77 river decision - Page 4

aargh57 · #31 10-17-2005, 02:28 PM

Look, I conceded that my river call on the end wasn't correct. What has that to do with the rest of the hand. I didn't slow down on the turn because a blank fell. I'm ahead of a good number of hands that you missed. Hands like A4, A2, A3 as well as those you mentioned could be in it. The flop bet is debatable but I think the turn is pretty standard. BTW, If you're using your "well respected poker author's" start chart he has you calling with 77 here too.

lufbradolly · #32 10-17-2005, 02:29 PM

Bet he'll call with a 5, 4, 2 and may just call with a weak K if he's really passive.

He may even fold a higher pocket pair but the chances of that are neglible because you'd of heard from him already with most higher pocket pairs.

If he raises then i dunno ask someone who's good lol.

So it's bet/call or bet/fold.

aargh57 · #33 10-17-2005, 02:30 PM

funny how most of the others here don't seem to think I misplayed it so badly.

lufbradolly · #34 10-17-2005, 02:33 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Are you serious?

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you?

keetz555 · #35 10-17-2005, 02:34 PM

[ QUOTE ]

ps: to consider pocket pairs as drawing is crap.

[/ QUOTE ]
Not all pocket pairs. SMALL pocket pairs (22-77). You go ahead and play them like they're pure gold... In family pots, small pocket pairs are crap unless they spike a set. I honestly don't understand how you can argue with me on that.

keetz555 · #36 10-17-2005, 02:39 PM

[ QUOTE ]
if he has a weak King then he's playing his hand correctly and that's poker

[/ QUOTE ]
Is he? I'd say that raising with a king is the CORRECT play here, but that's just me...

lufbradolly · #37 10-17-2005, 02:42 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
if he has a weak King then he's playing his hand correctly and that's poker

[/ QUOTE ]
Is he? I'd say that raising with a king is the CORRECT play here, but that's just me...

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you deliberately trying to be argumentative?

#38 10-17-2005, 02:42 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Third, the book example has a flush draw present, so there is some value to be gained when draws call you down. Not so in this example, there are few hands which can profitably call a flop bet and a turn bet which are not way ahead of you.

[/ QUOTE ]
If you bet the example in the book when its checked to you, you wont gain any value when they call because they get correct odds to do so. You loose some value when they call. However that doesnt mean betting is wrong, it just means You bet for the wrong reason. Betting is still correct.

Its the fundamental theorem of poker.

keetz555 · #39 10-17-2005, 02:51 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Are you deliberately trying to be argumentative?

[/ QUOTE ]
What? I'm just saying that MP3 should raise with a king if he has one. Do you disagree?

deception5 · #40 10-17-2005, 02:53 PM

[ QUOTE ]
If you bet the example in the book when its checked to you, you wont gain any value when they call because they get correct odds to do so. You loose some value when they call. However that doesnt mean betting is wrong, it just means You bet for the wrong reason. Betting is still correct.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is untrue. Your bet is for value when they call with a flush draw. You will win 65% of the time or so and they will win 35% or so when the flush comes in. They are putting in money with the likely losing hand. Putting in money when you are a favorite is the definition of a value bet.