|
|
|
|
#1
04-23-2003, 01:43 PM
|
|||
|
|||
winning with losers
I played a long session yesterday and there was at least half a dozen times it went check-check on the river when I would have called a bet and lost.
One time I had 88 and the other guy had 99. The final board was 10-7-6,2,10. He had openraised and I had made it three bets from the blind. On the flop, I bet, he raised, I called. Turn, I checked, he bet, I called. River, I checked. He opened his hand while saying something like, "I'll let you off the hook this time." Not only did his check save me a bet, I didn't have to show. Another time I had QQ verses KK. I reraised from the blind and the kings made it four bets. I called. The flop came all undercards. I check-called. The turn was another blank. I check-called. The river was an ace. I checked, he checked and showed. Again, I would have called. Again, I didn't have to show. The strangest one was a hand that could have gone check-check on the river, saving me a bet, except that I forgot to accept the charity. Here. No thanks. You take it back. I had AA. The flop came all one suit and I had the ace of trump. It came down to headsup on the flop. We went five or six bets. At this point, he had exactly one big bet left. Looks like an inevitable all-in, right? The turn card paired the top card on the scattered board, a queen. He was first to act, and on the turn, he checked. Hmmm. I might have had an interesting choice here if he had had plenty of chips, but as it was, I figured he had more than the bare-king of trump, meaning I thought he would call my river bet if it came to that, so there was no need to commit his last chips just yet. What do you think of that reasoning? The river was a blank. He checked again. This made no sense. I went ahead and bet and put him all in. He called while turning over a small flopped flush. Oops. But at least I didn't have to show! Tommy 
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
