80 Hand vs. Teri

[skipc]

sounds as though almost everyone thinks teri walks on water. i'm sure that teri is an excellant player, but no matter what, she still has to show you the best hand. ask yourself, how would i play this hand against anyone else, then proceed.

good luck
skipc

[andyfox]

I'd have check-called the flop, check-called the turn, and bet the river.

[Boris]

[ QUOTE ]
this is such the river checkraise it's not even funny. she could so have AJ or JJ or whatever.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yea if she has been 3 betting with weak aces then you could go for the river checkraise. Otherwise there are not many hands she will call with that are worse than AQ.

[mmcd]

[ QUOTE ]
it all depends on what she thinks of you. but given what we know of her play i think not checkraising the river and calling a 3 bet is significantly -EV.


[/ QUOTE ]

He said in his post that he has tight image (at least in EP).

He open raised UTG and called a flop and turn bet on an A X X X board.

Do you really think AQ figures to be ahead here those times that she bets the river?


The problem with checkraising is that most of the time he will get 3-bet, and it will be by a better hand. I think the chances of her betting the river when checked to AND calling a checkraise with a worse hand are pretty small.

[Luke]

I'd have check-called the flop, check-called the turn, and bet the river.

This is the standard line in situations like this and I see no reason why you should deviate in this specific spot.

Luke

[mmcd]

[ QUOTE ]
I'd have check-called the flop, check-called the turn, and bet the river.

This is the standard line in situations like this and I see no reason why you should deviate in this specific spot.

Luke

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the standard line against a typical player, but it would be bad here assuming she can read well. He might as well turn his hand face up as he bets. The bet would have no value. Some players would bet the turn here for a free showdown and then proceed to call when bet into on the river "just in case" or whatever, but I doubt a tough player who reads well would pay off with a worse hand.

The fact that she 3-bet a tight players UTG raise and did not check behind on the turn after his flop call doesn't make AQ look so hot(If she had checked behind on the turn AQ is obviously a clear value bet). While she might well 3-bet him with a fairly wide range of hands here, I don't think dominated Aces would be among them.

[mks]

I am still torn between betting and checking the river.

I can see the betting argument, but not for the usual reasons. If I check-call, check-call, then bet the river on an Axxxx board, my bet is going to look like exactly what it is, AJ, AQ, or possibly AK. I will be raised by a better or equal hand 100 percent of the time and I will call 100 percent of the time. So against AA, AK, and sets I lose 2 bets instead of 1. The advantage of betting the river though is that it may induce her to take a stab at the pot by raising with TT, 88, etc since in general I think that river bet looks weak. But I just don't think it's that likely.

I'm really not putting her on KK or QQ here, particularly not KK. She's aggressive, but she also knows how to play. Why would she bet KK on the turn? If I have an A she's getting called, if I have a smaller pair I'll probably fold and she loses the bet she would have gotten on the river. Checking KK on the turn here seems clear. Similar for QQ. What would you do in her shoes there with QQ/JJ/TT? Bet the flop, the turn, and then call the river when the UTG raiser who called on the A-high flop and turn bets into you?

I agree with Boris and others that a river-checkraise has little value.

I'm interested to hear more thoughts about why the standard line of betting the river is right here, besides the fact that she may read it as weak and take a stab at the pot with a worse hand (still seems unlikely). You have to get called by worse hands twice as often as you get raised and payoff a better hand. Is that realistic?

[mks]

I think your thinking is right on.

[mks]

"It sucks being heads-up out of position against a tough player."

This is the real lesson in this hand I guess.

[mks]

I agree with your assessment. Hard to imagine a more transparent bet. I suppose that means it would be a great bet if I had 77, but I'm not sure I want to be here with 77 in the first place.