Just a tiny thing about the write-up in case this is a live document and you feel like fixing a typo that had me confused for 5 seconds (which is probably 4.7 seconds too long but reading is hard)!
On the river you say that you check and he checks and shoves you. I gravitated at the word shove (figuring I should delete the "check" ) and was wondering well what did you do? Then from the context I realized "shoves" is supposed to be "shows" and then the end of the hh made sense.
Poker comments: 1. Suppose you somehow ranged the villain closer to his actual holding on the turn, would you bet on the turn to try to get a fold (and win the same amount you actually won)? 2. The villain could also have had some different kind of draw on the flop (maybe a pair and a non nut flush draw in a gutter), checking the river allows him to bluff at it instead of getting nothing if you bet. Or is that my dominant hold'em brain talking?
They are all live documents and I appreciate any edits that are offered.
One of the tricky parts about PLO is it's unclear what "this type of hand" is. He could have the same hand with clubs, he could have a similar hand with 87 in it. If I could see his cards I would have potted the turn, but my PLO game is not precise enough for me to have a strong opinion on the how the 5c turn plays compared to an offsuit 7.
Sam, what you mentioned about playing draws poorly in NLHE—raising when you should call or calling when you should raise—I think is something that happens to most of us. Do you have any heuristics for how to do it right?
I think the good news is, if you have a big draw, it's hard to misplay it too badly. They are pretty robust hands, they do well vs tight and loose ranges. The heuristics for how to play draws are not set in stone, but generally, don't fast play medium strength draw that you need to raise-fold, when you shove draws you tend to prefer to have some showdown so pair+plus draw or NFDs. I have thought about this question for the past couple days and this is the best answer I can give. There are some heuristics, but they are not consistent.
I think he didn´t realize he had a str8 : P
Just a tiny thing about the write-up in case this is a live document and you feel like fixing a typo that had me confused for 5 seconds (which is probably 4.7 seconds too long but reading is hard)!
On the river you say that you check and he checks and shoves you. I gravitated at the word shove (figuring I should delete the "check" ) and was wondering well what did you do? Then from the context I realized "shoves" is supposed to be "shows" and then the end of the hh made sense.
Poker comments: 1. Suppose you somehow ranged the villain closer to his actual holding on the turn, would you bet on the turn to try to get a fold (and win the same amount you actually won)? 2. The villain could also have had some different kind of draw on the flop (maybe a pair and a non nut flush draw in a gutter), checking the river allows him to bluff at it instead of getting nothing if you bet. Or is that my dominant hold'em brain talking?
They are all live documents and I appreciate any edits that are offered.
One of the tricky parts about PLO is it's unclear what "this type of hand" is. He could have the same hand with clubs, he could have a similar hand with 87 in it. If I could see his cards I would have potted the turn, but my PLO game is not precise enough for me to have a strong opinion on the how the 5c turn plays compared to an offsuit 7.
Sam, what you mentioned about playing draws poorly in NLHE—raising when you should call or calling when you should raise—I think is something that happens to most of us. Do you have any heuristics for how to do it right?
I think the good news is, if you have a big draw, it's hard to misplay it too badly. They are pretty robust hands, they do well vs tight and loose ranges. The heuristics for how to play draws are not set in stone, but generally, don't fast play medium strength draw that you need to raise-fold, when you shove draws you tend to prefer to have some showdown so pair+plus draw or NFDs. I have thought about this question for the past couple days and this is the best answer I can give. There are some heuristics, but they are not consistent.