad at all. |
Tell me how having a loose player on your left will benefit you. |
For one, the guy is obviously a horrible player. Ideally you will have him on your right, but it benefits you to have horrible players at the table no matter where they are sitting. And he does have another horrible player sitting directly on his right anyway. So we know stats on 2 players at the table, both of whom are horrible and one of whom we have great position on and you want to say it's a bad situation to be in? I can't follow that thinking at all. | There is such a thing as bad position on a good table.
I agree with ihategnomes. The player may play bad, but there are enough tables out there where having the loosies on the right and tighties on the left are always an option. You underestimate the profitability of being consistently last to act on every hand you play. Continuation bets work more, more free cards, more blind stealing, etc.
IMO, its not unprofitable to sit in this seat, however, you can make more by sitting somewhere else. This would not by my #1 table, and I might bring it up if I was looking for a 4th where I was just going to card camp. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
