switch0723 said:
fish are so unbelievably good at value betting bottom pair when it looks like their hand makes no sense unless they are bluffing
Played a guy like that 2 days ago i think. When the action went me cbet him call, turn c/c, he would bet almost every single hand he had on the river, regardless of whether it was bottom pair, total air, nuts, middle pair, etc. It's easy to play against (unless they run hot) but in order to play correctly against it you end up getting absolutely owned in some spots by A high calls against bottom pair, etc.
I said something about this earlier - but i think you can totally try to overread a fish. Back in the day i used to spew more postflop than i should have, mainly because i didnt' give ppl enough credit for a hand. But as you get better and understand why x line is best in y situation, i think it is too easy to start applying some of that logic to poorer player's line, when oftentimes all that is really happening is a player is just spazzing out coz they suck at poker. When i started HU, since i still made some of these brainless spewy plays myself, it was alot easier to give "credit" for somebody just spazzing out/taking a horrific line, whereas now i probably give more credit than is due because i find it hard to believe how players could make such awful plays - such as bluffing before river w/ no
equity vs a calling range, or bluffing in horrible spots where they shouldn't expect me to fold, hence i should be folding since they should not be bluffing, but they are bluffing anyways coz they are horrible. It's perfectly good logic to assign to good players, who rarely spaz out, but not good vs bad players who just do such stupid things that make no sense.
