|
|
#11
09-13-2005, 05:52 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: A Very Standard Hand
I disagree.
I check the turn. 2/3 pot is way too much to drop just to find out he doesn't have a flush and hes not calling a 2/3 pot turn bet with AQ either. lets just work the math. I raised preflop for 4xbb. he is only caller. + blinds, pot size on flop is 10bbs or so. I lead for 10, he calls. pot on turn is 30bbs. even with the scarecard everybody is going to bet 2/3 pot? so in essence you are giving villain on the flop 5 to 1 to hit his flush on the turn. sounds like an easy call with the flush draw on the flop to me. its true that most of the players at this level do not lead out on a scarecard, however I also don't think they call a 2/3 pot turn bet with AX here. 
|
|
#12
09-13-2005, 05:53 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A Very Standard Hand
[ QUOTE ]
I am sorry if I am hijacking this thread but I had a modification of this earlier. Party NL100 effecive stacks $100, no read. UTG limps, I make it $5 w/ As Ax in MP, button is only caller. Flop ($12) Q [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] J [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 2 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] (2 players) I bet $11, he calls Turn ($34) Q [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] (2 players) Hero...? [/ QUOTE ] I just check fold. a J is checking behind on the turn 95% of the time.
|
|
#13
09-13-2005, 05:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A Very Standard Hand
[ QUOTE ]
I disagree. I check the turn. 2/3 pot is way too much to drop just to find out he doesn't have a flush and hes not calling a 2/3 pot turn bet with AQ either. lets just work the math. I raised preflop for 4xbb. he is only caller. + blinds, pot size on flop is 10bbs or so. I lead for 10, he calls. pot on turn is 30bbs. even with the scarecard everybody is going to bet 2/3 pot? so in essence you are giving villain on the flop 5 to 1 to hit his flush on the turn. sounds like an easy call with the flush draw on the flop to me. its true that most of the players at this level do not lead out on a scarecard, however I also don't think they call a 2/3 pot turn bet with AX here. [/ QUOTE ] I think check-folding the turn is mighty weak.
|
|
#14
09-13-2005, 05:56 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A Very Standard Hand
Check/fold is pretty weak man. Maybe I'm out of touch with the 50s, but I doubt it. People will definitely call with a J or even lower pair and will also bet the turn when you check. They might even think they are ahead - why not, after all? And you have a draw to what is very likely a good flush. And people will pay off with the K high flush all the time and even worse if you hit a spade on the river.
|
|
#15
09-13-2005, 05:56 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A Very Standard Hand
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I am sorry if I am hijacking this thread but I had a modification of this earlier. Party NL100 effecive stacks $100, no read. UTG limps, I make it $5 w/ As Ax in MP, button is only caller. Flop ($12) Q [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] J [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 2 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] (2 players) I bet $11, he calls Turn ($34) Q [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] (2 players) Hero...? [/ QUOTE ] I just check fold. a J is checking behind on the turn 95% of the time. [/ QUOTE ] I think check-folding the turn is mighty weak. And I think any 2 is betting this turn more often than not if I check to them.
|
|
#16
09-13-2005, 06:02 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A Very Standard Hand
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I disagree. I check the turn. 2/3 pot is way too much to drop just to find out he doesn't have a flush and hes not calling a 2/3 pot turn bet with AQ either. lets just work the math. I raised preflop for 4xbb. he is only caller. + blinds, pot size on flop is 10bbs or so. I lead for 10, he calls. pot on turn is 30bbs. even with the scarecard everybody is going to bet 2/3 pot? so in essence you are giving villain on the flop 5 to 1 to hit his flush on the turn. sounds like an easy call with the flush draw on the flop to me. its true that most of the players at this level do not lead out on a scarecard, however I also don't think they call a 2/3 pot turn bet with AX here. [/ QUOTE ] I think check-folding the turn is mighty weak. [/ QUOTE ] I didn't say check fold here. but I don't see what betting 2/3 pot does.
|
|
#17
09-13-2005, 06:04 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A Very Standard Hand
[ QUOTE ]
Check/fold is pretty weak man. Maybe I'm out of touch with the 50s, but I doubt it. People will definitely call with a J or even lower pair and will also bet the turn when you check. They might even think they are ahead - why not, after all? And you have a draw to what is very likely a good flush. And people will pay off with the K high flush all the time and even worse if you hit a spade on the river. [/ QUOTE ] I didn't see the redraw. in this case I like check call. if they are betting with the J here, they'll probably raise any "1/2 pot please don't raise me bets from you anyways".
|
|
#18
09-13-2005, 06:05 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A Very Standard Hand
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I disagree. I check the turn. 2/3 pot is way too much to drop just to find out he doesn't have a flush and hes not calling a 2/3 pot turn bet with AQ either. lets just work the math. I raised preflop for 4xbb. he is only caller. + blinds, pot size on flop is 10bbs or so. I lead for 10, he calls. pot on turn is 30bbs. even with the scarecard everybody is going to bet 2/3 pot? so in essence you are giving villain on the flop 5 to 1 to hit his flush on the turn. sounds like an easy call with the flush draw on the flop to me. its true that most of the players at this level do not lead out on a scarecard, however I also don't think they call a 2/3 pot turn bet with AX here. [/ QUOTE ] I think check-folding the turn is mighty weak. [/ QUOTE ] I didn't say check fold here. only in your case where it also paired TP. [/ QUOTE ] Well, I think check-calling is the absolute worst option. Why is check-calling superior to betting? P.S. I agree that 2/3 is a bit much to bet on the turn. I bet 1/2.
|
|
#19
09-13-2005, 06:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A Very Standard Hand
the problem with betting the turn here is that it scares away most of the hands that you have beat while bloating the pot oop. I tend to mix it up but my standard line is check-call reasonable bet then block river.
on th at AA on QJxQ board, betting is superior to checking. in this case, too many worse hands, things like skeptic J or striaght/flush draws will call your bet and you can probably check-call blank river.
|
|
#20
09-13-2005, 06:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A Very Standard Hand
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I disagree. I check the turn. 2/3 pot is way too much to drop just to find out he doesn't have a flush and hes not calling a 2/3 pot turn bet with AQ either. lets just work the math. I raised preflop for 4xbb. he is only caller. + blinds, pot size on flop is 10bbs or so. I lead for 10, he calls. pot on turn is 30bbs. even with the scarecard everybody is going to bet 2/3 pot? so in essence you are giving villain on the flop 5 to 1 to hit his flush on the turn. sounds like an easy call with the flush draw on the flop to me. its true that most of the players at this level do not lead out on a scarecard, however I also don't think they call a 2/3 pot turn bet with AX here. [/ QUOTE ] I think check-folding the turn is mighty weak. [/ QUOTE ] I didn't say check fold here. only in your case where it also paired TP. [/ QUOTE ] Well, I think check-calling is the absolute worst option. Why is check-calling superior to betting? P.S. I agree that 2/3 is a bit much to bet on the turn. I bet 1/2. [/ QUOTE ] if you bet something like 1/2 pot you are just delaying your decision until the river where pot size is double. not everyone raises the flush on the turn. The only advantage is that you are charging for 4th club/pairing his kicker. if you feel he'll call and not raise the 1/2 pot bet with AX then certainly betting is better but otherwise I don't see too much advantage in it.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
