Terms & Conditions

Internet Magazine

Non–US new players
Get five 2+2 books


Order Books
Book Translations
Forum Login
 
 
Expand All   Collapse All

 Two Plus Two 
2+2 Magazine Forum
Special Sklansky Forum
2+2 Pokercast
About the Forums

 General Poker Discussion 
Beginners Questions
Books and Publications
Televised Poker
News, Views, and Gossip
Brick and Mortar
Home Poker
Beats, Brags, and Variance
Poker Theory
Poker Legislation

 Coaching/Training 
StoxPoker
DeucesCracked

 German Forums 
Poker Allgemein
Strategie: Holdem NL cash
Strategie: Sonstige
Internet/Online
BBV
Small Talk
German Poker News

 French Forums 
Forum francophone
Strategie
BBV (French)

 Limit Texas Hold'em 
High Stakes Limit
Medium Stakes Limit
Small Stakes Limit
Micro Stakes Limit
Mid-High Short-handed
Small Stakes Shorthanded
Limit––>NL

 PL/NL Texas Hold'em 
High Stakes
Medium Stakes
Small Stakes
Micro Stakes
Small-High Full Ring
Micro Full Ring

 Tournament Poker 
Small Stakes MTT
High Stakes MTT
MTT Community
STT Strategy
Tournament Circuit

 Other Poker 
Omaha/8
Omaha High
Stud
Heads Up Poker
Other Poker Games

 General Gambling 
Probability
Psychology
Sports Betting
Other Gambling Games
Entertainment Betting

 Internet Gambling 
Internet Gambling
Internet Bonuses
Affiliates/RakeBack
Software

 2+2 Communities 
Other Other Topics
The Lounge: Discussion+Review
El Diablo's General Discussion
BBV4Life

 Other Topics 
Golf
Sporting Events
Politics
Business, Finance, and Investing
Travel
Science, Math, and Philosophy
Health and Fitness
Student Life
Puzzles and Other Games
Video Games
Laughs or Links!
Computer Technical Help
Sponsored Support Forums
RakebackNetwork
RakeReduction.com
Other Links
Books
Authors
Abbreviations
Calendar
Order Books
Books by Others
Favorite Links
Feedback
Advertising Information
Home
Posting Hints
Privacy Notice
Forum Archives

The 2+2 Forums

Before using this Forum, please refer to the Terms and Conditions (Last modified: 2/26/2006)

Be sure to read the   Two Plus Two Internet Magazine

This is an archive. The main forums are here

These forums are read only.


 
UBB.threads™ Groupee, Inc.

Limit Texas Hold'em >> Small Stakes Shorthanded

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | >> (show all)
TJD
member


Reged: 05/08/03
Posts: 114
Re: Turn checkraises [Re: Nate tha' Great]
      #2422388 - 05/18/05 07:43 AM

What about the other end of the spectrum?

You said that when you were at 10/20 and it was very aggressive then you needed to check/call and check/raise more often.

By implication then, your current games are not THAT aggressive.

I suspect that at the higher limits there are not very many really passive players. However, if you were HU against one and they were not the sort who always peel one off on the flop and often fold the turn, would you use the check/fold line rather than continuing to pound when UI and only had big cards?

Trevor


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Wynton
stranger


Reged: 09/25/03
Posts: 18
Re: Turn checkraises [Re: TJD]
      #2422859 - 05/18/05 10:07 AM

Just want to add that I found James' comments very persuasive, particularly the suggestion that most players who will call the check/raise also would have raised the intial bet.

Also, from the perspective of someone who still playes mostly 2/4 and 3/6, I strongly suspect that the effectiveness of the turn check/raise may vary at different limits.

