|
|
#21
09-29-2005, 12:23 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Results
I like the turn check, call river. This elminates possibility of him putting you to big decision and sapping you of much needed brain power for long sessions.
with that board on turn, you are not liking results when you get it all in there most times. 
|
|
#23
09-29-2005, 02:03 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: AA party 2/4
Thanks.
We have a self-appointed sLAG with unknown likelihood of bluffing a missed draw on the river after we check behind on the turn. I think that likelihood is pretty damn high in the NL$400 6max games. Especially with the 9 paired and hero raising a lot pf. If he has a draw: He's probably bluffing enough to make checking behind better than betting if he was going to fold to your turn bet, and you're going to fold to his river bet if he hits. These assumptions are way too extensive, so checking behind the turn is quite certainly not optimal against a draw. But allthough it's not optimal, it does not lose us that much against the draw either. You assume that he WILL call with a flush or straight draw if we bet, and if that's true I'm with you on betting, but drawing with one card to come oop on a paired board is not so cool, so why would he call really? (Also, if we're planning to fold or call to a cr affects what line is best against the draw, since we'll sometimes lose huge if we fold and fold the best hand, and sometimes win big if we call and catch him on a semi-bluff. This only goes to show the structure I use to describe the situation is imperfect though, since if we call, the big losses come when he has us beat.) If villain has a worse made hand than ours: Since read on villain is he is not a calling station, checking behind on the turn is probably the best line when he has a weaker made hand than ours.(Is this were you disagree? Do you not agree that he's more likely to call a river bet after it's checked through or bet the river himself, than to call the turn?) Added beauty of him having less outs than usual since the board is paired. When he has us beat: Well, that checking behind on the turn is our line of choice if he has us beat goes without saying. I think you seem to underestimate the possibility of him having a 9 btw. Why can't he have a 9? (A9 is obviously unlikely, but less dominated 9xs aren't?) I'm not really buying the bet and reconsider if you're cr-ed line. If I bet the turn, I'm going to know before I bet what I do if he pushes over the top. And I don't like betting this turn and then folding to a raise from someone that I think will check-raise with a (semi-)bluff or worse made hand a not insignificant part of the time. Even if the fold after we got check-raised is the correct decision against his range of hands (so we should obviously fold once we get there), putting ourself in that situation in the first place was not smart imo. You're saying that weather to call or fold to a check raise is just a matter of putting him on a hand range and deciding if we have equity enough against it. I agree. But you're also saying that this decision does not affect weather we should bet the turn in the first place, and that doesn't make sense to me. Also: </font><blockquote><font class="small">Svar på:</font><hr /> In addition, by checking here, hands which WOULDNT call a bet, but are live (even the KQ example) have an "equity share" of the pot. The pot is 120 or so now, why give up 10% to a 4 outer? thats 3bbs. I dont know about you, but i want whats mine. if T8 folds to a bet, its still better to bet then give up 8 outs, or roughly 20%, or 20 dollars (5 bbs). [/ QUOTE ] Not if T8 will bluff the river often enough to make up for the $20 lost, and I think it will.
|
|
#24
09-29-2005, 02:18 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: AA party 2/4
I'll give my views on this since I usually advocate a turn check.
on this turn I would bet and I would likely call any reraise. If villain is thinking player, there is no way he does not lead with a set on the flop. there is no indication that I would continuation bet in to 3 way pot on that board and he would hate to have BB hit the draw for free. once the 9 hits, he tries to check raise us with a boat? gives us bad odds even if we have something like AKs? true I get broke to a 9 here but thats the only hand I get broke to. now I do understand what wtfsvi is saying. he is saying that there is a wide variety of hands that sb is leading the river with. and I agree with him that if villain won't call the turn bet with a draw or a lone J, then I think check behind is not bad. yes I give a free shot for him to outdraw me but the thing is the times he doesn't outdraw me, hes bluffing or blocking the river 100% of the time, thus it makes sense for me to check behind if this assumption is true.
