AA party 2/4

[emil3000]

I have been playing slightly laggy, nothing really crazy, but quite a bit of openraising. I reraised villains button raise from BB, he folded and remarked that he didn't like having another sLAA at the table. So apparently he considers himself SLAA, but he seems quite solid to me by 6max standards. He also said he has 400 hands on me, so he uses pokertracker. So far he has shown a bit of resistance to my raises, but it has been of the passive kind.

Party Poker No-Limit Hold'em, $ BB (6 max, 5 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

Button ($674.94)
SB ($988.45)
BB ($400)
Hero ($492.90)
MP ($404.20)

Preflop: Hero is UTG with A/images/graemlins/heart.gif, A/images/graemlins/club.gif. SB posts a blind of $2.
<font color="#CC3333">Hero raises to $15</font>, <font color="#666666">2 folds</font>, SB (poster) calls $13, BB calls $11.

Flop: ($45) J/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 4/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, 9/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="#0000FF">(3 players)</font>
SB checks, BB checks, <font color="#CC3333">Hero bets $40</font>, SB calls $40, BB folds.

Turn: ($125) 9/images/graemlins/heart.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
SB checks, <font color="#CC3333">Hero bets $100</font>, <font color="#CC3333">SB, hesitates a good while then raises to $450</font>.
Hero?

[xorbie]

Check behind, call river.

[emil3000]

[ QUOTE ]
Check behind, call river.

[/ QUOTE ]
Thought about checking behind, and I do it a lot. All the draws convinced me to bet. In my mind it's pretty close, no?

[j0wlev]

Looks like he wants to win the pot on the turn, I put him on a J.

Call the raise, and see his river play. I'm probably calling a moderate river bet.

[emil3000]

[ QUOTE ]
Looks like he wants to win the pot on the turn, I put him on a J.

Call the raise, and see his river play. I'm probably calling a moderate river bet.

[/ QUOTE ]
I am allin if I call the turn.

[j0wlev]

Ah, did not notice that.

Would a 9 really try to push you off your hand? There seems to be no value in this raise of his.

[wtfsvi]

You can avoid this by checking behind on the turn. I really don't think it's close, that's the right move against an aggressive oponent. Would be close if the turn was the 2 /images/graemlins/club.gif.

As it is you are in a tough spot, but this reeks of a draw to me. Passive on the flop, hoping for an overcall, and then aggressive on the turn when you refuse to give him a free card and he gets a good scarecard. I'd call. I think most T/sL-A's will lead this turn if they have a 9. And the timing issue can fall out both ways.

[emil3000]

[ QUOTE ]
You can avoid this by checking behind on the turn. I really don't think it's close, that's the right move against an aggressive oponent. Would be close if the turn was the 2 /images/graemlins/club.gif.

As it is you are in a tough spot, but this reeks of a draw to me. Passive on the flop, hoping for an overcall, and then aggressive on the turn when you refuse to give him a free card and he gets a good scarecard. I'd call. I think most T/sL-A's will lead this turn if they have a 9. And the timing issue can fall out both ways.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this board is obsessed with checking behind on turns. If you don't bet an overpair on this turn, what do you bet? I think it's not in the least close if the turn didn't pair the board. Board pairing makes it a bit more WA/WB, but really, protecting my hand is very important on this board. How profitable are you to play draws against when you check behind on this board?

Pot control is good and all, but it isn't the almighty grail.

[foldem]

I agree that betting the turn here is best with a draw heavy board. Many people like to check behind on the turn not because they are way ahead or way behind but because they want to avoid making a difficult decision if they are raised. If you are only willing to bet the turn with the near nuts it becomes pretty easy for people to know where you are at.

As far as this hand goes if my read says he is a nit, I fold. If he is an agressive player than I push.

[Bukem_]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Check behind, call river.

[/ QUOTE ]
Thought about checking behind, and I do it a lot. All the draws convinced me to bet. In my mind it's pretty close, no?

[/ QUOTE ]

It's pretty close, but once you bet the turn I believe its correct to fold.

