Re: Quads argument
 

Check/raise the turn, lead the river. Pray to anyone who will listen that somebody gets frisky and decides to go to war.

Re: Quads argument
 

[ QUOTE ]
Sarsen, a c/r is better on the turn because there's no guarantee the BB will bet the river for us again. And if others are on draws we need to charge them before they miss their draw - this has the added benefit, by the way, of getting more action from them on the river if they actually make their draw.

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess, I'm not disagreeing that the check raise on the turn is better than a c/r on the river. What I'm saying is that there's not enough info given to know if LP1 and LP2 are calling stations or what. Many times we sit at a table and don't have this information, without it, I agree the proper play is c/r the turn and hammer anyone who sticks around.

Re: Quads argument
 

[ QUOTE ]
This is, IMHO, flawed reasoning. Yes, THIS TIME he got in a sweet check raise on the river, but that is simply not going to happen every time. If he had gotten the river checked through, or checked to LP2 (who bets, you raise, and everyone folds), you've just left Tons of money on the table.

What you're doing is comparing a typical winrate for a turn c/r to basically the optimal winrate for the turn c/c river c/r. Since they are similar in value, it is clear that the turn check raise is preferable.

[/ QUOTE ]

If I understand what you're saying, yes, You're right. Problem is we have the actual play layed out for us. As a result we have the acutal winrate vs. a guess of what the action might have been if he'd c/r the turn. A bit of apples to oranges so to speak. If, the question was posed without the river action, then it becomes a much more straight forward answer in my mind. A c/r is the proper action on the turn suck them in for at least one more bet and see if you can milk them for another on the river...with no guarantees.