Monday 15 December 2008

Winning Again

$795 since the last blog post, (in around 1800 hands).

Played better anyway, ran bad EV wise for a change tho (expected $1200).

Some losing hands....

Hand 1: http://www.pokerhand.org/?3593223 Prolly the most interesting. 3bet pot with the nut flush draw oop 200bbs deep. Villain had previous history of twice 3betting, then pot controlling overpairs deep so as to take a street off I think. Here after 3betting he double barrells, which since I was almost ruling out overpairs meant he had a 7, 33, or possibly hit JJ, (or complete air, which seeing as he's 3betting 87os here is quite possible). So I check shove the turn... and blank when he calls.

Hand 2: http://www.pokerhand.org/?3593229 AIPF JJ vs AA. Villain was a 70/30, which is all I'm saying on this matter.

Hand 3: http://www.pokerhand.org/?3593233 Top 2 VS Top set. I'm on the wrong side of it.

Winning Hands:

Hand 4: http://www.pokerhand.org/?3593242 Fairly interesting, I've been experimenting with small bets to make people spaz out a bit, usually in situations where I've got a good idea of villai's range such as this example. So I flat a 3bet with KK IP, bet a 10hi board real small, and villain spaz raises and calls off the rest of his stack with ace high.

Hand 5: http://www.pokerhand.org/?3593238 This hand is actually quite interesting, and the reason is the history I had with the villain in the same session.

Villain MattBouldin had previousy seen me cbet near potsize in a 3bet pot with a strong hand (over pair KK in this example http://www.pokerhand.org/?3593254). Shortly after that however I play a pot vs him (here) http://www.pokerhand.org/?3593264, in this hand I bet weakly as a bluff and the hand goes to showdown. So assuming that he's took notice of these facets of my play when I next flop a strong hand in a 3bet pot VS him I plan to cbet weakly to induce some kind of light call down or spaz bluff. He takes the spaz bluff approach, raising the flop and betting the turn strong before snap folding to my shove.

s'all for now. dan

0 comments: