04-28-2002, 01:52 PM
IMO at lot of hold'em players play to aggressive at the river;
they bet with "only" top pair, have also seen players raise with one pair at the river.
From my experience, checking at the river is in many situations more profitable:
Say you start with AK and raise before the flop.
Flop comes: A-9-3 and you bet.
Turn comes: 5 and you bet.
Before the river there is one caller left, and you are first to act:
River is: 10
You check, and very often the caller now bet (and you call)
A lot of times the other player bet at the end with nothing or a week hand.
You win the pot, but the point is that if you had bet, the other player had fold.
So you win one extra bet by checking in the end, or in other situations you save one, when the other player actually beat you.
Any opinions?
they bet with "only" top pair, have also seen players raise with one pair at the river.
From my experience, checking at the river is in many situations more profitable:
Say you start with AK and raise before the flop.
Flop comes: A-9-3 and you bet.
Turn comes: 5 and you bet.
Before the river there is one caller left, and you are first to act:
River is: 10
You check, and very often the caller now bet (and you call)
A lot of times the other player bet at the end with nothing or a week hand.
You win the pot, but the point is that if you had bet, the other player had fold.
So you win one extra bet by checking in the end, or in other situations you save one, when the other player actually beat you.
Any opinions?