|
|
|
|
#1
12-19-2005, 05:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: The Overuse of the WA/WB line Out of Position
[ QUOTE ]
In the cases in which my opponent is a solid player I begin to check-call the flop and donk the turn with more frequency. [/ QUOTE ] Why would you do this with Ax instead of checkraising the flop and betting the turn? I'm really having trouble with this question. My right brain really likes the idea of checkcall-bet with hands like this. It feels right and I can't explain why. My left brain will have none of this. The checkraise is clearly a fat +EV bet so why leave it on the table? Especially when the flop doesn't leave much scope for representing that the turn improved your hand. Villain knows that the hand you bet the turn with is probably the hand you played the flop with. Whether or not you checkraised the flop isn't going to greatly influence his turn play. Can anyone out there help my right brain explain itself? 
|
|
#2
12-19-2005, 05:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The Overuse of the WA/WB line Out of Position
[ QUOTE ]
Can anyone out there help my right brain explain itself? [/ QUOTE ] I am probably unqualified to answer this question because both halves of my brain are left. But I think against solid players I think I get some confusion call downs that would have folded either immediately to a flop checkraise or to my subsequent turn bet. I know I am often like a deer in headlights when I see this line from an opponent that I either know or suspect is a good player. Cartman
|
|
#3
12-19-2005, 07:22 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The Overuse of the WA/WB line Out of Position
[ QUOTE ]
Can anyone out there help my right brain explain itself? [/ QUOTE ] Sounds fun. I'm not advocating this line, merely listing some advantages off the top of my head. Plus I'm not too bright. Others are invited to add to this list. (1) If the opponent has a hand like TT on an A82 flop, he must put you on a hand and decide whether to continue. If you start to show strength on the turn instead of the flop, your range is more likely to be one he beats (example: the turn may allow you to represent a 4-flush) and he will continue. (2) Shania, or the converse of the above point. If the turn is a blank, you can now check-call middle pair on the flop and donk the turn occasionally, representing an ace. Now he may fold a hand that has you beat. (3) The obvious. Your play looks suspicious and may induce a bluff-raise. You'd have to compare this to the amount of bets you expect to get in the pot with the flop check-raise. Edit: (4) If he has you beat, with AK or something, you may save yourself a half bet vs the villain calling your flop c/r and raising the turn.
|
|
#4
12-19-2005, 07:40 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The Overuse of the WA/WB line Out of Position
[ QUOTE ]
Edit: (4) If he has you beat, with AK or something, you may save yourself a half bet vs the villain calling your flop c/r and raising the turn. [/ QUOTE ] This point I must object to. The core of the left brain argument is that Ax is a big favorite and therefore the extra action contributed by the flop checkraise is +EV. The fact that sometimes Villain has AK and we are losing is already built into that assessment. Raising it again as a separate drawback is analogous to double counting.
|
|
#5
12-19-2005, 08:26 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The Overuse of the WA/WB line Out of Position
Fair enough. I was logic-chopping a little different then you. The +EV checkraise is a composite, which is composed of (EV when ahead) + (EV when behind). My idea was to argue you win more when ahead and as a bonus you lose less in the rarer case that you're behind. Whereas you think of it as one +EV flop raise that must be equalled by another line on the big streets in order to be correct.
It's your left brain so I'll defer to your counting system. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
