Two Plus Two Older Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Older Archives > Limit Texas Hold'em > Mid-High Stakes Shorthanded
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 12-17-2005, 03:24 PM
bobbyi bobbyi is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 14
Default Re: Blind Battles: Hand #8182910291129.3

[ QUOTE ]
EDIT: Upon reflection I'm not so sure about the river. I think any pair is usually checking behind.

[/ QUOTE ]
So do you also go with check/fold?
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 12-17-2005, 03:40 PM
Lmn55d Lmn55d is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 5
Default Re: Blind Battles: Hand #8182910291129.3

yea I now think that is best
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 12-17-2005, 11:14 PM
StellarWind StellarWind is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 704
Default Re: Blind Battles: Hand #8182910291129.3

Why not semibluff the turn? Having checked I guess the call is OK. The one-card OESD on a paired board isn't enough effective outs IMO, but you get a little extra EV from checkfolding the river and winning either unimproved or with a spiked pair.

Checkfold the river. The key point is that it is pretty clear to value bet any king, jack, or straight after you check the turn and river. With so many hands value betting the occasional bluff will be drowned out. There won't be one bluff for every six value bets even if he is bluffing most of his worse hands. Of course most of his worse hands are tens or underpairs and he's not apt to bluff those anyway.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 12-17-2005, 11:23 PM
sthief09 sthief09 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: duffman is thrusting in the direction of the problem (mets are 9-13, currently on a 1 game winning streak)
Posts: 1,245
Default Re: Blind Battles: Hand #8182910291129.3

tough one. on one hand, i don't think he's going to value bet very well here, but on the other i dont see him bluffing much. maybe he had a small pair and will bluff. i guess you can call just because it's a tough board to value bet there. your play is completely in line with Ax going for a donk river c/r
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 12-18-2005, 02:57 AM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Blind Battles: Hand #8182910291129.3

I think I would have followed through on the turn since the straight draw gives me enough outs I'm calling anyway. If he raises the turn, that bites, but at least you know you can fold UI on the river or go for a c/r if you hit your straight.

The villian's turn bet doesn't mean much given many aggressive players will bet with air when it's checked to them in an attempt to pick up the pot. The river is hard. I wouldn't be suprised if he bluffs 1/6th of the time, making a check/call worthwhile, simply because I probably bluff 1/6th of the time when the original leader showed aggression and then let the lead go.

I think bet/fold will net you less than check/call because given the board I see him calling a smaller range of hands than he'll bet due to the chance he'll bluff.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 12-18-2005, 03:33 PM
bobbyi bobbyi is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 14
Default Re: Blind Battles: Hand #8182910291129.3

[ QUOTE ]
I think I would have followed through on the turn since the straight draw gives me enough outs I'm calling anyway. If he raises the turn, that bites, but at least you know you can fold UI on the river or go for a c/r if you hit your straight.

[/ QUOTE ]
I thought that against a guy with these stats, I was getting raised on the turn here very, very often. No?
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:00 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.