150/300 hand

[lil feller]

sure, but that only works if they bet the turn. Against a guy who clearly is selective with his aggression (as the villian is in this hand) if he's betting the turn, we're probably behind and no longer a favorite with just one card to come.

By betting against this type of opponent we put in one bet when infront and 2 bets when behind (and that only happens if villians hand is strong enough to raise the turn).

If we try to c/r we usually end up putting in zero bets when ahead and 2 when behind and a dog.

Against a more laggy opponent I can certainly see the merit in going for a c/r, but against this villian I just don't see it being the best play.

lf

[ggbman]

First of all, i think you have a strong enough draw and enough equity on the flop to c/r and try to fold underpairs and Ace high type hands on the turn. Given your line, i would bet the river cuz you might OCCASSIONALLY fold 88-99 and also sometimes get called AQ/AK. Any T or J is value betting the river if you check, but is not raising the river if they didnt raise the turn.

Gabe

[elindauer]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
bet

[/ QUOTE ]

Stop, please just stop. Like elindauer and AndyFox have commented on already if you're not going to take the time to elaborate and include the what with your why, don't bother posting. Nobody is impressed by getting your post count up with uninteresting and uninsightful one line quips.

lf

[/ QUOTE ]

hi lil feller,

I read that "bet" post and got frustrated. Then I thought, you know, nobody cares, you'll never convince anybody. Stop getting annoyed and just move on. Then I read your post, and I smiled. Thanks for that.

-Eric

[elindauer]

hi bicyclekick,

You've told us that he is passive postflop, but without telling us how often he gets to showdown, it's hard to tell if he'll call with ace high on the river. Without already knowing that information, I want to find out, so I bet. AK / AQ could easily get to the river just like this, and if he calls with them, it changes a lot of my strategy for handling this guy in future hands.

To me, this knowledge is much more important than any subtle EV difference between check/fold and bet/fold lines. check/call is right out.

my 2 cents.
eric


edit: the more I think about it, the more convinced I become that for your play to make any sense, you have to bet the river and he has to be willing to call with ace high. If not, checking the turn will almost always be the best play.

Checking the turn avoids getting 2 BBs in while drawing and lets you see whether or not he has you beat then. The free card is meaningless, since you will get exactly 1 BB in anyways and cannot prevent him from drawing out. In fact, the check-check turn may save you some money if the river comes off bad.

Unless he is so weak-tight that he won't bet the turn and will fold the river unimproved, donking the turn only makes sense if you are going to bet a non-overcard river too. Betting to make ace high fold on the turn has very little value, as two overcards will not fold, and Ax is likely too weak a hand for him to have raised preflop.

[haakee]

Anybody else like a check-raise on the flop instead of a check-call? What's the plan on a blank turn card after check-calling the flop? Check-call again?

[tonysoldier]

I really like this hand and the discussion that has followed. At these high-stakes short-handed games often the absolutely more straight-forward than straight-forward play is completely overlooked. It was almost shocking to me to see the flop action, but it makes perfect sense. You have a good draw so you call. You hit a card that makes you think you might be good so you bet. He just calls, so you figure that you're probably best. The river comes a blank and so you ... fire again because you think he'll call you with AK or AQ, otherwise, you check. It seems to me like he probably will.

Your line is the best line, hands down, I think. It's so simple, just like the first times I started to "get poker." Really nice, really nice to think about.

[Shandrax]

Costs $300 to call for a $1300 pot, right?

According to my secret formula, you are about a 3.5:1 favorite to win the showdown. Still you probably only get called when you are beat, so check/call seems to be correct.

[DeeJ]

bet/fold

[geormiet]

[ QUOTE ]
I really like this hand and the discussion that has followed. At these high-stakes short-handed games often the absolutely more straight-forward than straight-forward play is completely overlooked. It was almost shocking to me to see the flop action, but it makes perfect sense. You have a good draw so you call. You hit a card that makes you think you might be good so you bet. He just calls, so you figure that you're probably best. The river comes a blank and so you ... fire again because you think he'll call you with AK or AQ, otherwise, you check. It seems to me like he probably will.

Your line is the best line, hands down, I think. It's so simple, just like the first times I started to "get poker." Really nice, really nice to think about.

[/ QUOTE ]


These are my thoughts as well. Also, I prefer check calling the flop over checkraising. Check raising this flop screams semibluff, which will cause your opponent to play correctly against 87s (by folding A high when a scare card hits, and calling down otherwise) whereas check calling almost disguises your hand better.

[daryn]

[ QUOTE ]
Anybody else like a check-raise on the flop instead of a check-call? What's the plan on a blank turn card after check-calling the flop? Check-call again?

[/ QUOTE ]

seems crystal clear to me. i hate the flop play. your hand is huge and likely a favorite over his. then there's the way you describe him, tight i think you said.. why not checkraise (and cap if he 3-bets)?