Comments on: Pot Entitlement – It’s Not Over Till It’s Over

By: Dell

Dell — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 18:53:01 +0000

Hi Gugel,

I don’t question the fold, but the line you chose to not charge him for possible draws or pairs. Bests!

By: Gugel

Gugel — Mon, 14 Sep 2009 23:02:03 +0000

@Dell

I was actually really conflicted about this hand when I played it. I kept thinking “OMG, Gugel, this is so weak, I can’t believe you want to fold.” But after almost timing out, I decided to fold.

I wasn’t super confident in my decision so I asked Ansky. He said obviously that’s a crumby position, but folding there is completely fine. I don’t think anyone considers Ansky weak-tight

By: Dell

Dell — Mon, 14 Sep 2009 22:53:08 +0000

Hi Gugel!

I guess your example in the 2nd hand is obvious, but i don’t get why u played so weakish the flop-turn sequence – c’mon pal, it’s like u limped pocket Aces and wait the donkey make his 2pair. Instead of representing a bluff by betting, u chose to slowplay a set and represent a draw or some weak hand, which isn’t a good line unless you’re facing a complete maniac (if so, why do u choose to fold?)… I like you and admire your systematic approach to HU, yet this is weak-tight stuff…

By: BigT

BigT — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 15:32:55 +0000

It can often be a difficult situation, you really need to know your opponent. If you’re up against somebody very aggressive you almost have to stick to the pot since you can sure he’ll raise a dangerous board whether he has it or not.

But yes, if an even half-way reasonable player starts calling a visible flush or straight draw you’d better really consider whether your set is worth it.

By: Gugel

Gugel — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 15:25:24 +0000

In Hand 2, you’re calling the flop because it’s really hard to get the villain to pay you off. A huge part of his range misses that flop and trying to get him to bluff is more valuable.