Tough Hand, wasn't sure whether to make call on Riv?

[Rosencrantz1]

[ QUOTE ]

My "The problem with your leading out at all IMO is that you have very little to gain - and a ton (or at least T150) to lose. " comment was regarding the river. "at all..." was in regards to 'any amount'.

Yeah, I thought about leading out on the flop. I do understand that it could be useful in gathering information. The problem 6-handed is, I do know of an amount that would give you the information you need/want -- folds and/or raises. If you have no intention of calling a raiser (which I assume he wouldn't), then you're proposing a best case scenario where everyone folds (not happening), or you were simply called, by MANY perhaps. Now what? He picks up the OESD on the turn....push? Granted given the nature of this particular hand development it would have taken down the pot. What if he doesn't...assume check/fold now? Maintain your assertion?Trying to take the lead with a marginal hand, in a family pot like this is asking for trouble IMO. I'm looking for the cheapest way toward hand improvement or an exit opportunity when the pricing dictates.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I understand what you're saying, but I think the point is that the cheapest way to play this is to lead out on the flop, given how cheap the lead-out is.

The lead out really is saying "I hit the pair of kings"; I don't think we're tying to hide our hand very much here (and that is fine). Anyone who raises is saying "Ok, I see you hit your Kings and I'm guess I've got a better kicker (or 2p or trips or whatever)" The problem with the check is that it's saying "I've missed...you?" which will encourage a much wider range of hands (include some we beat) to take a stab at it.

Then we're in much harder decision-making territory: Do we call a min-bet when the action comes back around? I haven't asked the MP player to define his hand at all, so he really could be betting with a lot of stuff that we beat. The goal is to set ourselves up for an easy (and cheap decision).

The way the OP played the hand he lost a lot more than the 40 it would have cost him to lead out.

[sofere]

[ QUOTE ]
More likely, with all those limps (and given our reads at the table) we're looking at unpaired high cards (AQ, AJ, QJ even) and maybe some mid-to-low pairs/suited connectors from late MP/LP.

[/ QUOTE ]

I find it interesting that you don't include K8+ here which are often limped at the lower levels (KQ, KJs especially)

Secondly, you have stated that a small bet gets you a lot of information, then you cite a fairly simple question: [ QUOTE ]
If we check and get a small bet after us, what then? Is that person betting because they have a hand that beats us or because they saw the table was weak?

[/ QUOTE ]
Then you fail to answer this question. What did the information tell you? Would you call? Push? Fold? If you call, what do you do when you're first to act on the turn?

Furthermore, 75% of the time pushing into 5 people in a draw heavy board, your going to get at least 1 or 2 callers. What do you do on the turn then? Where you called by K7, a flush or straight draw? A set or two pair that are stupidly slow playing? 72o that feels like outplaying someone?

IMO, the only info you get with a small bet into this many people is that if everyone folds, you probably had the best hand. Otherwise, you've made a meaningless pot meaningful with a crappy hand and semi-tough to get away from.

[adanthar]

With six limpers, I always check here, but I'll call a 4 way t30 bet OOP looking for a 4. You almost have the implied odds just to spike it alone.

You then have to call the turn, but I'll always check this river and probably fold to the CO (edit: if he value bets) because he has a flush like 99.4% of the time (and splits with me the rest.)

[bluefeet]

I can buy that. But with a couple flop callers say...

1) what do you do with the improvement on the turn?

2) if the answer to #1 is bet again, or check/call....what do you do with the straight now on the river? bet, check-call, or check-fold?

If #1 follows my original suggested check/raise-push option, could it not be equally or more adventagious to have played the flop passively...with a having NOW 'hit your straight' presentation?

[Rosencrantz1]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
More likely, with all those limps (and given our reads at the table) we're looking at unpaired high cards (AQ, AJ, QJ even) and maybe some mid-to-low pairs/suited connectors from late MP/LP.

[/ QUOTE ]

I find it interesting that you don't include K8+ here which are often limped at the lower levels (KQ, KJs especially)

Secondly, you have stated that a small bet gets you a lot of information, then you cite a fairly simple question: [ QUOTE ]
If we check and get a small bet after us, what then? Is that person betting because they have a hand that beats us or because they saw the table was weak?

[/ QUOTE ]
Then you fail to answer this question. What did the information tell you? Would you call? Push? Fold? If you call, what do you do when you're first to act on the turn?


[/ QUOTE ]

If I lead out on the flop and it's called around, fine. Let's see what the turn brings. If I bet and it's raised back to me on the flop I fold.

With the turn that came, I'd lead out again. If it's raised back to me, I would look at the pot odds since I've now got the OESD. I need better than standard odds since there is some chance that my hitting the straight could also give the villain a flush.

I guess my point is that unless we're pushing villain to show some aggression, I'm hesitant to just assume we're beaten with his tiny bets and us having played passively on every street.