Two Plus Two Older Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Older Archives > Limit Texas Hold'em > Micro-Limits
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 11-15-2005, 07:56 AM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: JTs against a loose passive

Id just check it.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 11-15-2005, 08:36 AM
Obliky Obliky is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Not value betting the river..
Posts: 86
Default Re: JTs against a loose passive

My initial reaction was that checking the flop would have been best, however thinking about it more we have ~12 outs (im only giving 0.5 outs to a T) which means about 12 * 4 = 48% equity.

Therefore isnt a bet on this flop a bet for value?

On the river, i think its very unlikely we are going to get called by a hand that we beat (if he has a J we are spliting most of the time). Its a pity we dont have any AF number for villian..but if he is a tad aggro i would go for a check/call and hopefully induce a bluff from a busted str8 draw.

After all we only have to win ~17% of the time to turn a profit, and i can see villian having a str8 draw more than that. Against a passive opponent a check/fold is best.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 11-15-2005, 09:35 AM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: JTs against a loose passive

first up i check the flop,
1) when you hit your straight you want other players in
2) it will give you better information on the vils respective ranges
3) someone else will probably bet it anyway
4) you are probably behind without the equity to value bet

im gonna go out on a limb tho and say check/call the river.

if he has a K there is a good chance you would have heard from him by now, and a Q or J most likely checks behind on the river for fear you are getting fancy with trips (only at this level of course)

besides even if another J does decide to bet it is highly likely a split.

i think a bet from a player that plays this many hands is much more likely to indicate a bluff from a naked ace or missed T, remember he is playing a lot so hands like T8 or T7s are all possible. definitely he is bluffing more than 1 in 7 anyway.

so yeah, check flop, check/call river
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 11-15-2005, 05:55 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: JTs against a loose passive

I kept going and bet the river, he mucked. Guessing he missed his straight.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 11-15-2005, 05:59 PM
milesdyson milesdyson is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 197
Default Re: JTs against a loose passive

[ QUOTE ]
I kept going and bet the river, he mucked. Guessing he missed his straight.

[/ QUOTE ]
you see why the river is a poor place to bet, right?
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 11-15-2005, 06:48 PM
DCWildcat DCWildcat is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 358
Default Re: JTs against a loose passive

grunch

I don't think I'm betting this. Getting raised on this flop blows. Check/fold.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 11-15-2005, 06:58 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: JTs against a loose passive

[ QUOTE ]
So why not check the flop with the intent of raising if it's 1 bet back? It is likely that the bettor will call one bet back. Then check the turn, gambling that the flop bettor will also check for fear of being checkraised. If it works, you get to see the river for 1 BB. If the turn is a blank and the flop bettor bets again, you can be much more sure you're beat and fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem (or more accurately, one problem) with this logic is that you won't be able to fold if villain bets a turn blank because of your straight outs.

[ QUOTE ]
Because hero has a lot of outs, he really wants to see both the turn and the river.

[/ QUOTE ]
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:09 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.