|
|
|
|
#1
11-16-2004, 08:37 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Pushing it too much?
Five handed 40/80. UTG, seems typical shorthanded aggro capable of making plays, raises. I 3-bet in the SB with KQ. UTG is the only caller.
Flop is A 9 5 two spades. I bet, he raises. I 3-bet and he calls. Turn is a non spade Q and I bet, he calls. River is a 7c and I check. Comments? Regards 
|
|
#2
11-16-2004, 09:16 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Pushing it too much?
I think it's significant to know if you have a spade or not because I like it much better if you don't. I suppose you would have mentioned it, and if he's the type to wait til the turn to pop you with top pair or better then once the turn gets there you're in very good shape. I like checking the river also because it virtually forces him to bet his JTs or whatever if he was semibluffing --- and if he's aggro he'll be value-betting QsJs and worse here.
-James
|
|
#3
11-16-2004, 01:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Pushing it too much?
Flop 3-bet is player dependent obviously but can't be too wrong. I often end up betting the river here because I have shown so much strength that it is hard for him to bluff, after your line to the river he should know you are calling the river, but he can definitely still crying call with middle or bottom flopped pair because you could have spades.
|
|
#4
11-16-2004, 01:32 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Pushing it too much?
I think its OK. His flop raise makes me think he probably doesnt have an ace, so I think you can push this one from time to time. I agree with Hiatus you should consider betting the river. I think he very rarely checks a better hand behind, and as big as the pot has become he will probably pay you off with most any pair. Hard to imagine you inducing a bluff as strong as you played it up to this point.
|
|
#6
11-17-2004, 03:22 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Pushing it too much?
[ QUOTE ]
I am, however, pretty certain that the river check is terrible. [/ QUOTE ] I agree.
|
|
#7
11-17-2004, 03:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Pushing it too much?
Depending on the image the villain had of Ikke, is it not possible he could've played A-2 or A-3 similarly? Why is there an automatic assumption that he doesn't have an ace just because he raised the flop?
|
|
#8
11-17-2004, 04:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Pushing it too much?
[ QUOTE ]
Depending on the image the villain had of Ikke, is it not possible he could've played A-2 or A-3 similarly? Why is there an automatic assumption that he doesn't have an ace just because he raised the flop? [/ QUOTE ] If the opponent does have an ace, do you think he is going to check it on the river if you check?
|
|
#9
11-17-2004, 05:17 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Pushing it too much?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Depending on the image the villain had of Ikke, is it not possible he could've played A-2 or A-3 similarly? Why is there an automatic assumption that he doesn't have an ace just because he raised the flop? [/ QUOTE ] If the opponent does have an ace, do you think he is going to check it on the river if you check? [/ QUOTE ] ding!
|
|
#10
11-17-2004, 05:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Pushing it too much?
Well, if the villain has an ace and bets the river after hero checks, what would've been the difference from the hero betting and villain just calling as he's been doing? But, you also have the possibility that that villain improves and decides to raise hero after hero value bets the river. If hero has an ace, the river is an automatic bet. But with other holdings, I don't see how hero checking the river is significantly + or - EV.
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Depending on the image the villain had of Ikke, is it not possible he could've played A-2 or A-3 similarly? Why is there an automatic assumption that he doesn't have an ace just because he raised the flop? [/ QUOTE ] If the opponent does have an ace, do you think he is going to check it on the river if you check? [/ QUOTE ]
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
