Comments on: Of Course I Snap-Call https://www.thinkingpoker.net/2010/03/of-course-i-snap-call/ 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. Wed, 10 Mar 2010 01:09:32 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=7.0 By: greylocks https://www.thinkingpoker.net/2010/03/of-course-i-snap-call/#comment-4231 Wed, 10 Mar 2010 01:09:32 +0000 http://www.thinkingpoker.net/?p=4399#comment-4231 AK would be pretty much the entire range I’d put many (but not even close to all) players on here, even at these stakes.

CO’s actions are remarkably consistent with how a lot of players would play AK, especially AKo, in a spot like this.

]]> By: foucault https://www.thinkingpoker.net/2010/03/of-course-i-snap-call/#comment-4230 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 17:18:39 +0000 http://www.thinkingpoker.net/?p=4399#comment-4230 In reply to Rob.

My thinking exactly.

]]> By: Rob https://www.thinkingpoker.net/2010/03/of-course-i-snap-call/#comment-4226 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 15:15:23 +0000 http://www.thinkingpoker.net/?p=4399#comment-4226 Was he trying to imply that he would flat AA/KK/QQ/AK here often enough to induce a squeeze behind him so he could then re-shove? I agree that is a stretch. He may try that with AA, but the other 3 of those hands would be just plain stupid. There is plenty more in his range. Easy enough call. It’s always fun to get berated for being right…

]]>