|
|
#25
09-29-2005, 01:49 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: AA party 2/4
[ QUOTE ]
We have a self-appointed sLAG with unknown likelihood of bluffing a missed draw on the river after we check behind on the turn. I think that likelihood is pretty damn high in the NL$400 6max games. Especially with the 9 paired and hero raising a lot pf. [/ QUOTE ] Just a point of interest, a lot of times the LAG has a made hand here as well (such as top pair) which has 2 outs. Which isn't bluffing the river. Although he may value bet. (And I dont really see how you could raise the river w/ unimproved aces..) So by checking the turn you're letting those portion of his hands off the hook. [ QUOTE ] If he has a draw: He's probably bluffing enough to make checking behind better than betting if he was going to fold to your turn bet, and you're going to fold to his river bet if he hits. These assumptions are way too extensive, so checking behind the turn is quite certainly not optimal against a draw. But allthough it's not optimal, it does not lose us that much against the draw either. You assume that he WILL call with a flush or straight draw if we bet, and if that's true I'm with you on betting, but drawing with one card to come oop on a paired board is not so cool, so why would he call really? (Also, if we're planning to fold or call to a cr affects what line is best against the draw, since we'll sometimes lose huge if we fold and fold the best hand, and sometimes win big if we call and catch him on a semi-bluff. This only goes to show the structure I use to describe the situation is imperfect though, since if we call, the big losses come when he has us beat.) [/ QUOTE ] I'm not assuming anything, I'm saying whether he calls raises or folds thats fine, it's just checking is not giving him the option to make a mistake (call or raise) It's like in limit holdem, where a bet is correct even if you can't bet enough, only because lack of a bet is incorrect. checking this turn vs a huge portion of his hands is just not right. Also, about not paying off the draw, you should be calling 100% of rivers; even if top pair pairs, he may be bluffing flush. or busted straight. or if straight fills, he may be betting top pair, or if the flush, he could be using that for a busted gut + overs. something like that. point is, by checking not only do you give up a portion of the pot, but you pay off their value bet. because yo uassume they will bluff alot. that is also a bad assumption, just because they are "sLag" they will bluff everytime they DONT hit. BTW, although this seems contrary to what I say alot to othe rpeople, ("make a plan for the hand on the flop and on") in this situation you dont have a plan for whether to call if he pushes all in. most of the time a call is correct and I'll probably always make it, given game conditions, the board, and hte pot size, so i guess yes, the plan is bet/call, but you should be betting here because it's the right move, and not afraid of folding if you feel thats the right move if they push. [ QUOTE ] If villain has a worse made hand than ours: Since read on villain is he is not a calling station, checking behind on the turn is probably the best line when he has a weaker made hand than ours.(Is this were you disagree? Do you not agree that he's more likely to call a river bet after it's checked through or bet the river himself, than to call the turn?) Added beauty of him having less outs than usual since the board is paired. [/ QUOTE ] No!!!!!! A sLag wont drop top pair to a 2nd barrelL! This was my point! hands that have 5% equity... you want them in!!!!!!!! bet bet bet, have them call, then buy dinner w/ their money. [ QUOTE ] I'm not really buying the bet and reconsider if you're cr-ed line. If I bet the turn, I'm going to know before I bet what I do if he pushes over the top. And I don't like betting this turn and then folding to a raise from someone that I think will check-raise with a (semi-)bluff or worse made hand a not insignificant part of the time. Even if the fold after we got check-raised is the correct decision against his range of hands (so we should obviously fold once we get there), putting ourself in that situation in the first place was not smart imo. [/ QUOTE ] refer to above [ QUOTE ] You're saying that weather to call or fold to a check raise is just a matter of putting him on a hand range and deciding if we have equity enough against it. I agree. But you're also saying that this decision does not affect weather we should bet the turn in the first place, and that doesn't make sense to me. [/ QUOTE ] technically yes, i've made the decision to call when i bet (if they raise) because the bet is correct vs his hand range. the only times its NOT a call is if a bet is right vs their hand range (all the draws, pps, top pair, etc.) but when they raise, you can use this NEWLY GIVEN INFORMATION and ascertain a fold vs their NEW range (ie, only trips or full house) [ QUOTE ] Also: Svar på: In addition, by checking here, hands which WOULDNT call a bet, but are live (even the KQ example) have an "equity share" of the pot. The pot is 120 or so now, why give up 10% to a 4 outer? thats 3bbs. I dont know about you, but i want whats mine. if T8 folds to a bet, its still better to bet then give up 8 outs, or roughly 20%, or 20 dollars (5 bbs). Not if T8 will bluff the river often enough to make up for the $20 lost, and I think it will. [/ QUOTE ] k