At these low limits, a lot of players will call down with poor hands, but neglect to bet the turn if checked to them. Another set of players will predictably bet when checked to, but also predictably fold when facing the check/raise. I imagine that the average player at 10/20 is not that predictable.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Grisgra
old hand


Reged: 08/17/04
Posts: 715
My opin' [Re: Nate tha' Great]
      #2425399 - 05/18/05 05:19 PM

Quote:

As a challenge to the forum, I would like someone to post an example or two where they think that check-raising the turn after leading and being called on the flop is *clearly* correct.




Excellent post. I think a turn checkraise is optimal in situations where your somewhat calling-stationy (but a bet-when-checked-to) opponent coldcalled you pf with his weak ace, and you have a strong ace or two pair on an A-high board. In these situations, among many opponents it's rare for them to raise you on the turn with their weak but decent hand, but they'll definitely bet when checked to. And they'll call you down.

Similarly, someone suggested that against the jerks that coldcall preflop, call the flop bet with anything, but bet the turn when checked to (whether they have anything or not), a turn checkraise is a good way to value-bet.

I guess that I'm saying that there seem to be a breed of opponents, esp. at 10/20, that are calling stations with iffy hands (i.e., if you want to bluff to the river with your missed hand, they're happy to let you), BUT value-betters when they sense weakness. (i.e., if all of a sudden you admit you don't have anything, then they're going to make you pay to see another street).

These kinds of players will not necessarily fold to your checkraise with their medium pocket or 2nd pair, and in fact will often call all the way down. You need an opponent with just the right mix of calling-station/desire to induce your bluffs/value betting capability. Interestingly, there are a huge set of mediocre 10/20'ers with exactly this mix IMO.

EDIT: Not that I can necessarily say that their line is mediocre, except that it's often so predictable and they never believe the checkraise . . . and they coldcall you pf with A3o. But I've certainly let opponents bet to the river unimproved instead of challenging them in the interim with my 2nd or 3rd pair, and bet on a street (actually, usually the river) when they've checked, thinking that they're actually quite weak and it's time to value-bet.

Edited by Grisgra (05/18/05 05:33 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Grisgra
old hand


Reged: 08/17/04
Posts: 715
Re: Turn checkraises [Re: James282]
      #2425420 - 05/18/05 05:22 PM

Quote:


4) Most hands that will bet the turn when checked to will raise it when you bet, allowing you to three-bet!




As you can see if you read my post, I think this is absolutely not true for a large segment of, at least, 10/20'ers. Of course, at lower limits, it may be true (they value-bet less), and quite possibly at higher limits as well (they probably value-raise more).


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
mmcd
addict


Reged: 06/29/04
Posts: 441
Re: Turn checkraises [Re: Nate tha' Great]
      #2425553 - 05/18/05 05:40 PM

Checkraise the flop, lead 3-bet the turn is the new bet the flop, checkraise the turn.

That being said, the one spot I will still often use the old line is in sb vs. bb confrontaions where I raised preflop, and got flatcalled there and on the flop.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
rory
newbie


Reged: 09/29/03
Posts: 29
Train Thinking [Re: Nate tha' Great]
      #2425955 - 05/18/05 06:27 PM

We don't bet out into the PFR as much, I am pretty sure most of us check-raise and not bet out on the flop when we catch a good piece of it. However, the bet out is a cheaper way to try to bluff and semi-bluff than the check-raise. HPFAP says we should be betting out a lot, both with our made hands, our semi-bluffs and balls out bluffs. We don't seem to do that nearly as much as they suggest.

And on the turn, is it possible it is a frequency issue? They recommend checking 60%!!! of your good and bad hands alike on the turn after you bet the flop, so that means you will be checking the turn more often than you bet again. I don't know about you but I never even came close to checking that many of my hands on the turn. Just my nothings and monsters. Certainly not 30% of my good hands. I don't see how people could keep betting mediocre hands behind me when I am check-raising them so frequently on the turn. And once they are trained to check-behind, it gives me even more liberty to bet-out-bluff the flop. Because with a single small bet, I can see the river card with my gutshot or overcards or whatever, because my check on the turn is so scary because I have it backed up by other check-raises.