[wtfsvi]

I bet the turn if the turn is the 2 /images/graemlins/club.gif, but I'm not sure if everyone agrees.

Betting the turn when the 9 pairs is a risky proposition. A solid player will just fold his draw most of the time when you bet, but you'll get him bluff very often when he misses the river and you checked behind on the turn. And when he doesn't fold the draw, he probably gets aggressive and forces you to make a tough decision.

This way, it's not even certain betting the turn is best if he does have a draw. Add in the times he has you beat and the times he has a made hand that will fold to a turn bet but call a river bet after the turn got checked through, and checking should be clearly superior.

[xorbie]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Check behind, call river.

[/ QUOTE ]
Thought about checking behind, and I do it a lot. All the draws convinced me to bet. In my mind it's pretty close, no?

[/ QUOTE ]

What draws? There's a flush draw, that's about it, unless this guy is calling raises with QT or T8. The fact that the board paired means anyone with a J only has two outs, so you don't even have to worry about some sort of two pair on the river. On top of that, this guy is lag and views you as lag. He'll bet the river often with missed draws to get you to fold A high, and he might also make a big move on this turn with or without a 9.

[emil3000]

I called. He had QJ, and I won. In my opinion, this betting pattern doesn't look like a full house. It's sorta odd for a 9 as well, but that was what I was mostly worrying about. The timing issue weighted my decision a bit, and also the fact that I felt like he wanted to take a stand against me made me call.

I am not sure if I am right or not wtih regards to betting the turn but consider this: if you call a slightly less than pot sized bet on the flop with a flush draw that is 2:1 to get there, and you get to see the river for free, that's a good gamble for you. Factor in the implied odds of the overpair calling a bet on the end, and you have a really nice situation. I don't like giving nice situations to my opponents. If they want to draw, it's gonna cost them. There are certainly times to check behind, but you have to at least give serious consideration to betting on this board. And yes, people do call raises with T8 and QT, so a straight draw is possible.

[wtfsvi]

If he will bet when he doesn't hit the flush as well as when he hits it, it's not a good gamble for him. If he won't bluff when he misses, I agree with betting the turn.

[BobboFitos]

[ QUOTE ]
Check behind, call river.

[/ QUOTE ]
im pretty late on this thread, noticed it from the digest, but this isn't a good time for pot control


whether to call the c/r is completely opponent dependant, but given it's 5handed and it's party calling is fine.

[wtfsvi]

Wow. Why?

Rock my world bobbo.

[xorbie]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Check behind, call river.

[/ QUOTE ]
im pretty late on this thread, noticed it from the digest, but this isn't a good time for pot control


whether to call the c/r is completely opponent dependant, but given it's 5handed and it's party calling is fine.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I totally agree with you generally. But if I don't know an opponent well enough to be comfortable getting all in here (and I often am), I'm checking behind this turn almost always. That doesn't mean I'm not raising the river a lot, but I'm checking behind here often.

[BobboFitos]

[ QUOTE ]
Wow. Why?

Rock my world bobbo.

[/ QUOTE ]

wtf! svi, you rock my world.

[ QUOTE ]
but this isn't a good time for pot contro

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok -

it breaks down like this. This is a moderate to heavy drawing flop. there are alot of possibilities for villain to take one off; the pot bet, as well, is perfect. (40 close enough to 45)

If it was rainbow you could make a clearer case for a turn check, but in this spot, hand protection + value comes to the core. 5handed turning every hand thats not top set into bluffcatchers and small pot hands is only effective if you're in a drunk LAG game where people throw barrells of money at you.

Villain claims he's "sLAA," (by the way, never good to be at a table full of people using PT acronyms, i think) so he could be taking one off with a wide range of hands.

