Playing my aces

[Nate tha' Great]

I like flat calling the turn and raising the river. I probably need to call a river 3-bet, unless you know him particularly well.

[StellarWind]

[ QUOTE ]
agree about the straight draw but this is not a very probable hand given the line so far barring a specific read--if the turn had put a flush draw up there or something I'd like this argument more.

[/ QUOTE ]
You have dismissed my primary argument without acknowledging it.

Seems like 2+2 gets dozens of posts per day from people who can't find obvious value bets on the river. And posters are supposedly the good players.

The whole wait-til-the-river plan is built around the assumption that this unknown player is going to value bet the river out-of-position into a PFR with a small pair. If he check-calls the river you lose a bet. This is a huge problem.

The rare possibility of 54 is just the cherry on top.

[Nate tha' Great]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
agree about the straight draw but this is not a very probable hand given the line so far barring a specific read--if the turn had put a flush draw up there or something I'd like this argument more.

[/ QUOTE ]
You have dismissed my primary argument without acknowledging it.

Seems like 2+2 gets dozens of posts per day from people who can't find obvious value bets on the river. And posters are supposedly the good players.

The whole wait-til-the-river plan is built around the assumption that this unknown player is going to value bet the river out-of-position into a PFR with a small pair. If he check-calls the river you lose a bet. This is a huge problem.

[/ QUOTE ]

In my experience - admittedly not at 2/4 - the number of times that he'll check it to you on the river are quite few, and usually involve a scare card like an ace hitting.

Also, remember that bet-call, check-call nets you one more bet than bet-raise-fold.

[CallMeIshmael]

For a somewhat similar hand, see: this

I vote here as I did there, call the turn, raise the river. Fold to a river 3-bet vs a known non-LAG, otherwise call.

(there are, of course some differences, ie. both blinds to the flop, but it certainly reminded me of it)

[scrub]

[ QUOTE ]
In my experience - admittedly not at 2/4 - the number of times that he'll check it to you on the river are quite few, and usually involve a scare card like an ace hitting.

Also, remember that bet-call, check-call nets you one more bet than bet-raise-fold.


[/ QUOTE ]

scrub

[StellarWind]

[ QUOTE ]
In my experience - admittedly not at 2/4 - the number of times that he'll check it to you on the river are quite few, and usually involve a scare card like an ace hitting.

Also, remember that bet-call, check-call nets you one more bet than bet-raise-fold.

[/ QUOTE ]
The answer to both points is "but it is 2/4". Aggression levels are a lot lower than I think you are used to and river flinching in particular is an epidemic. Meanwhile the bet-fold risk ... it just doesn't happen much. You would have a better case at 3/6 and no doubt a much better case wherever you are playing these days.

[Nick C]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In my experience - admittedly not at 2/4 - the number of times that he'll check it to you on the river are quite few, and usually involve a scare card like an ace hitting.

Also, remember that bet-call, check-call nets you one more bet than bet-raise-fold.

[/ QUOTE ]
The answer to both points is "but it is 2/4". Aggression levels are a lot lower than I think you are used to and river flinching in particular is an epidemic. Meanwhile the bet-fold risk ... it just doesn't happen much. You would have a better case at 3/6 and no doubt a much better case wherever you are playing these days.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've been missing both you and Nate lately here in Small Stakes, so I'm happy to see this exchange.

[Felipe]

[ QUOTE ]
I like flat calling the turn and raising the river. I probably need to call a river 3-bet, unless you know him particularly well.

[/ QUOTE ]

why do we raise the turn? <-- serious question from a growing player.