andyfox
08-23-2005, 02:54 PM
On the flop, which was 9 /images/graemlins/spade.gif6 /images/graemlins/spade.gif3 /images/graemlins/spade.gif, we have T-9o (no spades). We check the flop. There is no chance of the flop being checked around, since the 3rd player will always bet when checked to.
This is what happened. The 3rd player was indeed checked to and indeed bet. While I follow the author's logic in check-calling, it seems to me that all of it is trumped by the opportunity to take down the pot right then and there and to put pressure on the 3rd man. We have a vulnerable top pair and no spade on an all spade flop. Why allow the 3rd man to see a cheap turn card? And since the bettor would have bet with anything, isn't there a much better chance than normal that he will fold to a check-raise?
Also, what were the winner's hole cards? There are two six of spades in the hand as posted.
Thanks.
This is what happened. The 3rd player was indeed checked to and indeed bet. While I follow the author's logic in check-calling, it seems to me that all of it is trumped by the opportunity to take down the pot right then and there and to put pressure on the 3rd man. We have a vulnerable top pair and no spade on an all spade flop. Why allow the 3rd man to see a cheap turn card? And since the bettor would have bet with anything, isn't there a much better chance than normal that he will fold to a check-raise?
Also, what were the winner's hole cards? There are two six of spades in the hand as posted.
Thanks.