Some hands we're not too concerned with that villain may think are stronger on the flop: KQ, KT, A9, A4, 87 pretyt unlikely any of those check call that big a bet, but KQ may think overs are live and KT may think king is live, A9 or A4 may think you'll shut down with anything that cant beat tp. fine. it would take a real fish to check call 78 there but while establishing equities against always nice considering those types of hands.

others which have considerable more equity; Qt, t8, XX /images/graemlins/spade.gif

hands which on the flop villain may feel are even money or even ahead: Ax/images/graemlins/spade.gif QT/images/graemlins/spade.gif, KT/images/graemlins/spade.gif,A4/images/graemlins/spade.gif (big draw), etc.

few hands we're losing to on flop: J9, 99, 44. JJ LIKELY (although not always, 5handed i'd assume in a slightly overaggro game) makes itself known pf. J4 and 94 i dont consider.

hands which villain may think are best but really arent: AJ, Jx for that matter, underpair, taking a flier with a hand like A9 etc.

Ok, great. so we get to the turn and villain checks. this same betting rhythmn probably happens to everyone here thousands of times. (or for those who play under a thousand hands a day or week or whatnot, hundreds of times)

What we know is we raised preflop, he called, one other guy called. We potted a draw heavy board when checked to us, and villain called. ~abstrating a read, like villain always leads with sets, or always checkraises top pair, or whatnot, it's very tough to eliminate hands~ we can eliminate hands like A5/images/graemlins/diamond.gif or things like that which have no business being in the hand.

But on the turn, he checks again, alot of the time the PFR has nothing. oftentimes the pfr will check here with AK or worse or maybe better, like AJ (i'd bet AJ here, too) and call a bet on the end, and with worse hands, fold to a bet on the end. so we see that dance so to speak rehearsed many times over.

so this all begs the question why is this such a clear bet, especially with the 9 turning, making a potential (although unlikely) hand like A9 winning. well, for one, it does lower the probability of seeing 99 or 9x, heh. Always fun. You pick up more outs vs 44.

But really, alot of hands which WILL call a bet, like flush draw, straight draw, or both, make them make a mistake. beauty of 5handed play is you set up opponents like this from when yo usit down (or maybe im the only one) I dont set up raising alot p f in order to win a flop bet and hopefully a river bet out of a busted QT or overplayed KJ. I bet and make them move on a draw or a weaker pair (or oddly played KK, for example) or calldown w/ 2 outs (like QJ) or w/ 8 to 15 or so.

Alot of potential hands, few of which are beating you, will call a bet, and they will be making a mistake. Rather then let them make the mistake on the river, where your potential ear nis lower, make them make the mistake now.

In addition, by checking here, hands which WOULDNT call a bet, but are live (even the KQ example) have an "equity share" of the pot. The pot is 120 or so now, why give up 10% to a 4 outer? thats 3bbs. I dont know about you, but i want whats mine. if T8 folds to a bet, its still better to bet then give up 8 outs, or roughly 20%, or 20 dollars (5 bbs).

The reason it's more a bet here then if the board was rainbow, also, is a bulk of the hands which can call a flop bet are still "drawing," whereas on a rainbow board (dry board) it's more likely you're being trapped. hand protection is less important then stack commitedness. betting pot on a drawless board then getting bounced in is likely a fold, but the first mistake was the bet.

ANYWAY, there are boards to control the pot size, and then there are situations where whether you'll be c/r or not doesnt matter, you need to worr yabout the initial bet.


FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH, once you get c/r, it's time to reevaluate the situation, player, and odds. 5handed vs this type esp. when top pair and underpairs/overpairs have just 5% equity and 99 is now so unliekly it's very often a call. sometimes do you lose to J9 or 44? sure, but it's deifnately a profitable call especially dead money in the pot.

also, i would probably fire a 2nd barrel herre with AK, obviously folding to a c/r though. if my opponent would reraise (especially image) QQ+ i would bet/call with AJ, too. sometimes do I get trapped? sure. do i catch people with 2outers? most of the time, yes.

this was a little long, but the principle behind pot control is more often the "if this pot gets real big, i just cant see how i can win unless im playing poker with forrest gump," but this board given so many draws -&gt; and subsequent hand protection (and opponent perhaps viewing THEIR move as hand protection) its bet bet bet.

