One more damn bet

[tongni]

This is one of those things where it doesn't really matter what you do. That said, I usually fold, because there is nothing like making tough laydowns for the river for one bet.

[TStoneMBD]

fold. its not like there is even any draws on that board. his raise on the river is most definitely an ace but it shouldnt be a worse one.

[ QUOTE ]
You only have to be right 1 in 13.5 times to make your call correct. That's 7.4 percent. I doubt any of us can come up with a precise estimate of how often you're good here, but my gut is telling me that it's more than 7.4 percent heads-up against a LAG in a short-handed game.

[/ QUOTE ]

[Turning Stone Pro]

My advice was to call the river raise, while perhaps close I have to call in a 4 handed PP game, as Flawless mentions.

This gets back to my old theory. I am not saying I am definately right, but why is this so wrong?:

This pot is pretty big for a 4 handed game, 10 BB or so, before the river. Why would you take a shot to get bluffed or even value-raised (by someone overplaying Ax) off the river if you are going to auto-fold to a raise. You know the villian has SOMETHING, why not check-call river if you are going to muck to the raise?

I just don't see how making big laydowns with a solid hand in a PP shorthanded game is +ev.

TSP

[TStoneMBD]

a better summary of your theory is if villain bets a weaker hand more often than he bluffraises you equity wise then a checkcall is correct. someone could of course make this more precise.

its a good theory though.

[ggbman]

[ QUOTE ]
a better summary of your theory is if villain bets a weaker hand more often than he bluffraises you equity wise then a checkcall is correct. someone could of course make this more precise.

its a good theory though.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah this theory doesn't hold much weight though. For example, he might call with a worse hand 85% of the time. If we check it to him, him might bet a worse hand 7% of the time and bluff raise 2 % of the time. Even though he bets worse hands more often than he bluff raises, it would clearly be correct to bet here.

Gabe

[mplspoker]

Call. 9/10 time you are beat (maybe more), but if someone sees you fold like this , then they are going to start raising you on the river with hands you can beat and if you fold again it is a HUGE mistake. This is the reason that I will not fold legitimate hands like this.

[Paluka]

[ QUOTE ]
Call. 9/10 time you are beat (maybe more), but if someone sees you fold like this , then they are going to start raising you on the river with hands you can beat and if you fold again it is a HUGE mistake. This is the reason that I will not fold legitimate hands like this.

[/ QUOTE ]

If this was the case, wouldn't it make more sense to fold this time and call next time?

Am I the only one who doesn't like the turn bet? That flop action sure looks to me like you're probably beat since there are no draws whatsoever. I vote to check/call turn and river.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Fold, you never ever win here.

[/ QUOTE ]have you played alot of 4handed party20?
this is not even close IMO. easiest call. so ez.

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree with flawless here. To make this call correct the hero only has to win a little more than 7.4% of the time. Even if calling is a mistake it can only be a very small one at best, but if the hero folds the best hand in this huge pot, that would be a terrible mistake. I believe these kind of tough folds on the river in large pots should be saved for real life, where the hero may have more significant information about his opponent. Online, this type of fold should almost never be made in my opinion especially given the description of the villain.