Hmm, I haven't run into one of these problems lately.

[slavic]

UTG is a 17/15/2 player, UTG+1 is a 42/0/1

I'm new to the table and I sat down at it because 4 players had stats like UTG+1. It was lovely.

15/30 full game

UTG opens, UTG+1 3 bets, and it folds to me on the button with QsQc (I think for a bit) and I cap it up. blinds fold others call.

3 to a flop of Jd xd xh in this case the x's are uncoordinated.

UTG checks, UTG+1 bets, I raise, UTG folds, UTG+1 calls

Turn is a lovely xh

UTG+1 bets, I raise, UTG+1 calls

River J and it's black

UTG+1 checks, and I bet.

ho hum right?

[Harv72b]

How big a sample are we talking about on UTG+1? If it's pretty good-sized, I think we can call down after he 3-bets preflop and leads into you on the flop despite your cap. You can also make a case for checking behind on the river.

Unless we're talking about a pretty small sample size for UTG+1, I think you're looking at AA a significant portion of the time. If it is a small sample, then I like your line.

[bobbyi]

It is worrisome when he bets into you on this flop after you capped preflop, but the pot is large enough that it is worth raising anyway to face UTG with two cold and protect your hand. However, once you've gotten it heads up and he bets again despite all the strength you've shown, I don't see the merit to raising the turn.

[slavic]

60 hands or so

[slavic]

Yes I was thinking AA or KK are about all he could have here on the turn, or he crossed a wire. Perhaps I need to come up with the slavic player_crossed_a_wire constant and postulate. The postualte obviously stating that such a number exists, and the constant being a greek symbol of my choosing that stands for errr well something.

My river bet seems alot like spewing.

[bobbyi]

[ QUOTE ]
My river bet seems alot like spewing.

[/ QUOTE ]
Why do you say the river bet rather than the turn raise? It seems clear to me that calling the turn and river is better than the raising the turn and checking the river. If you aren't going to value bet the river, what advantage is there to raising rather than calling down?

[sfer]

I think a turn raise is standard but that the river bet is too much. Big sample without a preflop raise for UTG+1?

[jason_t]

I am not a fan of the turn raise/river bet 1-2 punch.

[slavic]

[ QUOTE ]
If you aren't going to value bet the river, what advantage is there to raising rather than calling down?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well I can think of one. Let's say he has KK or the last two QQ's, and he's weak enough to lay it down on the paired J's when I bet the river. So yes let's say I've found the one loose semi-passive, who likes to make big laydowns.

In fact I think the discovery of this classification of poker player, and the invention of the slavic postulate should get me into the poker liturature.

[bobbyi]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you aren't going to value bet the river, what advantage is there to raising rather than calling down?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well I can think of one. Let's say he has KK or the last two QQ's, and he's weak enough to lay it down on the paired J's when I bet the river. So yes let's say I've found the one loose semi-passive, who likes to make big laydowns.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is certainly true, but I thought it was too unlikely to be worth considering. Raising the turn may also end up gaining you an extra bet if you river a king, which I suppose is nice. But it also allows him to three-bet you on the turn and I think that is bad enough to offset the rare advantages of raising.