I don't think I've been playing these correctly

[QTip]

A couple of situations.

Let's say you hold Q /images/graemlins/heart.gifJ /images/graemlins/heart.gif

You limp UTG+1, folded to the CO who limps, sb folds, bb checks.

Flop: T /images/graemlins/heart.gif9 /images/graemlins/heart.gif3 /images/graemlins/club.gif

BB checks, you bet, CO calls, bb folds

Turn: 4 /images/graemlins/spade.gif

you bet, co calls

Turn 2 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif

You ? - how many are betting? Does a read matter that much to you?

Now

Change your hand to the A /images/graemlins/heart.gifQ /images/graemlins/heart.gif

Same action except you raise PF, CO cold calls, BB calls and there are now 3 more sb in the pot.

Same cards and action

on the river, you ?

Let's say you checks and CO bets. How many are calling? Does a read matter that much to you?


I think I'm playing scenario 1 correctly most the time. However, I think I'm check/folding the river WAY too often in the 2nd scenario.

[jskills]

In hand #1, I'm not sure I even bet the turn. Do you no matter what? I assume you meant the 2 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif fell on the river? I see myself check / folding a river like that, I have nothing expect Queen high. Weak / tight?

The second scenario plays out the same way for me. And yes, I think I check fold on the river as well. Someone with a lousy pair of tens is going to beat you. Do you advocate check calling?

[Colonel Kataffy]

[ QUOTE ]

In hand #1, I'm not sure I even bet the turn. Do you no matter what? I assume you meant the 2 fell on the river? I see myself check / folding a river like that, I have nothing expect Queen high. Weak / tight?

The second scenario plays out the same way for me. And yes, I think I check fold on the river as well. Someone with a lousy pair of tens is going to beat you. Do you advocate check calling?


[/ QUOTE ]

In the first scenario, I would think the turn would be a text book semi-bluff.

In the second, I think bet/folding would be better than check/calling. Though, check/folding might be best.

[McGahee]

I would check the turn in Hand #1 as well and check/fold river.

Hand #2 - I hate A high OOP on the river. I really don't like any of my options.

[SeaEagle]

In the first hand, I'm betting most of the time. Last fall, this was a specific area that I worked on (river bluffing with no-showdown-value hands). There were some psychological barriers I had to overcome, since the bluff is unsuccessful a lot (actually, most) of the time, but it's still a highly profitable play if used correctly. This appears to be an ideal spot and I think you're folding out a better hand way more than the 20% you need.

In the second hand, check/call is my preferred plan. With such a coordinated hand, you're going to get bluffed at with a busted draw quite often. PFA reads are important here.

[SeaEagle]

[ QUOTE ]
In the second, I think bet/folding would be better than check/calling. Though, check/folding might be best.

[/ QUOTE ]
I really don't like bet/folding here. What worse hand is calling you? What better hand are you folding out? Check/folding is OK, although with such a coordinated board and no aggression by villian, I think you're ahead a lot of the time.

[Colonel Kataffy]

[ QUOTE ]

I really don't like bet/folding here. What worse hand is calling you? What better hand are you folding out? Check/folding is OK, although with such a coordinated board and no aggression by villian, I think you're ahead a lot of the time.


[/ QUOTE ]

Its not so much that a worse hand is going to call, its that a worse hand is going to bet if you check. And some broken draws that are ahead of you may fold. I think against most opponents check/folding is best, but if he would try to pick up the pot with a bet, but fold a weak hand, then I don't think checking is right.

[SeaEagle]

[ QUOTE ]
Its not so much that a worse hand is going to call, its that a worse hand is going to bet if you check.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is why you need to check/call here a lot. Check/calling is never worse than bet/folding, assuming no worse hands are calling you. But in many cases, check/calling saves you a bet because there's a lot of better hands that will call a bet but are just going to check behind you to the showdown.

[ QUOTE ]
And some broken draws that are ahead of you may fold.

[/ QUOTE ]
I could see bet/folding if you had some fold equity, but I'm having a hard time seeing it. What broken draws are ahead of you?

[thejameser]

reads would help me, especially on #2. in #1 i would bet out the flop, i could think about checking the flop with the intention of raising for value. if it gets checked through i am drawing for free but missing bets if i hit my big draw. i check/call that turn and fold weakly on the river unless i have a read on CO that would lead me to believe in the rare instance that Q high is good. #2 i bet, bet, check/call DEPENDING ON OPPONENT. i can't give a solid answer withouth stats. if i revert to game theory in #2 i take the bet, bet, check/call line. i guess, subject to change when my stupid answers are ripped apart. /images/graemlins/crazy.gif

[Colonel Kataffy]

When I said broken draws, I was thinking along the lines of overcards or flush draw witha small pair. Your right though, thats not the case here.

