Hand to Talk About

[DcifrThs]

your options as i see them here postflop are to

1) 4 bet the flop, lead the turn.

2) call the flop c'r the turn.

3) call the flop lead the turn.

_____________________________

then on the turn you can lead the turn check the river.

lead the turn bet the river.

or lead the turn check w/ intention of raising.

...

the thing about playing LAGS at higher limits is that you want to do two contradictory things: you want to maximize your EV b/c they put more money in w/ worse hands than other players at the table...but at the same time, you dont want to put yourself in a position to give them too much action.

i think that on the flop, people tend to go off for more bets than they would otherwise on the turn. 4 betting the flop is good in that sense but opens you upt o a turn raise. CAN you fold to his turn raise? does he raise for free showdowns? if you 3 bet him there what happens?

im not suggesting you fold or 3 bet im just asking rhetorical questions. i think that the only way to play this hand different is to get more money in the pot...but you can't do that if you aren't comfortable with the consequences of a LAG in position....so the way you played it tends to maximize EV defensively.

Barron

[ggbman]

[ QUOTE ]
wow you posted a hand you played very well. good hand.

i think it's funny that people are confused by the river check-call. it makes the most money in this situation given your image and the lagginess of your opponent. that's all i will say, im sure youll go into detail.

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't take this the wrong Mike, but i find this pretty silly. I think this statement is contradictory. Masons opponent is laggy, but he has shown considerable strength. Bet has obvious merit, as there is a reasonably wide range of hands calling this river that will not bet it, especially given the preflop action. I dont know why you don't want to elaborate, but i would be interested to hear it.

Obviously i like betting the river. I don't consider myself a good enough player to say "I know betting the river is the right move" but i do have enough confidence to say it's closer than you are making it.

[ggbman]

A couple points, because i feel there are things i can learn from this hand.

1.) A better is never folding, but we have established that it is VERY rarely going to raise. I feel if KJ, KQ, or AK were going to raise, they would do it on the turn to charge the flush draw, not on the river after it misses. I'm not saying you never get raised, but IMHO, the percentage is so small you can essentially ingnore it.

2.) Preflop action: This could be where i am off. To, the preflop 3 bet and flop raise would often indicate some 88-JJ type hand as opposed to a heart draw. Is someone really 3 betting Mason with QJh? There are a few Axh combos that should definitly 3 bet. But again, if villian is laggy enough to 3 bet a lot of these combo's, i feel that makes his range wide enough that there are so many hands he will call with. This is the part i am least sure about though, so feel free to enlighten me.

3.) The hands that do beat us will almost certainly charge us to showdown anyway, so we rarely save a bet.

Those are the main reasons i would bet the river.

Gabe

[Dominic]

[ QUOTE ]
Mason check-raises the flop, bets the turn despite your flop 3-bet, and bets the river. Are you going to call him with any old thing? But now he checks the river and you're a high-limit loosie who has just lost a pot to him. Aren't you going to bet most anything of value or bluff when he checks?

[/ QUOTE ]

exactly...this screams "missed draw" to the the villain and you gt an extra bet out of him....

I like the play, but it doesn't seem particularly interesting. Unless i'm missing something. Which is highly likely.

[ggbman]

If Villian puts mason on hearts here somehow, which i think is a stretch to begin with, there are not many hands at all he should bet on the river. First of all, is he making a calldown with ace high because he has Mason on hearts? Because if he is, he isn't betting it most of the time, he thinks he is good.

Also, you say he will be "most anything of value." I don't know what range you assign hands of value to, but if he is going to bet it, i am pretty sure he is going to call a bet with it.

[rory]

Looks perfect to me. Mason donks the turn to avoid giving a free card-- when he doesn't get raised, he figures his very aggressive opponent is on hearts. Mason can't have two pair there, so a good king would have raised him and folded to Mason's 3-bet, since Mason would have either AK or a set there to 3-bet the turn.

A very aggressive opponent will be more likely to bet a hand like QQ-99 or whatever when checked to on the river, so Mason may not necessarily miss value if he is against those hands. He also might bet busted heart draws, hoping Mason will fold. Finally, if the villian was planning on raising the river with a monster such as a set, Mason just thwarted his plan by check-calling.

I thought this hand was played perfectly.

[YoureToast]

Although the rest of the hand is probably more interesting, I like the river action because I think your opponent has nothing a lot of the time here (blown flush draw or weak pair) and this is the only way you'll get an extra bet. Its much less likely he'll call with a worse hand, I think. The reason for this, in part, is his turn action. Being an aggressive player, its not very likely he has you beat on the turn (and thus not likely he has you beat on the river).

[Lestat]

<font color="red"> But now he checks the river and you're a high-limit loosie who has just lost a pot to him. Aren't you going to bet most anything of value or bluff when he checks? </font>

Not just bluff, but bet JJ, TT for value AND pay off a check/raise! [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[NLSoldier]

[ QUOTE ]
Mason donks the turn to avoid giving a free card-- when he doesn't get raised, he figures his very aggressive opponent is on hearts. Mason can't have two pair there, so a good king would have raised him and folded to Mason's 3-bet, since Mason would have either AK or a set there to 3-bet the turn.


[/ QUOTE ]

This seems like you are way oversimplifying things. The lack of turn raise can mean a lot of things, not just hearts. And I dont see this guy raising and folding to a 3bet with a good king. Mason, was your plan to 3bet the turn as a bluff if he raised?

[ QUOTE ]

A very aggressive opponent will be more likely to bet a hand like QQ-99 or whatever when checked to on the river,

[/ QUOTE ]

more likely relative to what? more likey will bet those hands than call with them? I dont think so.

[Stork]

One thing I haven't seen mentioned yet is that I think Mason's opponent would be much more likely to raise a river bet on a bluff than he would bet when checked to. I understand that he is very laggy, but if he's playing this high, and normally plays even higher, I assume he has decent hand reading skills and is reasonably smart. Based on Mason's play, he probably puts Mason on a king, and is smart enough to read Mason's river check to mean that Mason is trying to induce a bluff. So I don't think his river bet a bluff, although I probably can't fold TP here. The only hands Mason is ahead of right now is QQ-99, and maybe K9. I think those will be checked behind a good amount of the time given how likely it is (in villains eyes) that Mason has a king.
When Mason bets, he gets the calls for sure from QQ-99 and K9. It is very unlikely that villain has a better king since he didn't raise the turn. Villain therefor is only raising the river if he caught 2 pair, or as a sophisticated bluff which he most certainly is capable of, hoping to get Mason to fold a weak king, which is why I think Mason should call a raise on the river if he bets.
Basically, unless the opponent is stupid enough to run a bluff here (doubtful, as explained above), check-calling the river allows him to play near perfect, whereas betting the river will force him into a mistake more often.