Cohnonas Grandes

[ggbman]

I bet the river and he folded. As Mike would say, "Im dead, i have no outs, i'm a superstar!"

i've been up all night waiting for those results....

[DcifrThs]

this is not a 3bb bluff.

Barron

[elindauer]

[ QUOTE ]
this is not a 3bb bluff.

Barron

[/ QUOTE ]

Just to clarify, the first BB is going in anyways as the pot is large and you have a draw that, while weak, is good enough. There isn't a river card that makes you want to cap it, but all spades, queens and kings make you happy you called the turn.

-eric

[bobbyi]

[ QUOTE ]
Literally any spade? Or maybe a weak pair + spade draw that we will fold UI?

[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah. I'm not sold on the turn plan, but I definitely think the river bet works often enough to be worthwhile, even though it fails very often.

[DpR]

I do understand that he has outs. Perhaps if I wrote Play = (3 bet bluff | Hero misses)

My point being that the 2 bets on the turn, in the mind of villian, serves as part of the bluff. IMO, the villian is far more likely to fold this river given that hero raised the turn. Perhaps thinking "there is no way this guy is putting in 3 BB with a hand 1 pair can beat."

[DcifrThs]

[ QUOTE ]
I do understand that he has outs. Perhaps if I wrote Play = (3 bet bluff | Hero misses)

My point being that the 2 bets on the turn, in the mind of villian, serves as part of the bluff. IMO, the villian is far more likely to fold this river given that hero raised the turn. Perhaps thinking "there is no way this guy is putting in 3 BB with a hand 1 pair can beat."

[/ QUOTE ]

yea...i was just clarifying...i still dont like the play b/c i dont think it works enough, and it looks like what it is...a bluff run.

and yes, if you use mathspeak, the Pr(barron understanding | mathspeak) > Pr(barron understanding | the vagaries of the english language)

[img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Barron