|
|
#26
09-29-2005, 03:43 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: AA party 2/4
</font><blockquote><font class="small">Svar på:</font><hr />
I'm not assuming anything, I'm saying whether he calls raises or folds thats fine, it's just checking is not giving him the option to make a mistake (call or raise) [/ QUOTE ] Well, I hate to be a nit, but </font><blockquote><font class="small">Svar på:</font><hr /> But really, alot of hands which WILL call a bet, like flush draw, straight draw, or both, make them make a mistake. [/ QUOTE ] But ok. That was super nitty. Will stop. </font><blockquote><font class="small">Svar på:</font><hr /> Also, about not paying off the draw, you should be calling 100% of rivers; even if top pair pairs, he may be bluffing flush. or busted straight. or if straight fills, he may be betting top pair, or if the flush, he could be using that for a busted gut + overs. something like that. point is, by checking not only do you give up a portion of the pot, but you pay off their value bet. [/ QUOTE ] Yeah. Here you're 100% correct. Don't know why I said that about not payinf off when he hits. </font><blockquote><font class="small">Svar på:</font><hr /> No!!!!!! A sLag wont drop top pair to a 2nd barrelL! This was my point! hands that have 5% equity... you want them in!!!!!!!! bet bet bet, have them call, then buy dinner w/ their money. [/ QUOTE ] Then why will you fire another barrelt with AK? I'm really not sure if going for the whole stack of a decent player is right the times he has top pair in this spot, but ok. </font><blockquote><font class="small">Svar på:</font><hr /> the only times its NOT a call is if a bet is right vs their hand range (all the draws, pps, top pair, etc.) but when they raise, you can use this NEWLY GIVEN INFORMATION and ascertain a fold vs their NEW range (ie, only trips or full house) [/ QUOTE ] Of course. Like betting speed or chat tell or whatever.
|
|
#28
09-29-2005, 04:11 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: AA party 2/4
[ QUOTE ]
No!!!!!! A sLag wont drop top pair to a 2nd barrelL! This was my point! hands that have 5% equity... you want them in!!!!!!!! bet bet bet, have them call, then buy dinner w/ their money. Then why will you fire another barrelt with AK? I'm really not sure if going for the whole stack of a decent player is right the times he has top pair in this spot, but ok. [/ QUOTE ] It SEEMS needing to protect AA because alot of hands are quite live; and that this is a GOOD spot to 2nd barrell with ace high are contradictory, they are not. Same reason Q 8 2r (X) board checking both ace high and AA is more or less correct. Poker is weird, huh? Fully explaining the "why" is tough, but to be concise: I alluded to alot of hands which are fairly live, like 20% or less, if you check they can win + value bet. Then I also said we dont care if they fold. Thing is, alot of those hands fold. Which is better then having turn checked through. Now, if alot of them fold, doesnt this make it a good spot to bluff w/ AK? (Even though in that case ace high is good! It just cant stand any heat, thus a bluff) *As well, underpairs or bottom pair or what not you have considerable fold equity w/ AK, not to mention middle pair pairing gives you some more pot equity as well. If I bet 5handed with AK i never would expect Jx to fold, and thats also why I always bet whe nI can beat those hands. [ QUOTE ] he only times its NOT a call is if a bet is right vs their hand range (all the draws, pps, top pair, etc.) but when they raise, you can use this NEWLY GIVEN INFORMATION and ascertain a fold vs their NEW range (ie, only trips or full house) Of course. Like betting speed or chat tell or whatever. [/ QUOTE ] I didnt really mean that, I dont trust those enough online, I ment more of a rock figure. (People's image)... Like... not to pick on anyone in particular, but sourbeaver. If he checkraised me here I would put him on quads and fold. =)
|
|
#29
09-29-2005, 04:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: AA party 2/4
[ QUOTE ]
Wow, this thread got really good suddenly. Very honouring indeed to be in the digest. Bobbo articulates some of the things I argued much more eloquently than I could. Go Bobbo! [/ QUOTE ] woooo! ty =) nh here btw
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
