Re: Thorsson InterviewmichaelsullivanAugust 7 2006, 18:06:49 UTC
I don't think the underraise affects my decision about what to do facing the all-in. I think you have to muck an awful lot there in any case.
Suppose the betting had gone 47k, min-raise, raise to $260k, jam for 879k more.
This is what actually happened after the correction to 94k. What are you calling with there? I probably call with QQ, but not with much worse. My calling range there against an unknown opponent is certainly no looser than TT+, AK, and probably just JJ+ or QQ+. So I do the same with the CP described action.
Yes, it's possible the guy was shooting an angle, but this is a risky angle. Say you hold Aces or Kings. Your goal is to entice a raise so that you can jam and either pick up a big pot or get it all in. You're afraid that just min-raising will get a call. The non-angle method would be to bet about 3/4 of the pot, and figure you get a call. This will get all of in, or pick up a pot that's bigger some of the time. Other times your opponent won't take the bait and just call the min-raise, other times the floor will incorrectly rule that you called. I'm not sure it's really worth trying anyway.
Re: Thorsson InterviewmgrapeAugust 7 2006, 19:00:35 UTC
I don't think the underraise affects my decision about what to do facing the all-in. I think you have to muck an awful lot there in any case.
That's true, I think I just phrased my response poorly. With QQ specifically, and maybe JJ and AK, the doubt caused by his actions might be enough to turn a call into a fold. Given Thorsson's actions on the hand, Schmiech can put him on something very close to QQ.
Especially after five days of play, it seems pretty unlikely that someone would mistakenly push the wrong denomination chip to call. And regardless of whether it changed Thorsson's action, I still don't like the play.
Suppose the betting had gone 47k, min-raise, raise to $260k, jam for 879k more.
This is what actually happened after the correction to 94k. What are you calling with there? I probably call with QQ, but not with much worse. My calling range there against an unknown opponent is certainly no looser than TT+, AK, and probably just JJ+ or QQ+. So I do the same with the CP described action.
Yes, it's possible the guy was shooting an angle, but this is a risky angle. Say you hold Aces or Kings. Your goal is to entice a raise so that you can jam and either pick up a big pot or get it all in. You're afraid that just min-raising will get a call. The non-angle method would be to bet about 3/4 of the pot, and figure you get a call. This will get all of in, or pick up a pot that's bigger some of the time. Other times your opponent won't take the bait and just call the min-raise, other times the floor will incorrectly rule that you called. I'm not sure it's really worth trying anyway.
Michael
Reply
That's true, I think I just phrased my response poorly. With QQ specifically, and maybe JJ and AK, the doubt caused by his actions might be enough to turn a call into a fold. Given Thorsson's actions on the hand, Schmiech can put him on something very close to QQ.
Especially after five days of play, it seems pretty unlikely that someone would mistakenly push the wrong denomination chip to call. And regardless of whether it changed Thorsson's action, I still don't like the play.
Reply
Leave a comment