<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
xmlns:podcast="https://podcastindex.org/namespace/1.0"
xmlns:rawvoice="https://blubrry.com/developer/rawvoice-rss/"

	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.thinkingpoker.net/2010/01/wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.thinkingpoker.net/2010/01/wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee/</link>
	<description>Weekly poker podcast hosted by Andrew Brokos and Nate Meyvis featuring interviews with famous and behind-the-scenes figures from the poker world as well as an in-depth poker strategy segment.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 27 Jan 2010 02:31:02 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=7.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: foucault		</title>
		<link>https://www.thinkingpoker.net/2010/01/wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee/#comment-4089</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[foucault]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Jan 2010 02:31:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thinkingpoker.net/?p=4220#comment-4089</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.thinkingpoker.net/2010/01/wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee/#comment-4084&quot;&gt;Christoph&lt;/a&gt;.

Fair questions. I&#039;ll do my best, but I&#039;m not holding it up as an especially well-played hand, either:

1. Button was fishy, on the loose passive side. I was actually counting on him coming along. I still think it was pretty thin.

2. Agreed again. I actually wrote about a very similar situation in a recent article and advocated calling rather than raising, though part of the point there was that Hero had no fold equity against the guy with the likely pair. Here I do think it&#039;s a tough call for him to make with one pair, though I still think flatting might be fine. It was mostly just his bet sizing that tempted me.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://www.thinkingpoker.net/2010/01/wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee/#comment-4084">Christoph</a>.</p>
<p>Fair questions. I&#8217;ll do my best, but I&#8217;m not holding it up as an especially well-played hand, either:</p>
<p>1. Button was fishy, on the loose passive side. I was actually counting on him coming along. I still think it was pretty thin.</p>
<p>2. Agreed again. I actually wrote about a very similar situation in a recent article and advocated calling rather than raising, though part of the point there was that Hero had no fold equity against the guy with the likely pair. Here I do think it&#8217;s a tough call for him to make with one pair, though I still think flatting might be fine. It was mostly just his bet sizing that tempted me.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Chris M		</title>
		<link>https://www.thinkingpoker.net/2010/01/wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee/#comment-4086</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Chris M]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Jan 2010 22:43:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thinkingpoker.net/?p=4220#comment-4086</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[oh wait $ went in on turn, nvm lol]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>oh wait $ went in on turn, nvm lol</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Chris M		</title>
		<link>https://www.thinkingpoker.net/2010/01/wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee/#comment-4085</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Chris M]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Jan 2010 22:42:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thinkingpoker.net/?p=4220#comment-4085</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Wait...UTG bet/over-called Jack high?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wait&#8230;UTG bet/over-called Jack high?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Christoph		</title>
		<link>https://www.thinkingpoker.net/2010/01/wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee/#comment-4084</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Christoph]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Jan 2010 15:36:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thinkingpoker.net/?p=4220#comment-4084</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Nice! I&#039;ve got 2 questions though:

1. Why did you call preflop? I&#039;m not thinking that it is bad, but not having the BTN is quite a big disadvantage here imo, cause it&#039;s quite likely the player on the BTN is gonna call and take away your position or he could also SQZ pretty often here (same is true for the blinds). So in general I think it is a pretty thin call pf, but I guess under some circumstances it&#039;s fine. You do rely heavily on implied odds though imo, cause you won&#039;t be able to steal the pot as often as you might on the BTN.

2. If UTG can fold an overpair a shove is probably fine, cause the BTN probably wouldn&#039;t flat a big hand very often on the flop. However calling and hoping to keep the BTN in the hand probably has some advantages too, especially given the fact that BTN&#039;s call does look a lot like a draw, so he&#039;ll improve to a 2nd best hand that&#039;ll pay you off if you hit fairly often.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nice! I&#8217;ve got 2 questions though:</p>
<p>1. Why did you call preflop? I&#8217;m not thinking that it is bad, but not having the BTN is quite a big disadvantage here imo, cause it&#8217;s quite likely the player on the BTN is gonna call and take away your position or he could also SQZ pretty often here (same is true for the blinds). So in general I think it is a pretty thin call pf, but I guess under some circumstances it&#8217;s fine. You do rely heavily on implied odds though imo, cause you won&#8217;t be able to steal the pot as often as you might on the BTN.</p>
<p>2. If UTG can fold an overpair a shove is probably fine, cause the BTN probably wouldn&#8217;t flat a big hand very often on the flop. However calling and hoping to keep the BTN in the hand probably has some advantages too, especially given the fact that BTN&#8217;s call does look a lot like a draw, so he&#8217;ll improve to a 2nd best hand that&#8217;ll pay you off if you hit fairly often.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
