Debtable one..

[1800GAMBLER]

Agreed.

I'm wondering why TJ and Bob include this in their 10% rule of thumb. Suited connectors either like lots of players putting money in on the flop or money in when they are ahead; with a preflop raiser neither look likely.

Plus the preflop raiser will wreck the odds to draw and is unlikely to fold if we play them aggressively.

So the best suited connectors can hope for it to hit a flop were their draw makes them favourite.

Someone clear this up for me?

[Zag]

[ QUOTE ]
'After the flop, you played the hand too passive. His weak 1/4 pot bet probably means overcards (most likely AK). Raise (say, to $40) to protect your toppair and try to get it heads up. If he comes over the top, you can safley put him on an overpair and muck, otherwise keep up the presure if the turn comes low.'

That is the one reply i knew i'd disagree with. If he has over cards he has just made a -EV if i come over the top on that board he's probably done with his hand. Meanwhile if i call he should fire out another bluff.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the battle cry of passive players everywhere!! Against players who bluff far too often, it is the correct strategy. However, against everybody else, you want to make a raise on the flop. If he does have overcards, then you want to make sure he is making a mistake to draw at them. Remember, he has 6 outs to beat you, you don't want to give him infinite odds to draw at them.

If he has an overpair that he is not that proud of, a bet here will probably make him check to you on the turn, so you will end up seeing the river for the same money, if you check behind. (You already said that you would call a turn bet, on the assumption that he is bluffing again. Would you have called a river bet, too?) If he reraises, or if he calls and then bets out on the turn, you can lay it down with confidance.

[nicky g]

Good points. I'm not that big a fan of suited connectors in NL. As you say, they're useful in that they can flop multiple outs (straight and flush draw) - but decent players will rarely give you the odds to draw against their big pairs etc. I prefer small and medium pairs, which are better disguised and don't need as good impled odds as suited connectors do, and suited aces, which can be gold against smaller flushes (although really this doesn't happen very often).

That said raising in position with connectors can be good from time to time as people won't put you on the hand if you hit it, and may pay you off. Also, if you're playing against scared opposition and flop a good draw, they allow you to play very aggressively with the combined equity from the possibilities that your opponents may fold and the outs you have should they call; the Doyle Brunson approach (not great for most players). They're also useful in that you play them to build the nuts, or very strong hands: if you hit the nuts with them you can play with confidence, whereas if you only catch a small piece you can get away - unlike AK or AA say, which can leave you in a bit of a predicament if you're played back at post-flop.

But anyway in NL I think pairs have much more value than connectors; I'd be much more likely to call a raise with a medium pair than the sc's.

[Che]

"BB didn't make a proper bet at any stage"?

This is my first post here at 2+2, but I've done some lurking and I'm always fascinated by comments like this one, especially when we don't know what the opponent has. I look forward to the day when my skills have developed to the point of making such judgments, but I've only been playing a couple of months so I'm afraid this time is far in the future. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Anyway, in evaluating your comment, I asked myself this question: Is there a situation in which I would make the series of bets that the opponent made?

In other words, would I ever make a pot-sized raise against three limpers, 3/4 pot bet the flop, 1/2 pot bet the turn, then check the river given the board cards in question.

I wasn't able to come up with any definite "yes" answers, but a "maybe" would happen if I had an overpair or an AK-type hand and:

1. The river 3 put a three flush on the board (don't know since suits not given), or
2. I thought the opponent might be holding a 5

In either case, I'd probably bet again since a flush is very unlikely and a 5 is almost unthinkable (in my novice opinion).

So, while I agree that the play of the hand as a whole is odd, I'm not sure why none of the bets are proper and I'd be interested in hearing your reasoning as to why they are not proper.

(Note: I am not trying to criticize your claim. I am merely trying to understand the thought process that leads to the claim.)

[Paul2432]

[ QUOTE ]
In other words, would I ever make a pot-sized raise against three limpers, 3/4 pot bet the flop, 1/2 pot bet the turn, then check the river given the board cards in question.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think your math is faulty. With four players at $10 each there is $38 in the pot (assuming $2 rake) on the flop. Then $12 bet is less than 1/3 of the pot. Similarly, on the turn there is $61 in the pot (38+24-1). Here the bet again is only about 1/3 of the pot. Generally, with a hand like AA or KK which is what you are trying to represent you would bet about the size of the pot or more on the flop and turn. Holding AK you should bet the same (if you bet), hoping to force a hand like 98 to lay down.

Paul

[PlanoPoker]

Looks like AK/AQ, but it is at least feasible that he had a big PP here, and was betting an amount that he thought a weak hand could call, and possibly looking to get played back at. Even the check on the river. If he thought JayP was the type to push his top pair this could be a profitable move. I don't favor it, but its a possible scenario. His betting also matches 77 - if he is the type to try and steal pre-flop with mid pp's. (Which I find does not work at 1-2 NL)

[Che]

Yes, my math was definitely faulty. So much for that math minor... [img]/images/graemlins/crazy.gif[/img]

Also, thanks for the explanation of what the opponent should be trying to represent if he chooses to bet.

[tewall]

FYI Usually if you see criticism about a bet size being out of line it will be because it's too small. A "normal" bet will generally be between 1/2 pot and pot. Varying bet size can be tricky as it's easy to give your hand away if you're not careful. Some experts (T.J. Cloutier being one, I'm pretty sure) advocate always betting the same amount (e.g. the size of the pot. That way you can be sure you're not giving your hand away.

[The Gift Of Gab]

The best reason to fold preflop is that, as Guy said, your position is bad: you're trapped between the raiser and the field. Apparently this guy makes readable bets, which makes your call much better, but there are a lot of situations where you won't be able to play middle pair or a draw correctly because you're worried about action behind you, even if you're pretty sure the raiser airballed.

Otherwise I probably play it the same way. You can make a better case for raising the turn than for raising the flop, especially if his small bet means he's continuing a weak bluff. The flop looks harmless but you're sandwiched. Also, depending on his level of sophistication, he may see the ragged, drawless flop as a reason to underbet an overpair and get excess action from weak top pairs and underpairs.

[The Gift Of Gab]

He's not getting infinite odds since he already bet. He's giving himself ~3:1 to steal the pot and ~4:1 plus implied on a 6-outer if he gets called. JayP just has a chance to make those odds much worse.