Another Jim Brier (Middle Limit Hold'em) Problem

[Mikey]

In order to better understand this post and the point I'm tyring to make, read the previous post I wrote titled
"Jim Brier (Middle Limit Hold'em) Problem"

Alright, sifting through this book, I stumbled onto something else which is so very close to the first Jim Brier problem that I posted. This one really got my attention.

For those of you who have the book, it's on pg. 169 #22.

(22) A $30-$60 game. You are in the small blind with the 7 [img]/forums/images/icons/spade.gif[/img] 6 [img]/forums/images/icons/spade.gif[/img] . An early player, a middle player and the cutoff limp. You limp. There is $150 in the pot and five players. The flop is K [img]/forums/images/icons/diamond.gif[/img] 7 [img]/forums/images/icons/club.gif[/img] 3 [img]/forums/images/icons/heart.gif[/img] , giving you middle pair. Everyone checks. The turn is the J [img]/forums/images/icons/club.gif[/img] . What do you do?

Answer: Check. You probably have too many opponents to win the pot outright. The Jack is likely to pair someone, since hands containing facecards are the kind of hands players limp with. A bet will probably get called at least in one spot, if not more. the flop is also the type that some players with top pair like to check hands like king-queen or king-jack on the flop, planning to checkraise. When the flop doesn't get bet, they will bet or checkraise on the turn, If there had been only one or two other players, you could sometimes take a chance and bluff here. but four opponents is a whole crowd, too many to take on with your weak holding.

This is one I would like to bring up for argument as well,

I think that you should have bet the flop here instead of check it, since you are facing 4 opponents in an (unraised) pot. It's also stated that "this flop is also the type that some players with top pair like to check hands like King-Queen or King-Jack on the flop, planning to raise."

These two types of thinking contradict one another. On one flop of K [img]/forums/images/icons/heart.gif[/img] 5 [img]/forums/images/icons/spade.gif[/img] 2 [img]/forums/images/icons/club.gif[/img] it's ok to bet because. "a flop of king-rag-rag is an excellent flop to bluff into since you are representing a pair of kings. It is not so likely that someone without a king will hang around, as there is no draw on the board. You may win the pot outright by betting"

Now on this flop of K [img]/forums/images/icons/diamond.gif[/img] 7 [img]/forums/images/icons/club.gif[/img] 3 [img]/forums/images/icons/heart.gif[/img] , it is suggested that you check the flop.

I think it's even better to bet the 67 into 4 opponnents in an an unraised pot that it is to bet 65 into 3 opponents in a raised pot.

I would like to hear what others think.

[Clarkmeister]

I think you make a good point. I would much rather bet this flop than the other one. A key differentiator is that in this spot, your chances of having the best hand are simply much higher than the other hand.

[758219]

FLOP: If it's a loose game you have no bet, and if it's tight (and aggressive) you as a C&B formula have possibly no bet 1 per 4. If you deside to bet those tiny situations, there is nothing wrong with it, I am sure. Do you call if raised? Yes. Pocket eights is a painful (and overcards can come) hand and should bet and fold if raise (who then shows you A7s). Pocket Queens should check and call twice (and at the end look at the smiling face of the winner who shows you garbage).

[Bozeman]

Assuming that this book is similar to Brier's CardPlayer column, I bet there is a warning similar to:

"Since these hands were taken from live games, all of the plays leading up to the problem in question are not necessarily correct."

Craig