the wrong way to use Clarkmeister\'s theorem?
 

villain is about 62/10/1 over 30 hands for the session i played w/ him, but this is pretty early in it, so i have no real reads, just a sense he's kinda loose.

i also got called a fish by the table coach after this hand, which did great things for me on my other table with him.

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

Preflop: pryor15 is BB with 6[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] , 4[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] .
<font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, UTG+1 calls, UTG+2 calls, <font color="#666666">2 folds</font>, MP3 calls, <font color="#666666">2 folds</font>, SB completes, pryor15 checks.

Flop: (4 SB) J[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], 5[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], 7[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(5 players)</font>
pryor15 checks, <font color="#CC3333">UTG+1 bets</font>, UTG+2 folds, MP3 folds, SB folds, pryor15 calls.

Turn: (2.50 BB) A[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">pryor15 bets</font>, UTG+1 calls.

River: (4.50 BB) 8[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">pryor15 bets</font>, UTG+1 calls.

Final Pot: 6.50 BB

in retrospect, i'm thinking i should give up on the river and just try to see the showdown for free. i don't know that he calls the turn with a hand i can beat when my straight hits. but he might, right?

Re: the wrong way to use Clarkmeister\'s theorem?
 

To address the subject of the post, the Clarkmeister theorem dictates betting when the fourth flush card comes on the river, not on the turn. I'll reply to the hand itself shortly.

Re: the wrong way to use Clarkmeister\'s theorem?
 

[ QUOTE ]
To address the subject of the post, the Clarkmeister theorem dictates betting when the fourth flush card comes on the river, not on the turn. I'll reply to the hand itself shortly.

[/ QUOTE ]

my bad. i must have missed that somehow.

Re: the wrong way to use Clarkmeister\'s theorem?
 

i can see him calling with two pair. but what is he betting on the flop that you should stay in for 5:1 pot odds. i think your oesd outs are partly discounted for sure.


i thought clark was just when the 4th suit hit on the river

Re: the wrong way to use Clarkmeister\'s theorem?
 

I think c/f is the best line for flop and turn. c/c seems better than b/f (or b/c) for the river, especially since 2/4 players can be trickier, in my experience.

Re: the wrong way to use Clarkmeister\'s theorem?
 

[ QUOTE ]
i can see him calling with two pair. but what is he betting on the flop that you should stay in for 5:1 pot odds. i think your oesd outs are partly discounted for sure.


[/ QUOTE ]

JTo? 2 pair?

Re: the wrong way to use Clarkmeister\'s theorem?
 

Yeah, this isn't Clarkmeister, but I like it fine. I see no reason whatsoever to give a loose villain like that credit for the flush, and if you check to him on the turn he will undoubtedly bet, with or without it.

Re: the wrong way to use Clarkmeister\'s theorem?
 

Preflop: I guess you can see a free flop. If they force you to.

Flop: I hate this call. This pot is superdupersmall, you have eight outs to a straight, but really only six to a straight you feel good about, and since you may be drawing dead already, I might even discount it to more like 5 outs. Fold this. Now.

Turn: Accidental misapplication of Clarkmeister theorem. Okay. To an offsuit blank, you're check/folding, right?

River: Well, you made your hand. Too bad it's beaten by a heart. Any heart in the world. Villain would be pretty dumb to be calling you down without one, so howsabout we try for a free showdown? You're not getting called by anything you beat.

Re: the wrong way to use Clarkmeister\'s theorem?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, this isn't Clarkmeister, but I like it fine. I see no reason whatsoever to give a loose villain like that credit for the flush, and if you check to him on the turn he will undoubtedly bet, with or without it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Have you taken a look at the pot size?

Re: the wrong way to use Clarkmeister\'s theorem?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, this isn't Clarkmeister, but I like it fine. I see no reason whatsoever to give a loose villain like that credit for the flush, and if you check to him on the turn he will undoubtedly bet, with or without it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Have you taken a look at the pot size?

[/ QUOTE ]

So your suggesting Chck-Folding the Turn right?

Yeah, I wouldn't like a Check/ Call there if it wasn't 4 to a flush, so I don' like betting out even more.