Warning: Small pot and undramatic - Page 2

Schneids · #11 03-07-2005, 10:18 AM

I truly believe that a person who sees half the flops and is a passive player is thinking more about next hand than this hand when this river comes, instead of about ways to try to win this hand, if he's holding say 8-high flush draw or queen-high flush draw. Therefore I truly believe check and call is actually the worst option because I just do not see him betting any hands that we can call with and beat. These type of people like to see a lot of flops so that they can bet when they hit them, and check or fold when they don't.

tpir90036 · #12 03-07-2005, 11:27 AM

Am I still hungover from the tylenol PM and not reading this hand right?

The final board is: 9 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]5 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]5 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]K [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]K [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] and we have J [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]3 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]. why are people advocating check-calling?? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

elmo · #13 03-07-2005, 11:35 AM

Check folding doesn't seem that bad in my opinion... certainly better than check calling.

Clarkmeister · #14 03-07-2005, 12:31 PM

Check-call. This really isn't close.

Clarkmeister · #15 03-07-2005, 12:32 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Why would you want to check call against this opponent he is described as not being a habitual bluffer.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please. Even non-habitual bluffers take stabs with 8 high when headsup and their opponent's last 3 actions were call-check-check.

andyfox · #16 03-07-2005, 12:46 PM

Poster said he was 95% certain his opponent was on a flush draw and that the guy will bluff. Opponent most likely doesn't have the king of clubs, else he'd have bet the turn; and he's less likely to have the ace of clubs, because he's have raised with some holdings pre-flop that included the ace of clubs. Poster would be getting 5:1 to call.

Schneids · #17 03-07-2005, 12:59 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why would you want to check call against this opponent he is described as not being a habitual bluffer.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please. Even non-habitual bluffers take stabs with 8 high when headsup and their opponent's last 3 actions were call-check-check.

[/ QUOTE ]

"Minnesota nice" might apply to opponents in this state more than you realize. There are a LOT of opponents who Mike describes that fit this description at Canterbury who will not bet 8-high on this river to try to win the pot.

Online I'd definitely advocate check/call. Same with live in a lot of places. Maybe not so at Canterbury.

elmo · #18 03-07-2005, 01:29 PM

Oh, we are HU. forget that earlier post

worm33 · #19 03-07-2005, 01:32 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Why would you want to check call against this opponent he is described as not being a habitual bluffer.

[/ QUOTE ]

Now I did say he was not a habitual bluffer but he will bluff. FWIW the player in question is Myron. And also checkraising against this type of player never really crossed my mind. I'll save that play for someone who actualy knows whats goin on.
I think the main question here is weather to bet to fold out queen high, in a $240 pot, or check and call to increase the pot by 20%. If this were a $600 pot and I somehow was sure my opponett had a flush draw then a bet would be clear, because I dont want to risk blowing the pot to gain the extra $60. In this case of a small pot im not sure.

tpir90036 · #20 03-07-2005, 02:27 PM

Good points... I see it now that I am fully awake... I will blame it on the tylenol PM daze.