Is this one of those times I should check behind on the turn?

[spamuell]

Party Poker 2/4, but it doesn't really matter. 10 handed.

First orbit. I have AA in MP. I open raise and only the BB calls.

Flop TT2r.

He checks, I bet, he calls.

Turn: 5, offsuit

He checks.

What if there was a flush draw on the flop, or the 5 on the turn brought a twoflush?

I understand that you should check here because you're either way ahead or way behind, and you can't fold to a check-raise and you might induce a bluff on the river and he doesn't fold a worse hand (obviously). The thing is, they call with so many bad hands, he may well call the turn with just overcards, so perhaps it's a bet anyway.

[butters]

I'd bet. He could easily have a hand like 88 and have you on overcards.

[Entity]

Against a good player, I think I check here; against a bad player, I bet. At 2/4, given the weighted distribution of good players to bad players, I probably go ahead and bet.

Rob

[ErrantNight]

against a good (presumably TAG) player... what is the plan on the river?

specifically, let's say another blank, and he bets...

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
against a good (presumably TAG) player... what is the plan on the river?

specifically, let's say another blank, and he bets...

[/ QUOTE ]
I call. A raise isn't going to be called by worse hands 66% of the time against a good player, and the turn check may have induced him to bluff with a hand like AJs, KQs, etc.

Rob

[ErrantNight]

thanks guys... definitely something to keep in mind, particularly as i spend more time at 3/6...

[Shillx]

I would strongly consider raising a river bet if a K-J comes off, otherwise I agree that calling is better.

Brad

[colgin]

[ QUOTE ]
against a good (presumably TAG) player... what is the plan on the river?

specifically, let's say another blank, and he bets...

[/ QUOTE ]

You call. The whole point of this line is that a thinking player who won't call a bet on the turn when he is behind may now bet the river (or call your river bet if he checks and you bet).

Now, I don't really like this line at Party $2/4 but that's another matter.

[ErrantNight]

Why wouldn't you bet this turn?

If this is a question in relation to it, I would consider this to be very different than that KQ hand elsewhere... most notably you are the aggressor. The likelihood of your opponent having a better hand is significantly decreased. He hasn't shown you anything, if he is on or pick up a flush draw it's a small enough pot he doesn't have proper odds to be calling just based on that, and further, unless he has the unlikely holdings of a T or a suited hand that hit on the turn you're ahead.

A turn check behind doesn't mean that you'll induce a river bluff, villain has shown no inclination to bet thus far.

I think you re-evaluate in the event of a check raise, but your read on the opponent, the suits of your aces, the suits of the table etc. etc. etc.

This is such a hypothetical I'm not sure I even see your point, to be honest... but aside from a very specific read of someone who will bluff on the river with crap, and call a raise on the few times your hand improves or another blank falls... but will always fold on the turn to a bet here... I return to my first question, why wouldn't you bet here?

[colgin]

I don't have my copy here at work but I think this line is discussed in HPFAP. Against thinking players this is a good line. Against typical Party $2/4 players I don't like it at all as you will get called here by all sorts of crap hands that you are crushing.