<?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: How to Spot a Level 3 Thinker	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.thinkingpoker.net/2010/04/how-to-spot-a-level-3-thinker/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.thinkingpoker.net/2010/04/how-to-spot-a-level-3-thinker/</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>Sat, 10 Apr 2010 19:30:02 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=7.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Chris M		</title>
		<link>https://www.thinkingpoker.net/2010/04/how-to-spot-a-level-3-thinker/#comment-4393</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Chris M]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Apr 2010 23:29:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thinkingpoker.net/?p=4479#comment-4393</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.thinkingpoker.net/2010/04/how-to-spot-a-level-3-thinker/#comment-4392&quot;&gt;Chris M&lt;/a&gt;.

haha okay I should have finished the article, Level 3 addresses this quite well :-P]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://www.thinkingpoker.net/2010/04/how-to-spot-a-level-3-thinker/#comment-4392">Chris M</a>.</p>
<p>haha okay I should have finished the article, Level 3 addresses this quite well 😛</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Chris M		</title>
		<link>https://www.thinkingpoker.net/2010/04/how-to-spot-a-level-3-thinker/#comment-4392</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Chris M]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Apr 2010 23:25:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thinkingpoker.net/?p=4479#comment-4392</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I actually have a question about Example #2 as I think it&#039;s somewhat interesting.

Once villain checks back a 754 board we assume he rarely has a hand stronger than 7x.  So, if we are &#039;Player A&#039; OOP, this seems like a pretty good spot to bet turn / river oop.

I think the problem will be if Player B doesn&#039;t think Player A can value-bet thinly, that his river range is going to be polarized to 6x or air, making it an easy call.

However, this seems like a pretty solid value line for TT / JJ from Player A, and as is such, a pretty decent spot to bluff once Player B &#039;caps&#039; his flop range.

I think checking back QQ here to induce a 2 street bluff is pretty good by Player B - but I also don&#039;t think Player A&#039;s bluff is as &#039;hopeless&#039; as you make it out to be.  How many people are really checking back hands stronger than say A7 on this board?

Maybe in a FR game, certainly not in any decently aggro 6-max or HU game though.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I actually have a question about Example #2 as I think it&#8217;s somewhat interesting.</p>
<p>Once villain checks back a 754 board we assume he rarely has a hand stronger than 7x.  So, if we are &#8216;Player A&#8217; OOP, this seems like a pretty good spot to bet turn / river oop.</p>
<p>I think the problem will be if Player B doesn&#8217;t think Player A can value-bet thinly, that his river range is going to be polarized to 6x or air, making it an easy call.</p>
<p>However, this seems like a pretty solid value line for TT / JJ from Player A, and as is such, a pretty decent spot to bluff once Player B &#8216;caps&#8217; his flop range.</p>
<p>I think checking back QQ here to induce a 2 street bluff is pretty good by Player B &#8211; but I also don&#8217;t think Player A&#8217;s bluff is as &#8216;hopeless&#8217; as you make it out to be.  How many people are really checking back hands stronger than say A7 on this board?</p>
<p>Maybe in a FR game, certainly not in any decently aggro 6-max or HU game though.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Chris M		</title>
		<link>https://www.thinkingpoker.net/2010/04/how-to-spot-a-level-3-thinker/#comment-4391</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Chris M]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Apr 2010 23:08:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thinkingpoker.net/?p=4479#comment-4391</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[ty for going back to the og converter]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>ty for going back to the og converter</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: smizmiatch		</title>
		<link>https://www.thinkingpoker.net/2010/04/how-to-spot-a-level-3-thinker/#comment-4380</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[smizmiatch]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 04 Apr 2010 18:53:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thinkingpoker.net/?p=4479#comment-4380</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Good article! Thanks for the analysis of situations that may indicate how a player is thinking. 
It seems to me that good note-taking is the best way to get in your opponents&#039; heads and then deduce how they&#039;re approaching the game.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good article! Thanks for the analysis of situations that may indicate how a player is thinking.<br />
It seems to me that good note-taking is the best way to get in your opponents&#8217; heads and then deduce how they&#8217;re approaching the game.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
