I see...lemme know when or if you want the results
 

touche...excellent point with the 2d3d...let me know if anybody wants the results

Re: bet for value here? also did I have pot odds to call?
 

[ QUOTE ]
BTW I would bet 2d 3d...can you explain that one to this dullard

[/ QUOTE ]

Your nut straight loses only to a flush. The flush you'd make with 2d 3d is essentially no better than the nut straight, you'd still lose to any other flush. 2d 3d is slightly better only because it makes another flush a bit less likely, but that slight amount isn't enough to be the difference between checking and betting.

Re: bet for value here? also did I have pot odds to call?
 

Hey, how's it goin...I'd raise PF, and bet the flop when it got checked to me. you were definitely right in calling the flop with your OESD and overcards.

Re: bet for value here? also did I have pot odds to call?
 

[ QUOTE ]
4. pay 2BB's to the flush

...is not very likely, the best thing to do is bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

over the course of the entire time @ the table, paying 2 BB's off here wouldn't necessarily be that bad.

if villain (as well as other ppl at the table) see you fold to a check-raise on the river here, they'll be sure to try it on you and bluff you out down the road.

At these limits (where i'm cutting my teeth too), in addition to bluffing, it's not uncommon for players to miss seeing the flush & straight draws completely & think that hands like 2-pair & TPTK are very good here. They may think that's even more true when it's only 3-handed.

Re: bet for value here? also did I have pot odds to call?
 

[ QUOTE ]

3. split the pot with another straight (betting doesn't matter here)
4. pay 2BB's to the flush


[/ QUOTE ]

#3 Not always: If you bet, that other straight may fear that YOU have the flush and fold. Think of the "tilting opponent" possibilities if there's a showdown.

#4 Yup. Just because they check-raise I wouldn't give them 100% credit for having the flush...they may have that chopping straight from #3. I'd make them prove it.

Re: bet for value here? also did I have pot odds to call?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Certainly betting the river is the correct thing to do here, but it wouldn't shock me at all if the SB turns over the flush here. It's likely BB is going to fire again on the river so the SB trying to get a check raise in wouldn;t be the worst play in the world.

[/ QUOTE ]

If SB has a flush and was dumb enough to play the flop that way, would he suddenly become smart enough to check raise the river?

[/ QUOTE ]

That would surprise you? There are legions of Party .5/1 players that like to call along until they hit a real hand and then try and be tricky with them.

Don't get me wrong. I am not saying he most likely has the flush and I am not saying I think checking the river through was correct. I am just saying if SB check-raises and shows the flush it wouldn't shock me given the way the hand played out.

Re: bet for value here? also did I have pot odds to call?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
2. Raise on the flop. You have OESD to the nuts with two overcards. Again, if there's a lonely A out there, you can't let him draw cheaply.

3. The turn call is fine, and the river check is fine too.


[/ QUOTE ]

2. The "lone-A" isn't drawing, his Ace high has your QJ crushed right now

3. Are you serious? How do you make money when you don't bet when you make your draw? Do you not realize he made a straight on the river? How could you check here?

[/ QUOTE ]
Well, excuse my choice of words. What I'm saying is, you want to move a lonely A of his hand, a call isn't going to do that, a raise might.

Clearly BB wasn't impressed by his hand pre flop, or he would have bet it. My thinking is that a baby flush is highly likely, followed by a two pair/set. He could even have Axs. It's the case of only getting called by hands who have you beat, and the risk of getting C/R. I don't think you'll get more than one caller either ...

All in all, if betting for value here is +EV, it's only slightly so IMO. So checking here is fine, it's not a big mistake.

Re: bet for value here? also did I have pot odds to call?
 

raise preflop
raise the flop
check-call the turn
bet the river, calling a check-raise

what's the debate about here?

btw entity, you said the flop raise was borderline.. throw in 2 overcards and its not even close.. do you see why? oh wait, I just said why [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: bet for value here? also did I have pot odds to call?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Clearly BB wasn't impressed by his hand pre flop, or he would have bet it. My thinking is that a baby flush is highly likely, followed by a two pair/set. He could even have Axs. It's the case of only getting called by hands who have you beat, and the risk of getting C/R. I don't think you'll get more than one caller either ...

[/ QUOTE ]

you are thinking WAY too scared. when he sees the flop, we can narrow BB's holding to... any 2. many typical players will not raise out of the blinds.. except with big pairs or AK. putting BB on two pair, a set, or a baby flush from a flop/turn bet and river check is not a healthy attitude. if anything, it looks like Tx or 9x which is scared of the face card on the river. he saw the flop with any 2, he will have a worse hand far more often than not.

[ QUOTE ]
All in all, if betting for value here is +EV, it's only slightly so IMO. So checking here is fine, it's not a big mistake.

[/ QUOTE ]

not betting this river is a huge mistake.. not for this single occurence in particular, but because it comes up quite frequently. if you cannot find a river value bet here, you are passing up on many profitable river bets.

Re: bet for value here? also did I have pot odds to call?
 

[ QUOTE ]
raise preflop
raise the flop
check-call the turn
bet the river, calling a check-raise

what's the debate about here?

btw entity, you said the flop raise was borderline.. throw in 2 overcards and its not even close.. do you see why? oh wait, I just said why [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, flop raise isn't really borderline. My bad. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Rob