Microposter missed value bets

[car ramrod]

[ QUOTE ]
for example: i still don't see how checking that river in the first hand Aaron put up is a leak. there's a Queen, flush, 2pair, and possible flush on the board. the only thing we beat that is calling is a 9?

[/ QUOTE ]

obviously some type of a read on bb would be nice, but I think this is a pretty easy bet on teh river. If he is like most players he is calling down with a piece of that board and it doesn't have to be a Q.

Ok, here is the issue that I struggle with on these. In most cases of the hands stating a missed value bet, the final card either completed a flush draw, or didn't help me at all and I have unimproved overcards. My question is, if I bet out and get raised on the flush, do I fold? If I don't, then what does the bet accomplish. If he doesn't have the flush, he probably folds, if he does have it, I get raised, costing me two bets when I needed 0 or 1.

Therefore, is my line when those scare cards/straight completions/flush completions come out to bet and fold to a raise, or bet and call the raise. I don't like the bet and fold to a raise, because if anyone picks up on that, then crap i will get raised with anything that looks remotely nice on the river and my life is miserable. Please advise.

[@bsolute_luck]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
for example: i still don't see how checking that river in the first hand Aaron put up is a leak. there's a Queen, flush, 2pair, and possible flush on the board. the only thing we beat that is calling is a 9?

[/ QUOTE ]

obviously some type of a read on bb would be nice, but I think this is a pretty easy bet on teh river. If he is like most players he is calling down with a piece of that board and it doesn't have to be a Q.

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah it doesn't have to be a Q, but i think here are enough hands that we lose to that i don't see much value in betting here as i can't see many hands calling that we beat.

[Catt]

[ QUOTE ]
for example: i still don't see how checking that river in the first hand Aaron put up is a leak. there's a Queen, flush, 2pair, and possible flush on the board. the only thing we beat that is calling is a 9?

[/ QUOTE ]

You're beating any 6, any 9, worse J's, any PP below JJ, and any silly calls with a busted draw. If you get raised, it's a pretty easy fold. Against a LPP player, if your hand is reasonable, you should keep betting until told to stop. Guys will call and turn over the craziest stuff. If we knew he was a much more reasonable player, or a guy capable of C/R bluffing on the end, it's closer. And though we've only seen a few hands when this one comes up, and given what the game at this level (whatever it is) looks really passive, I'd say with some degree of comfort that it is a mistake not to bet this hand (and others like it) just because the board is somewhat intimidating by the river and someone has called all the way along. You don't always win, but you often do (add in the fact that - and this is a guess since I don't know the game - many players would bet their flush / straight / two pair on the river, and the chances that you are good here is greater after he checks the river to you).

[Catt]

[ QUOTE ]
Ok, here is the issue that I struggle with on these. In most cases of the hands stating a missed value bet, the final card either completed a flush draw, or didn't help me at all and I have unimproved overcards. My question is, if I bet out and get raised on the flush, do I fold? If I don't, then what does the bet accomplish. If he doesn't have the flush, he probably folds, if he does have it, I get raised, costing me two bets when I needed 0 or 1.

Therefore, is my line when those scare cards/straight completions/flush completions come out to bet and fold to a raise, or bet and call the raise. I don't like the bet and fold to a raise, because if anyone picks up on that, then crap i will get raised with anything that looks remotely nice on the river and my life is miserable. Please advise.

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't narrow his range to just a flush. Sure, he could be limping lots of suited hands here. But he could be limping a bunch of PPs (you would have heard from a set already), a wide variety of hands with a 6 (think A6, think K6s not in the flush suit, etc.) a wide variety of hands with a J or T in them (even JT), and a wide variety of hands with a BD draw on the flop and some high card strength think A8, etc. For a typical passive donk, this whole range of hands is entirely possible given his play, and the majority of them all call the river bet. Don't worry so much about bet-folding this river -- the real leak would be not folding to the guy (as opposed to not betting to avoid the tougher decision), and I'm pretty certain that no one is going to see this play and suddenly rev up their engines to make C/R river bluffs against you.

Compare this hand to the 33 hand where a flush comes on the river. I'd probably bet-fold there but bet calling is reasonable. There are enough combos of two-pair hands out (T8 seems to be popular and these guys play little connectors 34, etc.). By checking that river and then calling the bet you have the absolute worst of both worlds -- your opponents check through any hands that are losers, but bet their flushes. You win no bets when you're ahead but always lose one when behind. Bet the river, be prepared to fold if you think it right or call if you think it right, but habitually checking river scare cards will substantially eat into your overall earn. It's tough to become a good river value bettor (look at HUSH and Mid-High -- there are a bunch of players that feel they're still struggling to do it well) but just because it's tough doesn't mean you shouldn't start doing it more so you gain experience in it and start to get a much better feel for what does and does not invite a value bet.

[istewart]

Aaron, BTW.

I was semi-playing devil's advocate on the KJo hand because I think it's a very good place for a bet so don't get your panties in a twist. [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

So, i need to basically watch playing off suite hands in early position (QJ, KJ, AT, etc...), and work on my value betting. Anything else, because I have lost 29 of the last 33 tables i have entered and am a loser for 26K hands on .50-1 level.

[Catt]

I think there were a few missed value bets on the turn as well, but could be wrong.

Keep in mind that this review is over a small smaple of hands. If you're not happy with your game and your overall results, I'd suggest reading and rereading SSHE, maybe GSITH (though I haven't read it), and TOP is great regardless of your level. Also, respond to (not necessarily start) a lot of threads here -- don't be afraid of giving what might turn out to be wrong advice; you'll usually be corrected (often sometimes quite harshly) but you will learn a ton more and a ton faster if you jump into the debate by commenting on hands and most importantly by explaining why you're offering the advice you are.

If you can't explain why you think a certain play is correct, then you're not thinking about it enough. If you can explain it but it turns out to be incorrect, then you're way ahead of the game. You're in much better shape and well on your way to winning if you're doing a lot of number 2 and not a lot of number 1. And I'll guarantee that you'll learn and remember a lot more from any discussion in which you provide a reasoned analysis of why to do something and another poster provides a reasoned analysis about why your advice might not be correct. Certainly way more than just browsing this forum and lurking.

[Absolution]

I struggle with this as well, but just realizing that you're winning the minimum when you're ahead in these situations and you check helped me.

Also, read this: http://www.twoplustwo.com/magazine/i...ruitt0705.html

[bozlax]

[ QUOTE ]
i agree they should be prescreened. anything slightly debateable should be left in, but we shouldn't have to see like 40 hands where hero folds like 97o first in...

[/ QUOTE ]

I thought part of the purpose was to be able to see the play of the opponents, too. To be able to arrive at an independent read?

That said, I've always found these too tedious to wade through.