#1
|
|||
|
|||
Check up hand, river (semi) scare card
.25/.50, 5-handed on Pacific with the CO posting in. I get A [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]J [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] UTG and raise, and am of course cold-called by the entire table, except for the big blind, who oddly enough dropped out.
The flop comes down A [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]4 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]5 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]. The small blind checks and with 8.5 small bets up for grabs, I bet out. Everyone stuck around to see the turn card, the J [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]. Small blind checks and I bet into the 6BB pot. Just the cutoff calls. River card is the 4 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], making the final board: (A [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]4 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]5 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]) J [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]4 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]. Pot size: 8BB. What's my play? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Check up hand, river (semi) scare card
I'm betting.
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Check up hand, river (semi) scare card
Bet.
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Check up hand, river (semi) scare card
Bet, call a raise.
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Check up hand, river (semi) scare card
[ QUOTE ]
Bet, call a raise. [/ QUOTE ] This is why I ended up check-calling, because I couldn't fold to a raise. He had A2o and MHIG. Here's my thinking: There's a 0% chance he's folding a better hand here, obviously. If I bet and he calls, I am good like 90% of the time. If I bet and he raises, I am good like 10% of the time. I'd guess he calls about 50%, raises 30%, and folds 20%. So my estimated EV for betting out is .5[.9(1)]+.3[.1(2)]-.5[.1(1)]-.3[.1(2)]=.4. If I check-call, he will probably bet around 70% of the time, and I will probably be good around 70% of the time. So my estimated EV for check-calling is .7[.7(1)]=.49, which makes me think that check-calling is slightly better here. Of course, the problem is, my figures are just estimates, and they have to be pretty close to correct for my math to mean anything. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Check up hand, river (semi) scare card
The weak-tightie in me wants to check/call this river. But the more aggressive side says "bet". There are plenty of weak Ace hands that CO would call with here. If he raises, I curse and call.
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Check up hand, river (semi) scare card
[ QUOTE ]
There are plenty of weak Ace hands that CO would call with here. [/ QUOTE ] As it turns out, he likes to bet them, too. Nice avatar. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Check up hand, river (semi) scare card
I think your EV calcs are pretty good. Since both are positive and fairly close, I would base my decision on which action improves my table image. Being aware of your table image and how you can help shape it, can pay big dividends in the future.
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Check up hand, river (semi) scare card
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Bet, call a raise. [/ QUOTE ] This is why I ended up check-calling, because I couldn't fold to a raise. He had A2o and MHIG. Here's my thinking: There's a 0% chance he's folding a better hand here, obviously. If I bet and he calls, I am good like 90% of the time. If I bet and he raises, I am good like 10% of the time. I'd guess he calls about 50%, raises 30%, and folds 20%. So my estimated EV for betting out is .5[.9(1)]+.3[.1(2)]-.5[.1(1)]-.3[.1(2)]=.4. If I check-call, he will probably bet around 70% of the time, and I will probably be good around 70% of the time. So my estimated EV for check-calling is .7[.7(1)]=.49, which makes me think that check-calling is slightly better here. Of course, the problem is, my figures are just estimates, and they have to be pretty close to correct for my math to mean anything. [/ QUOTE ] Looking this over, my EV calculations for check-calling are wrong because I forgot to subtract the times I call and lose, which is .7[.3(1)], which makes the overall EV .28, which would suggest that betting out is actually better. Logically though, check-calling seems to make more sense, so I think my numbers are off somewhere. If he has a decent hand, like a worse ace: one bet goes in either way. If he has a big hand like trips or better, betting out costs me two bets if I call his raise where check-calling would've cost me only one. Finally, if he has nothing, he'll fold to a bet, but might bluff if checked to. I cannot see how leading could be better than calling here. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Check up hand, river (semi) scare card
YOu have 1000+ posts and are still learning to value bet?
|
|
|