2+2'er gets pwned trying to slowplay (marginal content) - Page 4

Greg J · #31 04-05-2005, 08:58 PM

And those 12 outs give you near 50% equity on the flop, and if you are raised on the flop (and you should have been), this sets up a nice chance to go for a check raise. Implied odds, plus the small chance of making villian fold make this flop bet correct IMO.

scotty34 · #32 04-05-2005, 09:00 PM

Those were my thoughts as well. Our opinion seems to be in the minority however, and I am somewhat convinced it wasn't the right play. If it was a mistake though, it was a very small one IMO.

Greg J · #33 04-05-2005, 09:04 PM

I rarely disagree with Entity, but I do here. If you are raised on the flop, seriously, so fuc[/i]king what? With your pot equity that meake it a tiny error at most, plus it initiates future action (check raise!!). Bet this flop every time! Totally +EV.

jon_keck · #34 04-05-2005, 09:09 PM

How about a river c/r? What would he cap the turn with that he wouldn't bet after the 9 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] fell?

I'd lead out if the river was an A or a club, but I think I'd check the majority of the time.

Is this wrong?

edit: He's not capping the turn with top pair, he almost definitely doesn't have 2 pair. He's got JJ/QQ/KK here practically every time, no?

He'll bet the river at least 2/3 of the time (QQ/KK), so going for a c/r nets at least .33bb more than betting out does. I'm assuming he won't fold the river, ever.

Someone lemme know if I'm way off base.

Entity · #35 04-05-2005, 09:15 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I rarely disagree with Entity, but I do here. If you are raised on the flop, seriously, so fuc[/i]king what? With your pot equity that meake it a tiny error at most, plus it initiates future action (check raise!!). Bet this flop every time! Totally +EV.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey Greg,

I really think your folding equity is minimal here on the flop, given the draws present on the board. I also think that checking will, in general, set up a better play for future action than betting, as it will generally disguise your hand more. A check-call followed by a bet will induce a raise and allow you to 3-bet very often.

Rob

Greg J · #36 04-05-2005, 09:24 PM

[ QUOTE ]
checking will, in general, set up a better play for future action than betting, as it will generally disguise your hand more.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes you are right about this. I was talking about if villian raises the flop, which he didnt. So is this a check for deception? If so, I like that reason better. I still like a semibluff here on the flop, which is much better than checking calling (b/c it gives you another way to win). Of course I check this turn UI. If villian bets this still leaves open the possibility of a CR on the river.

I think this might be closer than I initially thought... but my line is still a flop bet, check/call, check/fold UI, and check raising the river if I hit my hand.

scotty34 · #37 04-05-2005, 09:42 PM

[ QUOTE ]
How about a river c/r? What would he cap the turn with that he wouldn't bet after the 9 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] fell?

I'd lead out if the river was an A or a club, but I think I'd check the majority of the time.

Is this wrong?

edit: He's not capping the turn with top pair, he almost definitely doesn't have 2 pair. He's got JJ/QQ/KK here practically every time, no?

He'll bet the river at least 2/3 of the time (QQ/KK), so going for a c/r nets at least .33bb more than betting out does. I'm assuming he won't fold the river, ever.

Someone lemme know if I'm way off base.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, that would have been another option, and probably would have worked. However, I was hoping that he would be willing to raise my lead on the river with the 2nd nuts (OK the 3rd, but I'm not counting T7), In which case I could 3-bet and he may possibly even cap it. I very seldom only call the river with the 2nd nuts. Even if he were to only raise me 25% of the time and does not cap after my 3-bet, that would get me .5 extra BB.

jon_keck · #38 04-05-2005, 09:55 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
How about a river c/r? What would he cap the turn with that he wouldn't bet after the 9 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] fell?

I'd lead out if the river was an A or a club, but I think I'd check the majority of the time.

Is this wrong?

edit: He's not capping the turn with top pair, he almost definitely doesn't have 2 pair. He's got JJ/QQ/KK here practically every time, no?

He'll bet the river at least 2/3 of the time (QQ/KK), so going for a c/r nets at least .33bb more than betting out does. I'm assuming he won't fold the river, ever.

Someone lemme know if I'm way off base.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, that would have been another option, and probably would have worked. However, I was hoping that he would be willing to raise my lead on the river with the 2nd nuts (OK the 3rd, but I'm not counting T7), In which case I could 3-bet and he may possibly even cap it. I very seldom only call the river with the 2nd nuts. Even if he were to only raise me 25% of the time and does not cap after my 3-bet, that would get me .5 extra BB.

[/ QUOTE ]

I see. I wasn't taking into account that he would 3-bet you occasionally when you lead.

iluzion · #39 04-05-2005, 09:58 PM

Haha, wow yeah that was me. We were heads up, I put you on a possible bluff, maybe TT-QQ wanting to see if I missed, so I wanted you leading that turn. I'm happy with my play, but god was I pissed when that happened. It was prolly the 2nd last bad beat I had in the big downstreak (which appears to be over *crosses fingers*).

scotty34 · #40 04-05-2005, 10:02 PM

Yea, sorry for the intro comment in the OP now that I've thought about it more, and heard some comments. I like your play in the hand as well. Even though the board is draw heavy, it wouldn't be right to put me on a hand such as what I had. Out of curiousity, if I check that flop, you are betting it right?