Two Plus Two Older Archives

Two Plus Two Older Archives (http://archives2.twoplustwo.com/index.php)

- Small Stakes Hold'em (http://archives2.twoplustwo.com/forumdisplay.php?f=15)

- - 1st SS post (http://archives2.twoplustwo.com/showthread.php?t=253947)

No reads, 2nd orbit and villain just sat down a few hands ago . . .

PokerStars 2/4 Hold'em (10 handed) converter

Preflop: Hero is Button with 9[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], 9[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img].
6 folds, CO raises, Hero 3-bets, 2 folds, CO calls.

Flop: (7.50 SB) 3[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], 7[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], K[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] (2 players)
CO checks, Hero bets, CO calls.

Turn: (4.75 BB) 6[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] (2 players)
CO checks, Hero bets, CO calls.

River: (6.75 BB) 7[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] (2 players)
CO checks, Hero checks.

Final Pot: 6.75 BB

This is my first SS post, moving up from micros. This is also the first full ring session i've played at Stars. Did i miss a river bet? Is the aggro turned up a bit too high? Am i wasting your time? flame away . . .

[ QUOTE ]
Bet river.

[/ QUOTE ]

You really think 88/AQ pay off?

Rob

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Bet river.

[/ QUOTE ]

You really think 88/AQ pay off?

Rob

[/ QUOTE ]

My default at 2/4 Party is that, yes, they do, and worse hands too. Stars might be tighter, I don't know for sure.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Bet river.

[/ QUOTE ]
You really think 88/AQ pay off?
Rob

[/ QUOTE ]
My default at 2/4 Party is that, yes, they do, and worse hands too. Stars might be tighter, I don't know for sure.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree here... Default at Party against a player with reads maybe - but not against an unkown.

I don't think that an unkown CO pays off a worse hand here often enough to bet the river. Furthermore, he's unkown and checking gives Hero the opportunity to review the hand in the history which gives Hero a good start on some information against villian.

I think this is fine. some marginal hands I lump into "value bet without a read" but I agree with entity that this one is probably "value bet with a read" territory.

I think you played it well. The CO opened the door for your 3 bet preflop and you obliged. I don't even think the river check down is all that passive although I'm sure some will disagree. He may have been raising 88 but there are a lot of hands that he could have like 10,10 up that have you beat and he's gone calling station because he's afraid of AK.

What pushes the river action into bet territory is the preflop action. Looking back, CO raised preflop, making it much more likely he is calling here with some type of ace.

So bet the river. If raised, you have an easy fold, but that's not likely anyway.

Preflop raise is beautiful: isolate against a likely blind-thief with medium pocket pair, better position, and dead money from the blinds. Bravo.

Flop is standard: you've got to push your pair and hopefully push him off his draw.

Turn card is blank, and you bet it. CO has given you no reason to play it differently.

River card is not blank. Given how passive CO has been, I think I probably bet this one, but calling is probably better. If CO had been calling a weak K, you're dead. If CO had been calling a 7, he's setting up a check-raise on the river. If CO had been calling a 3 or overcards, he could easily fold (depending on the read that we don't have). Absent any read, I think checking through makes sense. If we knew he was a standard passive fish or calling station, betting would be in order.

Well played, and welcome to small stakes.

ICK!

[ QUOTE ]
What pushes the river action into bet territory is the preflop action. Looking back, CO raised preflop, making it much more likely he is calling here with some type of ace.

[/ QUOTE ]

What Ace is an unkown CO check/calling UI on the river?

[ QUOTE ]
So bet the river. If raised, you have an easy fold, but that's not likely anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]

If there's a fold on the river to a checkraise it's FAR from easy!?!