[GrunchCan]

Ok, I think I understand most of what you've said, but I don't understand this:

[ QUOTE ]
FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH, once you get c/r, it's time to reevaluate the situation, player, and odds. 5handed vs this type esp. when top pair and underpairs/overpairs have just 5% equity and 99 is now so unliekly it's very often a call. sometimes do you lose to J9 or 44? sure, but it's deifnately a profitable call especially dead money in the pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you saying we should fold?

Also, you refer to dead money, but the pot is heads-up. Are you speaking hypothetically, like, "If there were more opponents who will call, there would be dead money in the pot and we have a clear call?" Or should we call now becasue heads-up we have dead money? If so, what dead money?

[BobboFitos]

[ QUOTE ]
Ok, I think I understand most of what you've said, but I don't understand this:

[ QUOTE ]
FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH, once you get c/r, it's time to reevaluate the situation, player, and odds. 5handed vs this type esp. when top pair and underpairs/overpairs have just 5% equity and 99 is now so unliekly it's very often a call. sometimes do you lose to J9 or 44? sure, but it's deifnately a profitable call especially dead money in the pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you saying we should fold?

Also, you refer to dead money, but the pot is heads-up. Are you speaking hypothetically, like, "If there were more opponents who will call, there would be dead money in the pot and we have a clear call?" Or should we call now becasue heads-up we have dead money? If so, what dead money?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, it's a call. And by dead money i mean extra money in the pot, (the "dead" money being your overlay) so even though we may not expect to win 50% of time ("even" money) the fact we are getting a much better price means we dont need to win even close to that to make the call pos ev.

PLUS, you may even have the best hand ~50%+ anyway!

Your question, what dead money, meaning how much in the pot relative to the bet, is an expert question and the beauty of poker. If you're able to determine correct frequencies you win and everyone else loses.

[Lucky]

I like the turn check, call river. This elminates possibility of him putting you to big decision and sapping you of much needed brain power for long sessions.

with that board on turn, you are not liking results when you get it all in there most times.

[Allinlife]

[ QUOTE ]
Wow. Why?

Rock my world bobbo.

[/ QUOTE ]
you got rocked

[wtfsvi]

Thanks.

We have a self-appointed sLAG with unknown likelihood of bluffing a missed draw on the river after we check behind on the turn. I think that likelihood is pretty damn high in the NL$400 6max games. Especially with the 9 paired and hero raising a lot pf.

If he has a draw: He's probably bluffing enough to make checking behind better than betting if he was going to fold to your turn bet, and you're going to fold to his river bet if he hits. These assumptions are way too extensive, so checking behind the turn is quite certainly not optimal against a draw. But allthough it's not optimal, it does not lose us that much against the draw either. You assume that he WILL call with a flush or straight draw if we bet, and if that's true I'm with you on betting, but drawing with one card to come oop on a paired board is not so cool, so why would he call really? (Also, if we're planning to fold or call to a cr affects what line is best against the draw, since we'll sometimes lose huge if we fold and fold the best hand, and sometimes win big if we call and catch him on a semi-bluff. This only goes to show the structure I use to describe the situation is imperfect though, since if we call, the big losses come when he has us beat.)

If villain has a worse made hand than ours: Since read on villain is he is not a calling station, checking behind on the turn is probably the best line when he has a weaker made hand than ours.(Is this were you disagree? Do you not agree that he's more likely to call a river bet after it's checked through or bet the river himself, than to call the turn?) Added beauty of him having less outs than usual since the board is paired.

When he has us beat: Well, that checking behind on the turn is our line of choice if he has us beat goes without saying. I think you seem to underestimate the possibility of him having a 9 btw. Why can't he have a 9? (A9 is obviously unlikely, but less dominated 9xs aren't?)

