Good job me?

[krishanleong]

Party Poker 5/10 Hold'em (6 max, 5 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

Preflop: Hero is SB with A/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, Q/images/graemlins/diamond.gif.
<font color="#CC3333">UTG raises</font>, MP calls, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Hero 3-bets</font>, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, UTG calls, MP calls.

Flop: (10 SB) 2/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 7/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, T/images/graemlins/diamond.gif <font color="#0000FF">(3 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">Hero bets</font>, UTG calls, <font color="#CC3333">MP raises</font>, Hero calls, UTG calls.

Turn: (8 BB) K/images/graemlins/diamond.gif <font color="#0000FF">(3 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">Hero bets</font>, UTG folds, <font color="#CC3333">MP raises</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Hero 3-bets</font>, <font color="#CC3333">MP caps</font>, Hero calls.

River: (16 BB) A/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
Hero checks, <font color="#CC3333">MP bets</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises</font>, MP calls.

Final Pot: 20 BB

No reads. I think there are decisions to be made on the flop and river. I think leading the turn is correct because of the player in the middle.

Krishan

[mungpo]

I would perfer to bet the river against an unknown, but I can see it going either way. Looks good to me.

[Surfbullet]

I like the flop, you don't always have to ram-jam a nut flush draw, you disguise your hand a bit and get to 3-bet when you represent AK on the turn.

The river C/R is awesome. The only possible semibluff hand on the turn (QJ) just got there, and anything villain capped for value on the turn he'll bet again on the river. If you lead into him it's very unlikely that he'll raise, especially since the K/images/graemlins/diamond.gif is on the board so the closest hand he can have is the Q high flush.

Surf

[BreakEvenPlayer]

Hmm... I'm not so sure about the river checkraise. I like checkraising the river when I am the last one showing aggression on the turn. When villain caps here I think there is a pretty good chance he has a set and you should bet out hoping to 3bet.

Everything else is perfect.

[Isura]

[ QUOTE ]
I think leading the turn is correct because of the player in the middle.

[/ QUOTE ]

And you get to bet/3bet which kicks ass. I like the whole hand.

[Alobar]

I prolly lead the river. I think with the amount of action he is giving you on the turn, there is a very good chance he has a set, and the way youve played your hand looks like AK, so you have a good chance to bet/3 bet. Where a c/r prolly just scares him into calling.

[MAxx]

everything looks standard, or correct, till the river where it looks like a tuff decision.

we dont have any reads really, and it would look like villain has either a set or a smaller flush. in this situation, i would prefer to bet to 3bet for same reasons alobar said.

[EvanJC]

i like the flop and the river. nh.

[krishanleong]

[ QUOTE ]
I prolly lead the river. I think with the amount of action he is giving you on the turn, there is a very good chance he has a set, and the way youve played your hand looks like AK, so you have a good chance to bet/3 bet. Where a c/r prolly just scares him into calling.

[/ QUOTE ]

He had a set. I think leading just get's a call much more often than a raise. He capped the turn and has initiative. I considered a lead. I'll keep thinking about it. Thanks,

Krishan

[krishanleong]

[ QUOTE ]
Hmm... I'm not so sure about the river checkraise. I like checkraising the river when I am the last one showing aggression on the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why would you try a checkraise when you have initiave. It seems like thats a good way to miss river bets. Can you post an example?

Krishan

[krishanleong]

More thoughts.

The EV of leading is either 1 bet or 3-bets.

The EV of check-raising is 2 BB.

Assuming the cr success 100% it's worth 2 BB.

Leading the river is better if you get raised more than 66%. 1/3 you make 1 BB, 2/3 you make 2 BB for a total of .33 +1.66 = 2.

So do you think a set raises the river here 66% of the time? I'd say it's closer to 30%. But at this point is really becomes a judgement call. This also ignores the smaller flush possibility.

Krishan

[Guy McSucker]

[ QUOTE ]


Assuming the cr success 100% it's worth 2 BB.

Leading the river is better if you get raised more than 66%. 1/3 you make 1 BB, 2/3 you make 2 BB for a total of .33 +1.66 = 2.


[/ QUOTE ]

Eh?

Surely leading is better if the opponent raises &gt; 50%: at exactly 50%, half the time you win one bet, half the time you win 3, for an average of 2 bets. Of course this ignores the chance he folds to the 3-bet, but that can be offset against the chance he checks through when you attempt a check-raise, so I think 50% is the number we're looking for.

Anyway, the whole point of a river lead in a hand like this is that it freezes people up. That's why we get to bet-fold the river when we have AK and no flush, for instance. I think even a set is going to call a river bet more often than raising, as Krishan says. So I like the check-raise.

The other decision is the flop. To 3-bet or not to 3-bet? If the guy in the middle is the sort who won't lay down on the flop having already called one bet, then a 3-bet is a good plan with all that equity. If there's even a small chance he folds, I like the call.

Guy.

[krishanleong]

[ QUOTE ]

Surely leading is better if the opponent raises &gt; 50%: at exactly 50%, half the time you win one bet, half the time you win 3, for an average of 2 bets. Of course this ignores the chance he folds to the 3-bet, but that can be offset against the chance he checks through when you attempt a check-raise, so I think 50% is the number we're looking for.


[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, this is right. I suck. 2/3 of 3 is closer to 2 than 1.66.

[ QUOTE ]
Anyway, the whole point of a river lead in a hand like this is that it freezes people up. That's why we get to bet-fold the river when we have AK and no flush, for instance.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with this.

Krishan

[ISF]

I dont think you can ignore the finite probability that he will check behind here with some sort of KQd or two pair hand.
Even if this only happens one time in ten it changes the break even point to him raising 40% of the time.

[Chris Daddy Cool]

for the most part i think people are overestimating the amount of times you will be able to 3-bet the river if you lead as many (even with a set) will be scared into calling a river lead after the turn action. however, he will always bet this river and you will always be able to checkraise him.

[MAxx]

people maybe underestimating the occurance of a smaller flush as well......or

underestimating a river checkbehind...or

underestimating a villain fold to a cr... or

underestimating how close a decision this is...

but I like the thought behind either decision.

[krishanleong]

people maybe underestimating the occurance of a smaller flush as well......or

5%, I don't think flush over flush is common. A set in my mind is far more likely. Although I assume baysian would show a flush as a higher %.

underestimating a river checkbehind...or

I think this is 7%. Without a read I put him on a good hand. You normal 5/10er doesn't cap the turn for a free showdown.

underestimating a villain fold to a cr... or

This is about 3%. I think he's likely to check behind with many of the hands he'll fold to a cr.

underestimating how close a decision this is...
/images/graemlins/smile.gif

but I like the thought behind either decision.

Krishan