Curtains Hand #1

[Marnixvdb]

Raising this in the first place is something I'd only do if I were playing few tables only. That said, this is how I read it: with his stack he can afford to invest some chips. He is raising to steal the blinds and from the flop onwards he plays it according to his hand strength, exercising good pot control, crusing towards cheap showdown, while getting most in vs. worse hands (through inducing bluffs).

Betting this hand (TPWK) on the flop doesnt accomplish much with deepish stacks. If he misses he should bet most flops to try and take the pot right there.

[zipppy]

[ QUOTE ]

Betting this hand (TPWK) on the flop doesnt accomplish much with deepish stacks. If he misses he should bet most flops to try and take the pot right there.

[/ QUOTE ]

So if he gets top pair betting doesn't do him much good, but if he completely misses then he should bet?

[Marnixvdb]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Betting this hand (TPWK) on the flop doesnt accomplish much with deepish stacks. If he misses he should bet most flops to try and take the pot right there.

[/ QUOTE ]

So if he gets top pair betting doesn't do him much good, but if he completely misses then he should bet?

[/ QUOTE ]

Betting narrows the range with which villain will continue tremendously. With these stacks, this is something you want to accomplish only if you are either very weak (bluff) or rather strong (value against the majority of his range). Since hero's hand is weakish but has some value, it's not a good idea to bet the flop and narrow villain's range down to something that crushes hero's range. The pot is not interesting enough relative to stacksize to semi-bluff at.

[Snarf]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Betting this hand (TPWK) on the flop doesnt accomplish much with deepish stacks. If he misses he should bet most flops to try and take the pot right there.

[/ QUOTE ]

So if he gets top pair betting doesn't do him much good, but if he completely misses then he should bet?

[/ QUOTE ]

Thats my standard for the way I play...usually...

If I'm playing a supreme LAG (in my home games) I'll bet out either way 'cuz I will get very loose calls...but in ANY other case...

Check = hit
Bet = miss

Standard for me.

[zipppy]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Betting this hand (TPWK) on the flop doesnt accomplish much with deepish stacks. If he misses he should bet most flops to try and take the pot right there.

[/ QUOTE ]

So if he gets top pair betting doesn't do him much good, but if he completely misses then he should bet?

[/ QUOTE ]

Thats my standard for the way I play...usually...

If I'm playing a supreme LAG (in my home games) I'll bet out either way 'cuz I will get very loose calls...but in ANY other case...

Check = hit
Bet = miss

Standard for me.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that's standard for a lot of people, and I think it's easy to exploit if your opponent is observant enough to attach that read to you.

It's universal enough that I assume my opponents play this way until I have a different read on them. Maybe curtains was hoping the villian had this read on him, hoping to make his check/call on the flop and check on the turn appear very strong.

[Snarf]

[ QUOTE ]
I think that's standard for a lot of people, and I think it's easy to exploit if your opponent is observant enough to attach that read to you.

It's universal enough that I assume my opponents play this way until I have a different read on them. Maybe curtains was hoping the villian had this read on him, hoping to make his check/call on the flop and check on the turn appear very strong.

[/ QUOTE ]

I mix in some bet out hits and I'm usually alright.

I gotta say I have been surprised that no one has attached this read to me. ...maybe I bet enough hits that they wimp out on the half-read...

Plus online, I don't really play with players who would notice this kinda thing...