Bet/folding in order to use fold equity is something i've been playing around with though in my mind. Do you think this could be a reasonable play if you thought there was a good chance your opponet had two overs (and you had two smaller cards like a JT or 9T). Say he raised pre flop and the board is all small cards?

[SeaEagle]

[ QUOTE ]
Bet/folding in order to use fold equity is something i've been playing around with though in my mind. Do you think this could be a reasonable play if you thought there was a good chance your opponet had two overs (and you had two smaller cards like a JT or 9T)

[/ QUOTE ]
This is exactly why I recommended bet/folding in hand 1 and check/calling in hand 2 (and why, I assume, qtip posed these two specific hands).

[SmileyEH]

I think my default in the first one would be to bet especially if the player you are against has agg. numbers like 0.5 0.5 3 (ie; he chases a lot of draws and gives up on the river). The second one is a pretty standard check/call I think unless you're up against a tight passive.

-SmileyEH

[Dan Rutter]

I think Hand 1 is an easy bet, and fold to a raise. You likely will only be able to win the hand with a bluff, unless Q high is good. In Hand 2 this should be a check/call hoping that if your opponent bets, he is betting out on as bluff after a missed draw. Betting out on the river in Hand 2 is bad because you will be called by any hand that beats you, and any hand you beat will fold. Maybe if you bet you could get an unlikely AK to fold, thats it. By check/calling you will be able to pick off some bluffs when your opponent is drawing and misses, and your AQ high is good.

[Entity]

#1 is an easy bet against some and an easy checkfold against others. If he's got a WtSD of around 35 or less I'd bet.

I'm calling expecting to lose in #2 unless opponent is super passive.

Rob

[Moozh]

Come on guys, grow some balls. Even at 2/4 you'll get people to fold their overcards on the turn to a single bet. As it is, your hand is so strong that you don't really mind a call or a re-raise all that much anyway. I think the turn bet is easy.

The river depends on the opponent, but if they call the turn, usually they're calling the river so I'll check and fold. If you think they're the type of player to call only on a draw, you have another bet (with the first hand).

Edit: as for the difference betweent the two hands, I like betting more on the river on the first one because the subsequent calls behind you aren't nearly as threatening (and your limp makes it more believable that you actually hit that rag board). On the second, I'd probably check as you've shown strength the whole way and your opponent still hasn't folded. Since he must know you have a good hand, he probably has at least a pair to be calling that far, and if he has a draw, betting on the river is wrong. If you want a showdown, you need to check-call.

[Two_Slick]

[ QUOTE ]
I think my default in the first one would be to bet especially if the player you are against has agg. numbers like 0.5 0.5 3 (ie; he chases a lot of draws and gives up on the river). The second one is a pretty standard check/call I think unless you're up against a tight passive.

-SmileyEH

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree... river bet the first hand only if you put your opponent on a broken draw and he may fold an A or K high. 2nd hand I check/fold. I think betting out the river otherwise is -EV long term (unless against a maniac then I check call either hand).

[Azhrarn]

[ QUOTE ]
In the first hand, I'm betting most of the time. Last fall, this was a specific area that I worked on (river bluffing with no-showdown-value hands). There were some psychological barriers I had to overcome, since the bluff is unsuccessful a lot (actually, most) of the time, but it's still a highly profitable play if used correctly.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh man, I'm glad to hear someone else admit to this. This is something I know I need to do more, because I almost never do it, but I haven't been improving. It's hard to find the right spots while I'm playing, because my brain keeps convincing me it will fail, that it's a waste of time and money. Stupid brain...

[jgorham]

Reads are very very valuable in these situations. Many players will raise you in position on the flop with top or second pair. Against these players, the odds that they are on a draw improve on the river (so bet #1, check call #2).

Against calling stations, or super passive players, I think both hands are checkfolds (if you are ahead in hand 2, they often won't bet).

Try to figure out a hand range the player could be calling with. Against a lot of the aggressive players you find yourself up against, this can be an effective method - especially in hands like these.

[The Dude]

In the first hand I'm betting the turn and river every time, regaldless of the opponent. I don't care how tight a player is, there are hands he's calling a bet on the flop with that he's folding the turn with. And since you have so many outs, you only need him to fold once in a blue moon to make betting more profitable than checking.

Likewise on the river. Q high has no showdown value here, and there are plenty of A high and K high hands he'll fold to a bet on. Also, betting will sometimes win you a pot that your opponent would have bluffed at had you checked.

With AQ, I'm usually going to be checking the river, planning on folding to some opponents and calling against those who are likely to bluff.

[bobbyi]

Checking the river in hand 1 against an unknown is ridiculous. You need to know the opponent reasonably well before you can start making cute plays to try to save a single bet that likely cost you the pot.

[Willluck]

in the first one I may just bet that river do push ax off.
in hand 2 that is probably a check/call, you have much more SD value.