flair1239
09-02-2005, 11:17 AM
Hero: A /images/graemlins/spade.gif 6 /images/graemlins/spade.gif in the CO
Villian: 24/5/1.4; basic sort of player. Kind of straightforward. Plays his strong hands aggressively. Can get kind of tricky... but only when he has the goods. Knows a few plays. Can laydown a marginal hand, but likes calling down... nothing truly awful though.
Absolute 5/10
PF: Folded to villian in MP3 who limps, Hero raises.
Flop: J /images/graemlins/spade.gif 7 /images/graemlins/heart.gif 6 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif
Villian checks, hero bets
Turn: (3.5BB) 4 /images/graemlins/heart.gif
Villian checks, hero bets
I was going to leave off the action, but really this play seems automatic.
What I am wondering here though is this. The villian is capable of a checkraise. When he does checkraise, I would say 95% (for this particular player) it will be with a better hand. When he does I will only be getting about 6.5-1 to call. Meaning all of my 5 "outs" would have to be good, and I would somehow need to collect 2 bets on the river.
The other problem as I see it is that with this type of player, based on the pre-flop action, he is probably calling down with most hands better than mine. In which case I am essentially paying him off at this point.
But even with the pot this small, he only needs to laydown a little under 25% of the time for the turn bet to be profitable by itself. Also Many times I am ahead, but he is drawing to 6 outs (although often he is only drawing to (3) as I have him reverse dominated quite a few times).
As I said The decision to bet seems straightforward kind of a combination: semi-bluff, value bet, cheap showdown play.
However, with a player like this who is difficult to read because of his passiveness in the face of a PFR, I think the decision could be a little bit closer than it appears. But I am not sure... hence this post... so a boring hand that for some reason interests me.
SO does anyone want to play devils advocate and make a case for a check?
Bonus question: On this board what would be a player type you would consider checking against.
Villian: 24/5/1.4; basic sort of player. Kind of straightforward. Plays his strong hands aggressively. Can get kind of tricky... but only when he has the goods. Knows a few plays. Can laydown a marginal hand, but likes calling down... nothing truly awful though.
Absolute 5/10
PF: Folded to villian in MP3 who limps, Hero raises.
Flop: J /images/graemlins/spade.gif 7 /images/graemlins/heart.gif 6 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif
Villian checks, hero bets
Turn: (3.5BB) 4 /images/graemlins/heart.gif
Villian checks, hero bets
I was going to leave off the action, but really this play seems automatic.
What I am wondering here though is this. The villian is capable of a checkraise. When he does checkraise, I would say 95% (for this particular player) it will be with a better hand. When he does I will only be getting about 6.5-1 to call. Meaning all of my 5 "outs" would have to be good, and I would somehow need to collect 2 bets on the river.
The other problem as I see it is that with this type of player, based on the pre-flop action, he is probably calling down with most hands better than mine. In which case I am essentially paying him off at this point.
But even with the pot this small, he only needs to laydown a little under 25% of the time for the turn bet to be profitable by itself. Also Many times I am ahead, but he is drawing to 6 outs (although often he is only drawing to (3) as I have him reverse dominated quite a few times).
As I said The decision to bet seems straightforward kind of a combination: semi-bluff, value bet, cheap showdown play.
However, with a player like this who is difficult to read because of his passiveness in the face of a PFR, I think the decision could be a little bit closer than it appears. But I am not sure... hence this post... so a boring hand that for some reason interests me.
SO does anyone want to play devils advocate and make a case for a check?
Bonus question: On this board what would be a player type you would consider checking against.