|
|
#1
03-12-2005, 06:21 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Did I butcher Clarkmeister\'s Theorem????
Live 4/8 at Canterbury Park. 9 handed. Villain in this hand is a fish. Probably 50/4. Can get frisky on the flop, but seems to tone it down on the expensive streets. He will bet any flop if it is checked to him. I hate him.
Hero is in BB with K [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]Q [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 4 limpers. Hero raises. 5 to the flop Q [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]6 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]2 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] Hero bets, villain raises, hero 3 bets, villain 4-bets, hero calls. turn: Q [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] Hero checks, villian bets, hero calls. River: 3 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] hero checks..... 
|
|
#4
03-12-2005, 06:44 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Did I butcher Clarkmeister\'s Theorem????
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] not a fan of the turn check & call. [/ QUOTE ] I don't see any other way to play this. [/ QUOTE ] On the turn I don't mind the check and call, but if you mean on the river then yes, this is time for Clarkmeister's theorem. Given your read on villain I call the raise.
|
|
#5
03-12-2005, 07:20 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Did I butcher Clarkmeister\'s Theorem????
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] not a fan of the turn check & call. [/ QUOTE ] I don't see any other way to play this. [/ QUOTE ] On the turn I don't mind the check and call, but if you mean on the river then yes, this is time for Clarkmeister's theorem. Given your read on villain I call the raise. [/ QUOTE ] Arent you contradicting yourself? You are saying now's the time to use the theorem, but you would call a river raise? i.e. the theorem doesn't apply. Also, I think the read on villan would make the desicion easier. He tones it down on the expensive streets.
|
|
#6
03-12-2005, 07:41 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Did I butcher Clarkmeister\'s Theorem????
Call the raise on the flop. Why jam it?
Bet out on the turn. If only called, bet the river. If raised, and you really think he doesn't have a flush and you miss the river, check call the river. b
|
|
#7
03-12-2005, 08:18 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Did I butcher Clarkmeister\'s Theorem????
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Arent you contradicting yourself? You are saying now's the time to use the theorem, but you would call a river raise? i.e. the theorem doesn't apply. [/ QUOTE ] I don't think the theorem says anything about folding to a raise. What if you have the nut flush or a straight flush? You should still bet according to the theorem, but folding to a raise is probably -EV. I have two reasons for calling the river raise. 1) I think your hand is best if Villain doesn't have a spade, and I think villain will raise a hand without a spade. 2) Joe Tall told me to keep track of all my river calls to see whether they are mostly good or bad. I have too many good ones on my list.
|
|
#8
03-12-2005, 08:43 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Did I butcher Clarkmeister\'s Theorem????
[ QUOTE ]
I have two reasons for calling the river raise. 1) I think your hand is best if Villain doesn't have a spade, and I think villain will raise a hand without a spade. [/ QUOTE ] Given the description that the villain is more tame postflop, I really doubt he will bluff raise on the end on a 4 flush board. He would be expecting you to call this raise if you've bet into him and gone all that way. He wasn't noted to be tricky beyond the flop. [ QUOTE ] What if you have the nut flush or a straight flush? You should still bet according to the theorem, but folding to a raise is probably -EV. [/ QUOTE ] This is highly opponent and board dependent, isn't it? You don't just blindly call the raise regardless of who is raising you. b
|
|
#9
03-12-2005, 11:07 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Did I butcher Clarkmeister\'s Theorem????
[ QUOTE ]
Live 4/8 at Canterbury Park. 9 handed. Villain in this hand is a fish. Probably 50/4. Can get frisky on the flop, but seems to tone it down on the expensive streets. He will bet any flop if it is checked to him. I hate him. Hero is in BB with K [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]Q [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 4 limpers. Hero raises. 5 to the flop Q [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]6 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]2 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] Hero bets, villain raises, hero 3 bets, villain 4-bets, hero calls. turn: Q [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] Hero checks, villian bets, hero calls. River: 3 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] hero checks..... [/ QUOTE ] I think I understand the turn call, but I don't think I like it. You have outs to a full if a flush is already out there and you would rather not pay 2 BB for that draw. Is that it? The fact is that you're more likely ahead than behind; your opponent is more likely to be drawing than have the flush already. I think that trumps the "check hands with outs" in this case.
|
|
#10
03-12-2005, 11:43 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Did I butcher Clarkmeister\'s Theorem????
Villain in this hand is a fish. Probably 50/4.
So he's one of the tight ones in this game [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]? Hmmmm, I think if you were planning on calling the river, a bet would be in line with CM's theorem. Some of those CP guys are real good at making big laydowns, and if you bet the river, I suspect that AQ would get folded by a lot of those guys.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