I'm not really buying the bet and reconsider if you're cr-ed line. If I bet the turn, I'm going to know before I bet what I do if he pushes over the top. And I don't like betting this turn and then folding to a raise from someone that I think will check-raise with a (semi-)bluff or worse made hand a not insignificant part of the time. Even if the fold after we got check-raised is the correct decision against his range of hands (so we should obviously fold once we get there), putting ourself in that situation in the first place was not smart imo.

You're saying that weather to call or fold to a check raise is just a matter of putting him on a hand range and deciding if we have equity enough against it. I agree. But you're also saying that this decision does not affect weather we should bet the turn in the first place, and that doesn't make sense to me.

Also:
</font><blockquote><font class="small">Svar på:</font><hr />
In addition, by checking here, hands which WOULDNT call a bet, but are live (even the KQ example) have an "equity share" of the pot. The pot is 120 or so now, why give up 10% to a 4 outer? thats 3bbs. I dont know about you, but i want whats mine. if T8 folds to a bet, its still better to bet then give up 8 outs, or roughly 20%, or 20 dollars (5 bbs).

[/ QUOTE ] Not if T8 will bluff the river often enough to make up for the $20 lost, and I think it will.

[amoeba]

I'll give my views on this since I usually advocate a turn check.

on this turn I would bet and I would likely call any reraise.

If villain is thinking player, there is no way he does not lead with a set on the flop. there is no indication that I would continuation bet in to 3 way pot on that board and he would hate to have BB hit the draw for free.

once the 9 hits, he tries to check raise us with a boat? gives us bad odds even if we have something like AKs?

true I get broke to a 9 here but thats the only hand I get broke to.

now I do understand what wtfsvi is saying. he is saying that there is a wide variety of hands that sb is leading the river with. and I agree with him that if villain won't call the turn bet with a draw or a lone J, then I think check behind is not bad. yes I give a free shot for him to outdraw me but the thing is the times he doesn't outdraw me, hes bluffing or blocking the river 100% of the time, thus it makes sense for me to check behind if this assumption is true.

[BobboFitos]

[ QUOTE ]

We have a self-appointed sLAG with unknown likelihood of bluffing a missed draw on the river after we check behind on the turn. I think that likelihood is pretty damn high in the NL$400 6max games. Especially with the 9 paired and hero raising a lot pf.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just a point of interest, a lot of times the LAG has a made hand here as well (such as top pair) which has 2 outs. Which isn't bluffing the river. Although he may value bet. (And I dont really see how you could raise the river w/ unimproved aces..) So by checking the turn you're letting those portion of his hands off the hook.

[ QUOTE ]

If he has a draw: He's probably bluffing enough to make checking behind better than betting if he was going to fold to your turn bet, and you're going to fold to his river bet if he hits. These assumptions are way too extensive, so checking behind the turn is quite certainly not optimal against a draw. But allthough it's not optimal, it does not lose us that much against the draw either. You assume that he WILL call with a flush or straight draw if we bet, and if that's true I'm with you on betting, but drawing with one card to come oop on a paired board is not so cool, so why would he call really? (Also, if we're planning to fold or call to a cr affects what line is best against the draw, since we'll sometimes lose huge if we fold and fold the best hand, and sometimes win big if we call and catch him on a semi-bluff. This only goes to show the structure I use to describe the situation is imperfect though, since if we call, the big losses come when he has us beat.)

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not assuming anything, I'm saying whether he calls raises or folds thats fine, it's just checking is not giving him the option to make a mistake (call or raise)

It's like in limit holdem, where a bet is correct even if you can't bet enough, only because lack of a bet is incorrect. checking this turn vs a huge portion of his hands is just not right.

Also, about not paying off the draw, you should be calling 100% of rivers; even if top pair pairs, he may be bluffing flush. or busted straight. or if straight fills, he may be betting top pair, or if the flush, he could be using that for a busted gut + overs. something like that. point is, by checking not only do you give up a portion of the pot, but you pay off their value bet. because yo uassume they will bluff alot. that is also a bad assumption, just because they are "sLag" they will bluff everytime they DONT hit.

