Value bet an unimproved AQ?

[gonores]

bet/call with impunity. i am certain of this.

[BarronVangorToth]

[ QUOTE ]
Will worse hands really call here? Are you autofolding if you get raised?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes.
No.

Barron Vangor Toth
BarronVangorToth.com

[PokerBob]

[ QUOTE ]

My river play is horrible, maybe this can help me.


[/ QUOTE ]

[NLSoldier]

[ QUOTE ]
bet/call with impunity. i am certain of this.

[/ QUOTE ]

yep.

[SA125]

I like the check call line. There's a lot of repsonses that say bet/call. I think that, when the dust settles in a hand like this, the amount you lose by not betting a hand that would have called you won't equal the amount you'll lose when you call a raise.

You have to win 2 times just to off set that 1 time when you lose. Out of 4 times, you have to win 3 just to show a small profit.

Maybe I'm wrong, but calling really seems to make the EV equation much more difficult.

[Paluka]

You are almost never, ever getting raised on this river. The river raise almost shouldn't even factor into the equation.

[andyfox]

I think a hand that has you beat bets the turn here, like 99 times out of 100. OTOH,you 3-bet pre-flop, bet the flop, and then checked the turn when there were all low cards on board--that should scream A-K or A-Q to him. So he might raise your river bet with bupkis. His turn check behind means either a smaller ace or a monster and, since monsters are rare, I'd bet the river. And call a raise.

[Josh W]

[ QUOTE ]
You are almost never, ever getting raised on this river. The river raise almost shouldn't even factor into the equation.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not only this, but a decent enough chunk of the time, a river raise is a bluff, trying to knock me off my AK or like.

As such, you don't need to win twice as much. I'm too lazy to do the math, but the bluff-raise is so similarly frequent, that like Paluka said, you can just factor it out of the equation (dang near).

Josh