Re: Live 80 hand... settle a dispute on river action
 

thank you all for agreeing with me. My friend's point was as follows

1) There is no way a weak tight player is going to check a full house twice.

2) given his turn action, he could have completely missed and end up playing the board. There are very few hands he doesnt call with

3) since he is weak tight, he likely wont try for a c/r bluff.


interesting thoughts, though i still think checking is right.

Re: Live 80 hand... settle a dispute on river action
 

[ QUOTE ]
thank you all for agreeing with me. My friend's point was as follows

1) There is no way a weak tight player is going to check a full house twice.

2) given his turn action, he could have completely missed and end up playing the board. There are very few hands he doesnt call with

3) since he is weak tight, he likely wont try for a c/r bluff.


interesting thoughts, though i still think checking is right.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think I agree with your friend.

Re: Live 80 hand... settle a dispute on river action
 

your play is also consistent with a pair under Ts. i think betting here to get a worse hand to call is a good idea b/c all worse hands either chop or play the board. no better hand is folding (almost any better hand would raise pf except the suited Qs and Ts but even some of those raise pf).

your bet would also look more like a bluff than a good hand so if he has a bluff catching hand (which conveniently enough here is the board) he will call. good hands bet the turn.

id probably bet here. i dont think its clear cut though and there are some good reasons to check. one other reason to bet though is you described him as "weak tight" this means virtually 0% chance of being c'rd here either by a better hand or a bluff b/c a weak player bets this river w/ a hand you beat.

the real question would be do YOU call a river bet getting 4:1? b/c i think thats more tricky than whether to bet when he checks albeit for some of the same reasons...and some others

Barron

Re: Live 80 hand... settle a dispute on river action
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
thank you all for agreeing with me. My friend's point was as follows

1) There is no way a weak tight player is going to check a full house twice.

2) given his turn action, he could have completely missed and end up playing the board. There are very few hands he doesnt call with

3) since he is weak tight, he likely wont try for a c/r bluff.


interesting thoughts, though i still think checking is right.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think I agree with your friend.

[/ QUOTE ]big surprise, i also would bet...

Re: Live 80 hand... settle a dispute on river action
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
thank you all for agreeing with me. My friend's point was as follows

1) There is no way a weak tight player is going to check a full house twice.

2) given his turn action, he could have completely missed and end up playing the board. There are very few hands he doesnt call with

3) since he is weak tight, he likely wont try for a c/r bluff.


interesting thoughts, though i still think checking is right.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think I agree with your friend.

[/ QUOTE ]big surprise, i also would bet...

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks guys. I guess this hands proves why I am not ready to play 200/400 or 300/600

Re: Live 80 hand... settle a dispute on river action
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
thank you all for agreeing with me. My friend's point was as follows

1) There is no way a weak tight player is going to check a full house twice.

2) given his turn action, he could have completely missed and end up playing the board. There are very few hands he doesnt call with

3) since he is weak tight, he likely wont try for a c/r bluff.


interesting thoughts, though i still think checking is right.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think I agree with your friend.

[/ QUOTE ]big surprise, i also would bet...

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks guys. I guess this hands proves why I am not ready to play 200/400 or 300/600

[/ QUOTE ]ok... i cant even tell if this is sarcastic.

Re: Live 80 hand... settle a dispute on river action
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
thank you all for agreeing with me. My friend's point was as follows

1) There is no way a weak tight player is going to check a full house twice.

2) given his turn action, he could have completely missed and end up playing the board. There are very few hands he doesnt call with

3) since he is weak tight, he likely wont try for a c/r bluff.


interesting thoughts, though i still think checking is right.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think I agree with your friend.

[/ QUOTE ]big surprise, i also would bet...

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks guys. I guess this hands proves why I am not ready to play 200/400 or 300/600

[/ QUOTE ]ok... i cant even tell if this is sarcastic.

[/ QUOTE ]

Its actually kinda serious. I just started playing the 80 around 6 months ago and while I am a winning player (albeit much better in mixed games than straight HE), I have really gotten to realize just how big the difference between the 80 (high middle limits) and the 150-300 and 200-400 games (low higher limits)