BTW, although this seems contrary to what I say alot to othe rpeople, ("make a plan for the hand on the flop and on") in this situation you dont have a plan for whether to call if he pushes all in. most of the time a call is correct and I'll probably always make it, given game conditions, the board, and hte pot size, so i guess yes, the plan is bet/call, but you should be betting here because it's the right move, and not afraid of folding if you feel thats the right move if they push.

[ QUOTE ]


If villain has a worse made hand than ours: Since read on villain is he is not a calling station, checking behind on the turn is probably the best line when he has a weaker made hand than ours.(Is this were you disagree? Do you not agree that he's more likely to call a river bet after it's checked through or bet the river himself, than to call the turn?) Added beauty of him having less outs than usual since the board is paired.

[/ QUOTE ]

No!!!!!! A sLag wont drop top pair to a 2nd barrelL! This was my point! hands that have 5% equity... you want them in!!!!!!!! bet bet bet, have them call, then buy dinner w/ their money.

[ QUOTE ]

I'm not really buying the bet and reconsider if you're cr-ed line. If I bet the turn, I'm going to know before I bet what I do if he pushes over the top. And I don't like betting this turn and then folding to a raise from someone that I think will check-raise with a (semi-)bluff or worse made hand a not insignificant part of the time. Even if the fold after we got check-raised is the correct decision against his range of hands (so we should obviously fold once we get there), putting ourself in that situation in the first place was not smart imo.

[/ QUOTE ]

refer to above

[ QUOTE ]

You're saying that weather to call or fold to a check raise is just a matter of putting him on a hand range and deciding if we have equity enough against it. I agree. But you're also saying that this decision does not affect weather we should bet the turn in the first place, and that doesn't make sense to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

technically yes, i've made the decision to call when i bet (if they raise) because the bet is correct vs his hand range. the only times its NOT a call is if a bet is right vs their hand range (all the draws, pps, top pair, etc.) but when they raise, you can use this NEWLY GIVEN INFORMATION and ascertain a fold vs their NEW range (ie, only trips or full house)

[ QUOTE ]
Also:

Svar på:
In addition, by checking here, hands which WOULDNT call a bet, but are live (even the KQ example) have an "equity share" of the pot. The pot is 120 or so now, why give up 10% to a 4 outer? thats 3bbs. I dont know about you, but i want whats mine. if T8 folds to a bet, its still better to bet then give up 8 outs, or roughly 20%, or 20 dollars (5 bbs).

Not if T8 will bluff the river often enough to make up for the $20 lost, and I think it will.

[/ QUOTE ]

k

[wtfsvi]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Svar på:</font><hr />
I'm not assuming anything, I'm saying whether he calls raises or folds thats fine, it's just checking is not giving him the option to make a mistake (call or raise)

[/ QUOTE ] Well, I hate to be a nit, but </font><blockquote><font class="small">Svar på:</font><hr />
But really, alot of hands which WILL call a bet, like flush draw, straight draw, or both, make them make a mistake.

[/ QUOTE ] But ok. That was super nitty. Will stop.


</font><blockquote><font class="small">Svar på:</font><hr />
Also, about not paying off the draw, you should be calling 100% of rivers; even if top pair pairs, he may be bluffing flush. or busted straight. or if straight fills, he may be betting top pair, or if the flush, he could be using that for a busted gut + overs. something like that. point is, by checking not only do you give up a portion of the pot, but you pay off their value bet.

[/ QUOTE ] Yeah. Here you're 100% correct. Don't know why I said that about not payinf off when he hits.


</font><blockquote><font class="small">Svar på:</font><hr />

No!!!!!! A sLag wont drop top pair to a 2nd barrelL! This was my point! hands that have 5% equity... you want them in!!!!!!!! bet bet bet, have them call, then buy dinner w/ their money.

[/ QUOTE ] Then why will you fire another barrelt with AK? I'm really not sure if going for the whole stack of a decent player is right the times he has top pair in this spot, but ok.


