Two Plus Two Older Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Older Archives > Limit Texas Hold'em > Micro-Limits
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 11-10-2005, 12:21 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Classic Clarkmeister Theory?

[ QUOTE ]
This flop check is horrible. I don't care if villain is TAG.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree with this. We are WA/WB if villians 3 betting range is AA-JJ/AK.

EDIT: Just saying that checking the flop is not terrible, betting is an option
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 11-10-2005, 12:28 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Classic Clarkmeister Theory?

[ QUOTE ]
I think I actually like the turn check. His play is pretty consistent with a whiffed AK, and even not many TAGs can resist betting an unimproved AK heads up when checked to, twice. I think he folds the turn a lot if you bet it.

[/ QUOTE ]

IMO villian checks behind the flop with AK or with a slowplaying a set or big overpair. I think we should bet the turn to avoid give a big [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] a free card, though I guess that depends on whether we can fold to a raise (not sure if villian would semibluff with AK with big [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img])
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 11-10-2005, 12:47 PM
DMBFan23 DMBFan23 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: I don\'t want a large Farva
Posts: 417
Default Re: Classic Clarkmeister Theory?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This flop check is horrible. I don't care if villain is TAG.

[/ QUOTE ]

We are WA/WB if villians 3 betting range is AA-JJ/AK.


[/ QUOTE ]

AK has 7 outs, more if he has a diamond or 2. not WB at all.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 11-10-2005, 12:54 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Classic Clarkmeister Theory?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This flop check is horrible. I don't care if villain is TAG.

[/ QUOTE ]

We are WA/WB if villians 3 betting range is AA-JJ/AK.


[/ QUOTE ]

AK has 7 outs, more if he has a diamond or 2. not WB at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes you are right it is not classical WA/WB (I had misread the board and didn't see the gutshot.)

But is it wrong to play it the same way? Who cares about giving a free card here when we are likely behind. I guess I say this b/c what do we do if we get raised on the flop or the turn (villian could easily semibluff raise AK, especially if he has a [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img])
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 11-10-2005, 12:59 PM
KaiShin KaiShin is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: thanks for all the fish
Posts: 1,195
Default Re: Classic Clarkmeister Theory?

[ QUOTE ]
What is a clarkmeister exactly?

[/ QUOTE ]
Heads up, out of position, when the fourth flush card falls on the river, you should bet.

Conversely, HU, with position, and facing a bet on the river if the fourth flush card falls, you should call.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 11-10-2005, 01:20 PM
adsman adsman is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Snowbound in the Alps
Posts: 505
Default Re: Classic Clarkmeister Theory?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This flop check is horrible. I don't care if villain is TAG.

[/ QUOTE ]

We are WA/WB if villians 3 betting range is AA-JJ/AK.


[/ QUOTE ]

AK has 7 outs, more if he has a diamond or 2. not WB at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes you are right it is not classical WA/WB (I had misread the board and didn't see the gutshot.)

But is it wrong to play it the same way? Who cares about giving a free card here when we are likely behind. I guess I say this b/c what do we do if we get raised on the flop or the turn (villian could easily semibluff raise AK, especially if he has a [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img])

[/ QUOTE ]

I think on the turn he has either AK or AQ. So bet it or check-raise it if you don't mind risking giving him a free card. Obviously we would love for an Ace to fall on the river, but there are only two of them left. He could have a gutshot draw in there or a flush draw or a straight draw come to think of it, so you have to pop him somewhere on the turn.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 11-10-2005, 01:23 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Classic Clarkmeister Theory?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This flop check is horrible. I don't care if villain is TAG.

[/ QUOTE ]

We are WA/WB if villians 3 betting range is AA-JJ/AK.


[/ QUOTE ]

AK has 7 outs, more if he has a diamond or 2. not WB at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

Who cares about giving a free card here when we are likely behind.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why are you insistent on thinking we're behind? It's very close but still you need to bet this to see where you are. I think once you lead out, villain raises with anything that beats us (because of the double-diamond and semi-coordinated board). If he holds AK he merely calls, IMO. Unless of course he has AdKd, in which case he has 15 outs and is a favorite heads up, and may raise anyway.

Lead out. If raised, I think it's safe to call. Unless he holds AA, you can count A's as outs. And of course, another J helps greatly.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 11-10-2005, 01:35 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Classic Clarkmeister Theory?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This flop check is horrible. I don't care if villain is TAG.

[/ QUOTE ]

We are WA/WB if villians 3 betting range is AA-JJ/AK.


[/ QUOTE ]

AK has 7 outs, more if he has a diamond or 2. not WB at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

Who cares about giving a free card here when we are likely behind.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why are you insistent on thinking we're behind? It's very close but still you need to bet this to see where you are. I think once you lead out, villain raises with anything that beats us (because of the double-diamond and semi-coordinated board). If he holds AK he merely calls, IMO. Unless of course he has AdKd, in which case he has 15 outs and is a favorite heads up, and may raise anyway.

Lead out. If raised, I think it's safe to call. Unless he holds AA, you can count A's as outs. And of course, another J helps greatly.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you want to bet/call the flop, then check/fold the turn UI?
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 11-10-2005, 01:43 PM
adsman adsman is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Snowbound in the Alps
Posts: 505
Default Re: Classic Clarkmeister Theory?

[ QUOTE ]

Why are you insistent on thinking we're behind? It's very close but still you need to bet this to see where you are.

[/ QUOTE ]

Leading out to 'see where you are', against a player who 3 bet you preflop when you're out of position is a very bad idea.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 11-10-2005, 02:00 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Classic Clarkmeister Theory?

[ QUOTE ]
Hi Fair i would have bet the flop and i certainly would have bet the turn after he checked the flop. You said the villian is tag not tricky or laggy so the river is an easy bet/fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

With Villain's 3-bet preflop and his TAG tendencies, my read was he would bet the flop when checked to allowing me to C/R him and then for me to lead the turn no matter what fell.

His check behind me on the flop was a total surprise. When the 4[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] fell on the turn I immediately began thinking of Clarkmeisters Theory. It's hard to believe, but in 40,000 hands I haven't yet been OOP HU with a 4 flush by the river. Either I've folded, won the pot outright or there were 3+ players involved.

When the 4[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] fell I was checking (right or wrongly) hoping he'd bet, I'd call and the Clarkmeister would fall into place. Which it did.

I'm not too concerned with betting the flop since my original plan was to C/R. Later my goal was to see if I could get HU OOP when the 4th flush fell, then bet into him.

~
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 07:52 AM.


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