Clarkmeister definition? - Page 2

A_C_Slater · #11 06-21-2005, 03:48 PM

More on this theorem I believe you are not supposed to bet if you have a small one card flush. Say the board is A [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 4 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 7 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 3 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] J [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] and you have A [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 6 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], you should not bet, but check/call.

What better hand is going to fold? You will only cause a worse hand to fold by betting. And if you had a hand like A [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 6 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] then you should bet in order to fold out hands like A [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] Q [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img].

kapw7 · #12 06-21-2005, 03:52 PM

[ QUOTE ]
More on this theorem I believe you are not supposed to bet if you have a small one card flush. Say the board is A [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 4 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 7 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 3 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] J [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] and you have A [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 6 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], you should not bet, but check/call.
What better hand is going to fold? You will only cause a worse hand to fold by betting.

[/ QUOTE ]
Why not?[img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] You have a draw to a straight flush.

xenthebrain · #13 06-21-2005, 03:53 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Or better, when you play against a 2+2er and there is a 4th flush falling on the river and he bets OOP raise him with nothing.

[/ QUOTE ]
Or better, when you play against a 2+2er and there is a 4th flush falling on the river bet OOP and if he raises (probably with nothing) reraise him. Do you have the guts?

A_C_Slater · #14 06-21-2005, 03:54 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
More on this theorem I believe you are not supposed to bet if you have a small one card flush. Say the board is A [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 4 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 7 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 3 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] J [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] and you have A [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 6 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], you should not bet, but check/call.
What better hand is going to fold? You will only cause a worse hand to fold by betting.

[/ QUOTE ]
Why not?[img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] You have a draw to a straight flush.

[/ QUOTE ]

This scenario occurs on the river. Notice the 5 board cards.

A_C_Slater · #15 06-21-2005, 03:57 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Or better, when you play against a 2+2er and there is a 4th flush falling on the river and he bets OOP raise him with nothing.

[/ QUOTE ]
Or better, when you play against a 2+2er and there is a 4th flush falling on the river bet OOP and if he raises (probably with nothing) reraise him. Do you have the guts?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well then... from now on whenever I'm playing a 2+2 er and he beats OOP on the river 4flush I'm to going to raise and then cap a 3bet!

That'll show em.

xenthebrain · #16 06-21-2005, 03:59 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Or better, when you play against a 2+2er and there is a 4th flush falling on the river and he bets OOP raise him with nothing.

[/ QUOTE ]
Or better, when you play against a 2+2er and there is a 4th flush falling on the river bet OOP and if he raises (probably with nothing) reraise him. Do you have the guts?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well then... from now on whenever I'm playing a 2+2 er and he beats OOP on the river 4flush I'm to going to raise and then cap a 3bet!

That'll show em.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll call and win with ace high.

kapw7 · #17 06-21-2005, 04:00 PM

[ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

This scenario occurs on the river. Notice the 5 board cards.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry alcohol and good cards have fuelled my sarcasm. Damn, I prepared a better reply but your post was too decent and cool to use it.

xenthebrain · #18 06-21-2005, 04:02 PM

But seriously, shouldn't one have at least a hand with showdown value for Clarkmeister's Theorem?

I think it's purpose was not only getting the other one to fold, but to not allow your opponent to value-bet the holding he beats you with and checking the hand which doesn't.

Catt · #19 06-21-2005, 04:03 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I would like to add that I always use this play when presented the opportunity and the fold ratio is amazing, beyond my expectation.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just keep in mind that the play is actually a value bet with what may be the best, but a marginal, hand, such as TPTK. The theory is that only a big flush (A, K, maybe Q) will ever raise. Most made flushes will simply call. But many 2nd best, non-flush hands will also call your bet. These 2nd best hands would in most cases have checked through the river in a heartbeat and you miss a bet. If Villain doesn't have a flush, there's a chance he folds a hand that beats you; but there's also a chance he folds a hand you had beat anyway.

El Cuchara · #20 06-21-2005, 04:20 PM

this doesn't make sense to me slater, why would you bet/fold if you don't have the flush, but then check/call if you do have the flush?? If only a hand that beats you would call, then why would you bet in the first place?

I can speak from experience that this works, i had QJs and hit the flush on the turn. four flush hit on the river, the guy went all in (no limit) and I folded it. The guy was pretty tight, so i think he had the ace, but i still wonder to this day.