AQo, whiff the flop.

[Nick Royale]

[ QUOTE ]
I think there's a good argument to lay the hand down on the turn given the action. But I think over calling the river is a mistake.


[/ QUOTE ]
I don't agree. Readless I still think the calldown is pretty easy.

[ QUOTE ]
Until I see someone demonstrate the ability to isolate, I assume it's not in their skill set.

[/ QUOTE ]
It's in a bad players nature to not blow the field with a monster, the first thing a person new to poker learns ia to slowplay.

[gopnik]

the hero was the preflop raiser and he just called the flop and bet the turn when A came. What hand would a decent player c/r with? pocket pair? flush draw? The hero probably has an A and is probably calling you done. I dont see any point of check raising unless you can beat top pair. If the hero had a big PP, he would have raised the flop.

[BigEndian]

Thinking about checking the Ace through and actually checking it through are two different things. The most important part is to think about the hand you're involved in. Not just from your perspective, but from your opponents' perspectives. I don't think checking this turn is horrible, but it's relative. Against one opponent, I would have given it more serious thought.

I think that assuming your opponents are all bad until otherwise proven is the wrong policy - particularly as you climb the stakes. Hand reading in general improves as you move up. But regardless of the given stakes, my opponents in this hand would have to be oblivious to not think that I didn't have an ace when I bet the turn.

Granted, some opponents are oblivious. But not giving your opponents enough credit is a downward spiral imo nd a road-block to doing well as you move up.

This is expecially true if you find yourself against a LAG type. Very often you'll find that while they play their hands extremely hard and raise in situations where we would cringe, they are very good hand readers and use metagame principles in ways that multi-tablers turn a blind eye to.

I think the turn call is thin - razor thin. The value in the call isn't in the strength of your hand, it's in the odds in which you feel your opponents are truely and utterly bad. The river call is far worse in my opinion for the same reasons only the draws didn't get there.

- Jim

[Nick Royale]

[ QUOTE ]
I think that assuming your opponents are all bad until otherwise proven is the wrong policy - particularly as you climb the stakes. Hand reading in general improves as you move up. But regardless of the given stakes, my opponents in this hand would have to be oblivious to not think that I didn't have an ace when I bet the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't assume my oppponents we're bad, this qoute made me suspect you did: "Until I see someone demonstrate the ability to isolate, I assume it's not in their skill set", but I might have gotten you wrong. However, my point was that neither a good or bad player use to try to blow the field. On the other hand the check from BB might have been a plan with a monster to attempt to check/raise the flop aggressor. I would personally definately c/r the flop in that case if I were him.



[ QUOTE ]
not giving your opponents enough credit is a downward spiral imo nd a road-block to doing well as you move up.

[/ QUOTE ]
Definately agree, but about the limit, I just have to assume this is a hand played anywhere between 2/4 and 10/20. And as you know an unknown 2/4-player and 10/20-player isn't close in skill.

[MisterKing]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Once we've bet it, and its raised and coldcalled back to us, I think we have a clear call + check/fold unimproved on the river. . Additionally, some of the time we have the best hand on the turn!

[/ QUOTE ]

If this is true then some of the time we will also have the best hand on the river, so why check/fold?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because those times that we do have the best hand on the turn, there's very little chance they're betting into us on the river. We need to improve a huge chunk of the time on the river to consider continuing.