beautiful naked chick

[CondoBrian]

Agreed. No way do I give this guy a chance to check raise me, as I'd be done with the hand for sure at that point. As it is, you get to catch your miracle card on the river for free. Can't beat that.

[TexTiger]

I'm thinking he's wanting to CR here too, based on the flop amount lead out and smooth call of the raise. If he's on a set or over pair, he should come back over the top on the raise, but he didn't. If I were him and on a straight draw, flush draw, or TPTK, MPTK I would play for the CR on the turn when something that looks like it would fill me comes even if I didn't hit.

TT

[Wes ManTooth]

no one is concerned that UTG has pocket 99s or TTs??

[dmk]

[ QUOTE ]
no one is concerned that UTG has pocket 99s or TTs??

[/ QUOTE ]

nope, because if he does, thats poker. theres no way i'm not getting all of my chips in the middle

[TexTiger]

No, because he would/should have either reraised the flop, or bet out on the turn. He didn't, so it's doubtful he has the set.

TT

[nightlyraver]

If you were UTG and you held A9 with no spade you would have check-raised that turn? If so, hats off to you - you would need a real good read on the other player in that case.

So refering to my other post, does the presence of the flush card on fourth street simply amount to Hero giving up on this hand completely? I simply can't see him calling on the end if UTG comes out firing...

[Sluss]

Does this mean we get to see the bad beat police? That's a half naked hot chick. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

By the way well played nothing you can do if he has 1010 or 99.

[TexTiger]

If I'm limping UTG w/ A9 (which I'm usually not anyway unless it's suited and I have a good stack, but for sake of argument), I'm making at least a pot sized bet, maybe a 1.5 pot sized bet, not a half pot bet, to reduce the odds for anyone behind me that are on the flush/straight draw. If I get a caller, than I put them on either 2 pair or a set, and when a "scare" card comes, I'll either lead out (which UTG should have done IMO), or if I think the villian will bet, I will go for the CR. If UTG leads out, you have to put him on a made flush or straight at best, 2 pair at worst, meaning you have at best 4 outs, and you're not going to get the odds needed to call, unless he just min-bets the pot.

Either villian played the hand poorly with AA-QQ or got a bad beat with AQ or AK spades.

TT

[nightlyraver]

No doubt I'm labeling villian as a bad player in my analysis given the betting pattern preflop and on the flop. Then again, you see bad players limping with hands like A9,AA,KK and even QQ and then playing it poorly. He limped early and only bet 2/3 the pot on this dangerous flop with many players still to act. He then smooth called the raise. I can't see him check-raising the turn with a hand like A [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]A [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] but he is only about 35% to win the hand at that point. This same bad player will likely check and call a value bet of roughly 1/2 the pot on the turn (this being the 2nd mistake). Is there something wrong with this line? Thus, why should we simply give up on the turn when the flush card hits? Forget the river in this particular case - if the 2 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] fell instead and UTG came out betting Hero would have had to fold without a good read to suggest the contrary.

[TexTiger]

The action could be a good player that limped with Ax [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] as well as a badly played A9, AA-QQ. Since there are no other reads as to whether the Villian is either a good or bad player, there is no reason to risk a value bet that could turn into a check raise leaving hero with having to fold. Get the free card.

TT