Should i have taken a different line of play?

[China Willy]

[ QUOTE ]
Besides, it's not like checking the flop cost you the pot in this case. The guy who ended up with the flush flopped a pair and had an ace in his hand, so (from the way things sound) he would have seen the turn even if you had bet the flop. And, since the turn was a heart, he would have seen the river as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

How on earth is this germane to the discussion? You read the results -- great point.

[China Willy]

[ QUOTE ]
You raise the turn because you get 2x as much money.
-James

[/ QUOTE ]

No you don't. Check-bet-call twice gets you 1.5BB. Raising gets you 2BB. Last time I checked that's not twice as much.

And the arguments *agaisnt* it still hold true, as well as the fact that there are multiple scenerios (I threw out 2) where you get the same or more depending on how the action unfolds.

Here's one more for thought: Suppose an A hits. Its the case ace here, but you don't know that. If an A hits on the turn, you get tons of action.

Also, knowing the results, UTG might have semi-bluff bet the turn anyhow, allowing you to raise. OR, he might have semi-bluff checkraised Hero, effectively accomplishing the turn raise-field thinning effect that Hero wants to accomplish when he's hoping the dude on his right bets.

Bottom line, you don't know. Pot is big, you have best hand, bet.

-CW

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
OR, he might have semi-bluff checkraised Hero, effectively accomplishing the turn raise-field thinning effect that Hero wants to accomplish when he's hoping the dude on his right bets...


Bottom line, you don't know.

[/ QUOTE ]

Can i give a better description of the players? No way he is going for a c/r if an A hits. He would fear it will be checked through. I mean what i said. They were str8 forward players on this one. My reads were about as close as you can get for the most part. You're putting reads/scenarios in that are very unlikely given these players and how i've described them. Postflop, with this type of aggression preflop, they played very predictable. Which is why i 'knew' i had the best hand on the flop. No question. Even on the turn, for that matter. Given UTG1s and MPs 'call' i know i likely have the bettor beat. The other guys would raise if they had anything better.

[ QUOTE ]
Here's one more for thought: Suppose an A hits. Its the case ace here, but you don't know that. If an A hits on the turn, you get tons of action.

[/ QUOTE ]

In this case, you would't want AJ to fold on the flop. You would welcome his turn raise so you can 3 bet him.

b

[steveyz]

I agree, you want to thin the field. However, a flop bet will not thin the field. Better to wait until the turn and hope someone on your right bets into you.

[Senor Choppy]

KJ is an excellent example. A 3 outer happens to have correct odds to call here if the hands were face up. But would you call a bet with KJ here, even if you were to close the action? Chances are both cards are dead, and you only have 4 outs to pick up an open-ender. 16 sbs is a big pot, but not so big as to make calling with any 2 correct, and KJ is pretty close to qualifying as just that.

You charging a hand that's effectively (with his backdoor) a 10-1 shot against you 1 small bet is majorly EV here. If he misses his K on the turn, he's probably folding, and if not he can put in 2 more small bets which is, again, majorly EV for you.

You are giving up one of the most +EV bets imaginable, in the hopes that on the turn a bet will come from the position directly in front of you, to knock out some theoretical draw that probably never materialized. You don't need to be worrying about punishing people on the turn because at this point in this hand, there's nothing anyone could have that needs to be charged 2 full bets instead of just 1. If you give them all a free card, things could change, and you could be behind.

I don't disagree with this play in theory. If I had QQ on a ragged flop, I like it. But given your hand and your read on your opponents, you're trying to apply a play to a situation that doesn't warrant it IMO.

[Senor Choppy]

Even if them taking one off here is a given, you're getting them to put in 3 small bets with hands that have the equivalent of around 4 outs, with them counterfitting each others outs in most cases. Betting here probably has an EV of at least +2 small bets assuming 3 callers.

You have to pick up at least 1 extra big bet on the turn just to break even. This doesn't seem unreasonable, and maybe the play should be made to try and induce a bluff from someone that would've folded his hand otherwise. But for the justification to be that you charge someone 2 full bets instead of 1 who would've had odds to call otherwise, you have to get bet into by the appropriate person AND someone behind you has to have picked up a 4 outer of some sort. This is a tough parlay to pull off, and not worth the sacrifice of EV on the flop by itself.

[andyfox]

I'm not terribly concerned with getting a few small bets on the flop here. I'm more concerned with winning the already swollen pot. And I have a better chance to win the pot the fewer opponents that get to the river. The best chance of doing that is by checking behind on the flop and raising on the turn. Usually somebody's gonna take a stab at this pot on the turn when it's checked around on the flop because they either think it missed everybody else or because they think their second pair or pocket pair or two big cards may be good or because they're semi-bluffing.

[Senor Choppy]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not terribly concerned with getting a few small bets on the flop here. I'm more concerned with winning the already swollen pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're looking at this wrong.

Let's assume someone is going to pick up a gutshot on the turn, regardless of what you do on the flop. If you bet, you gain almost a full small bet, but they will be getting proper odds on the turn (barely) to see the river. If you check, you are positive you'll be able to raise the turn and they won't have proper odds and will either make a mistake calling or have to fold. It appears that the 2nd scenario is potentially saving the pot for you, but in reality, since them calling or folding for one bet are both borderline, (they're barely getting the odds they need), whether or not they make this call is virtually neutral EV. Preventing them from making it MIGHT save you the pot, but this doesn't change the fact that the call itself has very little effect on your results over the long run.

Going out of your way to avoid people calling 1 big bet on the turn with whatever draws they picked up isn't going to have pot-sized implications like people in this thread seem to believe.

[FishyWhale]

It´s never wrong to bet to give backdoors the chance to fold, but with that flop, checking to vary your play and give yourself a chance to raise a lesser hand on turn to fold out the one pair hands and other crap really is okay (the A7 would have called anyway, the AJ was drawing dead, and an AK would also have called). I you knew that someone would routinely check-raise here with less, hoping that you have AK or TT or whatever, then of course bet. Easy turn raise, easy river fold.

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not terribly concerned with getting a few small bets on the flop here. I'm more concerned with winning the already swollen pot. And I have a better chance to win the pot the fewer opponents that get to the river. The best chance of doing that is by checking behind on the flop and raising on the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

These were primarily my thoughts during the hand.

Minor point to those that think i only gain .5 BB by waiting to the turn over betting the flop and turn, i gained an extra 1.5BBs collectively while i have the best hand. That's quite a chunk. But it's more about where i can fold them out, imo. The flop isnt the place.

b