River action against two LP-P's

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
<font color="white">Where is the 3-bet and hope the villian misclicks option? </font>

[/ QUOTE ]
<font color="white">Are you folding to a cap or calling because the pot is too big? [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] </font>

[umdpoker]

how the hell do you write in white? <font color="white"> </font>

[umdpoker]

<font color="white"> i figured it out! anyways, where is the option to check the river? i prefer to induce bluffs on this board. a worse hand aint calling you, and i doubt a k is gonna fold. also, if it comes back 2 bets cold, you know damn well you are beat.</font>

[jrz1972]

[ QUOTE ]
<font color="white"> i prefer to induce bluffs on this board. a worse hand aint calling you, </font>

[/ QUOTE ]

<font color="white">Do you play against LPPs much? They don't bluff, and they call down with crap. If you want to check the river because you can't stand a raise, that's one thing. But checking the river to induce bluffs from LPPs or checking the river because you're afraid the LPPS won't call you with their bpnk is a major leak.</font>

[Evan]

Okay, so right now its 76/23 to fold (and 99=100 I guess). Honestly I thought there would be more people voting for call, and i still believe that the amount of people that would call given the situation is higher than the proportion that calls after reading the hand here--which is pretty normal.

I just wanted to say that and bump this because I want to get some more people to vote if they haven't seen this thread yet.

[LotusBoy]

I voted for FOLD, but I am still working on folding in these situation. I guess I suck. Also I hate to see CO fold after I folded. But that should not be a valid reason for me to call.
Since I have this problem, I won't bet out on such river. I will check/call a single bet.

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
Since I have this problem, I won't bet out on such river. I will check/call a single bet.

[/ QUOTE ]
That is a bigger leak. Read srt's post for more information on why. Basically, you'll still lose a bet when you're behind, without any possibility of winning a bet when you're ahead.

[Evan]

If you absolutely cannot fold this river (which I suspect is decently common), what do you think is worse, betting or checking? Not sure if the answer to this question is meaningful in the slightest (since you're making a pretty big mistake either way), just thought it was interesting.

[LotusBoy]

Thank you, I am still working on my river play. I miss a lot of value bet because I have problem folding to a raise.

[Entity]

I honestly think they're pretty close to equal.

Let's say you're ahead on this ugly river card 20% of the time. So, 20% of the time you bet, and are called two ways -- you win 2BB, so the EV of betting when you're ahead is .4BB. The other 80% of the time you lose 2BB, since you must call, so you lose 1.6BB. You lose 1.2BB overall.

When checking, I don't think they bet with a hand that you beat, so you earn 0BB 20% of the time and lose 1BB 80% of the time, for a net loss of -.8BB.

At face value, it would seem that check/calling is better if you must call a raise, but I think that the problem there is you will check-call in other situations where you are good far more often than 20% of the time. As the situations increase where you begin check-calling and stop value betting as much as you should, the temporary benefits of check-calling are outweighed by its demerits.

At least, I think so. I'm sure I could do some math to figure it out, but I've done the math before to show that bet-folding is the best line in the majority of these situations, and it doesn't take off the aggressiveness that earns us those little tiny fractions of bets that we make our livings off of. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Rob