30/60 canterbury vs worm33

[jrlock50]

I've never posted before and I don't want to appear naive, but what was the purpose of the river bet? I can't picture too many hands that SB would call with that hero can beat, nor any winning hands that he would fold.

[worm33]

Bk said it was "still pretty early in the session". Well it was about my 10th-15th hand at the table. Maybe 20 tops. Anyhow I was definitly not in a "groove" yet. At this point in the session when I checkraise him on the river his hand has precisely 0% chance of being good. I might get fancy 7 hours in up 3 dimes, but not now. I was pretty sure he had exactly AQ. When the queen hit the river I didnt think he would raise me and if he did im not 3 betting that river anyway, and I knew he would have to pay it off.

[elysium]

hi bike

when you have a good aggressive acting behind you pre-flop in the CO, with JTs, and it's folded to you, raising in is wrong.

there is a misconception about how to play against aggressive players. aggressive players are also frequently under-rated. it is not always such a good thing to come into battle against aggressives bumping heads a lot. first though, and perhaps more importantly; and i'm not going to go into how often JTs is over-estimated; JTs works provided that you know how it plays; instead, you shouldn't open with a raise in that situation because it hinders you while helping the aggressive. you have given him the instrument that is his greatest asset; the ability to raise or reraise, and cut down your odds. that is not your asset that is his. furthermore, you don't know what that aggressive is holding, and that's his second most important asset.

he acting after you do; that's an assist for him. what else does he have going for him in this hand? the list goes on and on.

you only have a reasonably high expectation that his starters are trailing yours, but with all his weapons, i have the SB leading you in this hand; JTs or not.

you don't beat aggressives by building big pots. you beat aggressives by outplaying them. in this hand, you actually make this aggressive opponent play better because you have improved his odds while he has cut down yours. your swinging your JTs meat cleaver instead of sharpening it. its a butcher job. the pre-flop is horrendous. not just bad, horrendous.

everyone favoring a pre-flop raise here had better start thinking. your opponents out there will be. the fact that so many of you favor the pre-flop raise-in is not good. you don't play this game that way people. the pre-flop is a clear-cut call.

[bicyclekick]

Quit spouting off bad advice.

I can't believe you want to call there. That's ridiculous. I'm often raising JTo there, let alone JTs. That's more previous hand/player dependent but still. Just because one player is good and aggressive means I should'nt be raising JTs? Yeah right. Even if he wants to 3 bet me, I have position on him, and that's a big weapon. I don't think worm33 wants to get into too many confrontations with me out of position without the goods. He's definately not re-stealing with cheese because I can be easily moved off post-flop.

Even if the sb was a goofball donk big 3 better there's no way i'm mucking JTs. Aint happening elysium. Nor am I just calling. I could see where calling might be a little better than when we're talking about worm33, but I'm still raising and still feel that raising is best.

[pokerhooker]

If we all agree that BK should have checked the river, doesn't that make worm's check hoping to raise incorrect?

[DcifrThs]

[ QUOTE ]
If we all agree that BK should have checked the river, doesn't that make worm's check hoping to raise incorrect?

[/ QUOTE ]

but worm knew bk wouldn't, nay, couldn't help betting whatever hand he likelycalled w/ on teh turn. if its a bluff, he woulnd't have been called anyways, if it wasn't he stands to win 2 bets.

worm played this hand expertly.

-Barron

[pokerho420]

[ QUOTE ]
I might get fancy 7 hours in up 3 dimes, but not now.

[/ QUOTE ] Bk's preflop 4 bet is questionable and he played post flop rather abysmally. But in the end a check call would have been more suitable against someone who's entire game is "fancy". I don't think it matters where you're at in your session Mike in order to make plays, and Bk was right to call in the end, even though he shouldn't have bet in the first place.

[pokerhooker]

worm said he put BK on AQ or AK hoping BK would value bet the former and bluff the latter. Do you think he would have checked had he known BK had JT?

The logic is going to get a bit circular, but if worm KNOWS that BK is going to bet any hand he called with on the turn, shouldn't BK also KNOW that worm, by checking, is going to showdown any hand that had him leading every street. If worm had a hand he didn't think he could showdown, he would have bet the river and hope that BK folds.

[Jgents]

My primary choice after betting out the river: If I feel I have the best hand, I re-raise the C/R, otherwise I fold. Calling is the worst option in my book after betting the river. Second option: Check behind the river.

I like my first option.

[Net Warrior]

elysium, excellent post. Thanks for the clinic on playing this type of hand against good aggressive opponents. I'm puzzled by the fact that your advice seems to have fallen on deaf ears. Oh well.