I don't know, the bet-out a lot into the PFR and the check on the turn line seems like they go together if you are willing to bet-out-bluff or semi-bluff into the PFR very frequently with hands as weak as just a gutshot. To cover you have to start check-raising even your pretty good hands on the turn, so that you are a threat enough to check-raise that you can support your bet-out weak semi-bluffs on the flop.

I am really not coherent with these thoughts. But online, way more than B&M, 'good' 'thinking' players have basically been trained to be calling stations. People take so many shots at you on PP in particular that any good player who doesn't turn into a calling station of sorts winds up getting killed. So bet-bet-betting makes more money with your hands because people are never willing to give you credit for a hand, as you pointed out, but they will dump to turn check-raises and other 'i have a monster' obvious ploys. Maybe not even then, I guess.

I don't know-- I guess what I am trying to say is that I feel like I never gave the HPFAP way a shot, because I never checked my good hands on the turn enough and I never bet-out semi-bluffed with weak draws and what have you into the PFR. I think to use this check-the-turn-a-lot advice, a lot of us would have to retool our entire game, including river play!

I guess the thing to keep in mind is it is a hell of a lot easier to flop some really weak draw or nothing rather than a good hand. If we were to incorporate betting out with these weak draws on the flop and checking the turn a ton into our play, we might win pots a lot more frequently with crap when we get to the river for cheap. I think to use this line effectively, we would have to become way more aggressive with bluffs and semi-bluffs on the flop than most of us are now.

Also, the last consideration is this is really about training an opponent. Imagine if you could train an opponent to check behind a large parcentage of the time when you check on the turn after betting the flop. You could play a lot of hands against this opponent, because you would get to see a lot of rivers for very cheap and you can always keep betting your good hands if you want, just as long as you check enough of them to keep him checking on the turn. But you have to train the opponent first. Online we play against so many different opponents who turn over so fast that training an opponent is not worth the initial investment of losing bets with 30% of our good hands.

Sorry this is totally disjointed-- I am really sick and not thinking right.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
rory
newbie


Reged: 09/29/03
Posts: 29
Bump [Re: Nate tha' Great]
      #2427472 - 05/18/05 09:50 PM

Respond to this thread not stat posts, guys. Think about it this is really important.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Grisgra
old hand


Reged: 08/17/04
Posts: 715
Re: Bump [Re: rory]
      #2427752 - 05/18/05 10:29 PM

Quote:

Respond to this thread not stat posts, guys. Think about it this is really important.




I can't respond to your stream-of-consciousness post until I hire a translator . You, on the other hand, are a Party 10/20 vet and can respond to *my* response pretty easily .

I agree that this is way-important stuff.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
krishanleong
newbie


Reged: 07/12/04
Posts: 45
Re: Bump [Re: rory]
      #2427797 - 05/18/05 10:35 PM

Quote:

Respond to this thread not stat posts, guys. Think about it this is really important.




I think HEPFAP is pretty solidly wrong here. I don't think it's close either. The games where a turn checkraise policy works are ones where the turnover is low and players are the adjusting tough type.

Krishan


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
wrto4556
veteran


Reged: 01/08/05
Posts: 1280
Re: Bump [Re: krishanleong]
      #2427806 - 05/18/05 10:37 PM

Quote:

Quote:

Respond to this thread not stat posts, guys. Think about it this is really important.




I think HEPFAP is pretty solidly wrong here. I don't think it's close either. The games where a turn checkraise policy works are ones where the turnover is low and players are the adjusting tough type.

Krishan




I remember someone saying that HEPFAP should be named "Hold'em poker against advanced players".


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | >> (show all)



Extra information
0 registered and 9 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  Mat Sklansky 

Print Topic

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is enabled
      UBBCode is enabled

Rating: ****
Topic views: 1453

Rate this topic

Jump to

Contact Us 2+2 Publishing

Powered by UBB.threads™ 6.5.5


Message Boards and Forums Directory Message Boards and Forums Directory