</font><blockquote><font class="small">Svar på:</font><hr />
the only times its NOT a call is if a bet is right vs their hand range (all the draws, pps, top pair, etc.) but when they raise, you can use this NEWLY GIVEN INFORMATION and ascertain a fold vs their NEW range (ie, only trips or full house)

[/ QUOTE ] Of course. Like betting speed or chat tell or whatever.

[emil3000]

Wow, this thread got really good suddenly. Very honouring indeed to be in the digest. Bobbo articulates some of the things I argued much more eloquently than I could. Go Bobbo!

[BobboFitos]

[ QUOTE ]
No!!!!!! A sLag wont drop top pair to a 2nd barrelL! This was my point! hands that have 5% equity... you want them in!!!!!!!! bet bet bet, have them call, then buy dinner w/ their money.

Then why will you fire another barrelt with AK? I'm really not sure if going for the whole stack of a decent player is right the times he has top pair in this spot, but ok.

[/ QUOTE ]

It SEEMS needing to protect AA because alot of hands are quite live; and that this is a GOOD spot to 2nd barrell with ace high are contradictory, they are not.

Same reason Q 8 2r (X) board checking both ace high and AA is more or less correct. Poker is weird, huh?

Fully explaining the "why" is tough, but to be concise: I alluded to alot of hands which are fairly live, like 20% or less, if you check they can win + value bet. Then I also said we dont care if they fold. Thing is, alot of those hands fold. Which is better then having turn checked through. Now, if alot of them fold, doesnt this make it a good spot to bluff w/ AK? (Even though in that case ace high is good! It just cant stand any heat, thus a bluff) *As well, underpairs or bottom pair or what not you have considerable fold equity w/ AK, not to mention middle pair pairing gives you some more pot equity as well.

If I bet 5handed with AK i never would expect Jx to fold, and thats also why I always bet whe nI can beat those hands.

[ QUOTE ]
he only times its NOT a call is if a bet is right vs their hand range (all the draws, pps, top pair, etc.) but when they raise, you can use this NEWLY GIVEN INFORMATION and ascertain a fold vs their NEW range (ie, only trips or full house)

Of course. Like betting speed or chat tell or whatever.

[/ QUOTE ]

I didnt really mean that, I dont trust those enough online, I ment more of a rock figure. (People's image)... Like... not to pick on anyone in particular, but sourbeaver. If he checkraised me here I would put him on quads and fold.

=)

[BobboFitos]

[ QUOTE ]
Wow, this thread got really good suddenly. Very honouring indeed to be in the digest. Bobbo articulates some of the things I argued much more eloquently than I could. Go Bobbo!

[/ QUOTE ]

woooo! ty =) nh here btw

[emil3000]

[ QUOTE ]
nh here btw

[/ QUOTE ]

ty

[wtfsvi]

I'm starting to like the bet, to make him make a move on the pot. Like you said, it's quite unlikely that he plays a flopped set or two-pair like this (check call, check agan). And a 9 might very well lead the turn as well.

If I bet, it's definitly bet call though. If I have to fold to a check raise (but the oponent is capable of making moves, just not quite enough that I can call the check raise), I'm still with checking behind. I don't see how that does not affect the decision. (Of course, if he is close to incapable of making moves, I have no problem bet folding.)

Anyway. Good discussion. Thanks. I am partially convinced.

[BobboFitos]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm starting to like the bet, to make him make a move on the pot. Like you said, it's quite unlikely that he plays a flopped set or two-pair like this (check call, check agan). And a 9 might very well lead the turn as well.

If I bet, it's definitly bet call though. If I have to fold to a check raise (but the oponent is capable of making moves, just not quite enough that I can call the check raise), I'm still with checking behind. I don't see how that does not affect the decision. (Of course, if he is close to incapable of making moves, I have no problem bet folding.)

Anyway. Good discussion. Thanks. I am partially convinced.

[/ QUOTE ]

woohoo

[RikaKazak]

what about the implied odds of when he bets when he hits but would of folded to turn bet cause board paired, like flush draw, you bet 2/3 pot he folds, $20 positive, plus the $xxx he bets on river and you call.