[Judi]

[ QUOTE ]
Here it is, as described by W. Deranged:

Clarkmeister's Theorem: When playing a heads-up pot out-of-position, always lead the river if the river makes four-to-a-flush.

The idea--

If you have a big flush, it's obviously a value bet.

If you don't have a big flush:

1. Villain may fold a better, non-flush hand or a baby flush fearing a big flush.

[/ QUOTE ]

What kind of person would fold for 1 bet in a 10BB pot, when they know you are capable of this move?

[ QUOTE ]
2. Villain may call with a worse hand thinking you're full of it (it's one of those weird situations where there are both value-bet and bluff-bet reasons to bet).

[/ QUOTE ]

So, he'll fold a better hand or small flush, but call with a worse hand......

[ QUOTE ]
3. You can easily fold to a raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

You can, as you're bluffing with what you think is the worse hand. Me, I'm ck/calling in case villain bet, thinking I'll muck.

[ QUOTE ]
4. You don't allow yourself to get bluffed out of pots when you do have the best hand (particularly as many will automatically bet the scare card if you check).

[/ QUOTE ]

Neither do I.


[ QUOTE ]
I (Jim) would add that this assumes a reasonable, thinking opponent. I've seen Party Poker fish raise and re-raise here with only a 5 or 6 of trump.

[/ QUOTE ]

Okay. So, we need to find ourselves in this position, against a player, who will lay down a better hand, thinking we have the flush, or a player who will call with a worse hand, or a "fish" who will raise with small trump cards, when we have none. Or....should we just ck/fold to the "fish" if we know he wouldn't bet without the trump? Or, should we bet into him in case he doesn't have trump but will call with a worse hand, thinking we are full of it, or would lay down a better hand cause he doesn't think we are full of it?
And......we know all this while playing how many tables at once?



[ QUOTE ]
Anyhow, I think this is an excellent use of bet/fold.

Jim

[/ QUOTE ]

I can see that you do.