Re: Weird science...
 

[ QUOTE ]
Fnurt,

I dont like your flop play, I think calling is a poor idea. You have FD/2 overs. You are not going to be very far behind anything, and you have folding equity. Calling sucks because when you miss the turn you may have to fold. Pushing really can't be far from wrong in this spot. I wouldn't have called his reraise, but pushed.

-Jason

[/ QUOTE ]

I felt like I had more folding equity by saving my money for later. I don't think someone raises the flop in the way he did with the intention of folding to a reraise.

I agree that I can't be very far behind, but I still didn't want to gamble vs. some crappy pair, and I thought I would have a better chance to get him off that pair later. I really don't understand what he had though.

Re: Weird science...
 

Whatever he had he knew it couldn't beat a flush. Looks like he correctly put you on a flush draw and tried to confirm it with his small river bet.

He probably had a decent pocket pair.

Re: Weird science...
 

[ QUOTE ]
Whatever he had he knew it couldn't beat a flush. Looks like he correctly put you on a flush draw and tried to confirm it with his small river bet.

He probably had a decent pocket pair.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you're right that he put me on a flush draw, then he was pretty dumb to bet almost nothing on the turn, wasn't he?

Re: Weird science...
 

For Sure. Maybe I was giving him more credit than he deserved. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
Maybe he just a really bad player who had no idea what he was doing. Sometimes we try to read to deep into a persons play. Maybe he just has no clue.

Re: Weird science...
 

Fnurt,

Let's be real, your opponent played this hand very poorly. Every possible hand he had, including absolutely nothing, can not be represented for by his actions.

While you say that he didnt have intentions to fold to a reraise on the flop, you are assuming too many things. If you had posted this hand, and stopped telling us what happened as he raised you on the flop, everyone would probably say push or fold. Calling sucks because an average to good opponent will push this turn everytime, especially with a hand that can make that sort of flop raise.

I personally don't pass on these small edges very often. You can play scared of a pair, but you are going to often be ahead in this hand enough in my view to make it profitable. The fact that:

1) Your opponent *could* fold to a flop all-in, so you do have folding equity, and that
2) Your opponent could have a draw without a pair

Make this a push for me. I suppose you could take the cautious rout and call the flop and check/fold to an all-in on the turn. But I am much more apt to take the aggressive approach here, even though it may be slightly reckless. I'd rather take a coinflip, then check/fold on the turn when I miss my outs, but that's just me.

-Jason

P.S. If you were against an expert opponent who may have read you for a draw, this is even a better reason to get your chips all-in on the flop, because you may not get paid out if you hit your spade on the turn. An ace also may kill your action. This would be a disaster, to call, hit the draw, and not get paid off. If you knew this was going to happen, then you can in no way justify flat calling the flop.

Re: Weird science...
 

[ QUOTE ]
I felt like I had more folding equity by saving my money for later.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but in the long run wont the value of your hand also decrease as you miss your outs 1/3-1/4 of the time on the turn? And who says you will have folding equity on the turn, don't you expect him to bet the turn at the least? And normally push the turn?

I'm not sure how you can say you have more folding equity waiting. The only explanation for this would be that your opponent has a draw, and will miss his hand later. Most of the scare cards in the deck help you, so if they hit on the turn you would have folding equity, but you would also be ahead.

Re: Weird science...
 

[ QUOTE ]

I felt like I had more folding equity by saving my money for later. I don't think someone raises the flop in the way he did with the intention of folding to a reraise.


[/ QUOTE ]

The problem is you need a lot more folding equity by waiting because you will have less equity in making your hand after you miss on the turn.

Re: Weird science...
 

These are very good points, and the kind of help I was looking for when I posted the hand to boot. Part of my thinking was that I expected to have a call on the turn in any event (do I?). If it's going to be a fold on the turn if I miss, then I agree that I definitely have to push on the flop.

Re: Weird science...
 

[ QUOTE ]
I felt like I had more folding equity by saving my money for later.

[/ QUOTE ]

....

[ QUOTE ]
Part of my thinking was that I expected to have a call on the turn in any event (do I?). If it's going to be a fold on the turn if I miss, then I agree that I definitely have to push on the flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

these thoughts seem incongruent.

I like Jason's line of pushing the flop, unless you are against a set, you cannot be far behind, and you get him to fold even top pair many times. You are ahead of TP if he doesn't share a kicker, so might as well get the chips in while you have FE and are most likely ahead. If he flopped big, then go ahead and river the nuts.

Re: Weird science...
 

The thoughts are incongruent because I don't know whether he will push on the turn (and in fact, he didn't).