Going with your read and being wrong

[sourbeaver]

Let's say you're HU against someone who you read as having AQ or AK.

You : A /images/graemlins/diamond.gif J /images/graemlins/diamond.gif

Flop : 4 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif A /images/graemlins/spade.gif 5 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif

What's your line ?

How do you feel about your play (assuming you take the line you just thought about) if it turns out he had 55 ?

Just wondering if you guys reconsider the quality of your line when it turns out your read was wrong.


My line : called a small bet on flop. Turned 2-pair, raised his turn bet all-in, rivered the flush. He had a set.

[etgryphon]

Well I think you can only do the best that you can...

The thing that I'm wondering is if you "knew" that he had AK or AQ why the raise all in to his bet on the turn? I think a moderate raise here would be sufficent. You want to entice him to continue, but by going all in you are only going to be called by the better hand (which happened) and you got lucky (which saved your butt).

So I don't think you made the best use of your read and the play i preposed above would have been best for both cases. 1) when you are ahead of your read hands, or 2) when your behind the set.

-Gryph

[sourbeaver]

Not enough left to raise less .. He was going to call that all-in with AK, no doubt, this is Party 25 after all (hasn't changed much since I played there, which is good for my experiment).

[fathertime]

I'd raise his flop bet hard and be happy if I ended up all in on the flop.

Sets are so good because they are so well disguised. And so I don't fret if I put someone on a weaker hand than a set.