The ugliest card in the entire deck shows up

[Fiksdal]

Full Tilt Poker - No Limit Hold'em Cash Game - $0.25/$0.50 Blinds - 6 Players - (LegoPoker HH Converter (http://www.legopoker.com/hh))

SB: $24.45
BB: $31.50
UTG: $5.60
MP: $54.80
CO: $50.10
Hero (BTN): $59.50

Reads: <font color="blue"> Fwiw villain is 42/10/1 over 19 hands. I've been active since he got to the table.</font>

Preflop: Hero is dealt A/images/graemlins/club.gif Q/images/graemlins/club.gif (6 Players)
3 folds, <font color="red">Hero raises to $2.00</font>, SB folds, BB calls $1.50

Flop: ($4.25) Q/images/graemlins/heart.gif 4/images/graemlins/heart.gif 7/images/graemlins/diamond.gif (2 Players)
BB checks, <font color="red">Hero bets $4.00</font>, BB calls $4.00

Turn: ($12.25) K/images/graemlins/heart.gif (2 Players)
BB checks,

Hero? If we check behind, are we calling a bet on a blank river? Betting if checked to?

[Genz]

I check behind and bet if checked to and call a small bet. I fold if it is anywhere near $7 or more.

[corsakh]

Keep it small.

[TheRenaissance]

Check behind and call a small bet on the river. I think there is merit in checking behind on the river as well - you get to see what he will call you with preflop/flop, which may be very valuable info from an unknown. Also plenty of donks like going for the double checkraise, especially if you have been active.

But of course you will miss out on value from Qx hands.

[JROK777]

What's making you not call a bet in the $7 range? Villian has to bluff the pot off @1 time in 3 to break even. Would you call a $6 bet? If villian has a flush, he called a $4 bet and need to win a pot of $20 to break even on that call. Villian needs to extract $12 from us on the river to make his call profitable(if he had a fd). If he bets $7 and has a flush he still loses $ on his flop call. I guess he could have a king here or even a monster. I also think villian could fire with a small PP or a worse queen on the river. I am trying to figure out when to make river calls like this one. And when not to make them. I just wondered what logic you were using to estimate this fold?

[Fiksdal]

Also, couldn't villain be blocking the river with Qx if we check behind on the turn?

[TheRenaissance]

[ QUOTE ]
Also, couldn't villain be blocking the river with Qx if we check behind on the turn?

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course, but blocks tend to be small - less than half pot.
Not sure what my cutoff would be, but I'd make a crying call for 7$.
If he bets 9$+ I'd lean towards folding.

No idea where these numbers come from though.

[Debaser]

Can someone explain why checking behind is better than betting and folding to a c/r? It seems if we get c/r here we're good about one time in never so it's an easy fold.

I can understand it if we have the A /images/graemlins/heart.gif cos then getting c/r sucks.

[CityFan]

[ QUOTE ]
Can someone explain why checking behind is better than betting and folding to a c/r? It seems if we get c/r here we're good about one time in never so it's an easy fold.

I can understand it if we have the A /images/graemlins/heart.gif cos then getting c/r sucks.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've been thinking exactly this, but I decided this isn't QUITE the spot for it.

The usual reason to do that is to get villain to fold hands he might bluff with (and we would fold to) on the river. But here, we seem to be decided that we'd call a bet on the river if we check behind. So we WANT villain to make those bluffs!

On the other hand, if we plan to fold the river, why waste money now? Most of the time we WILL be beat here and are just costing ourselves a bet.

That's my analysis, although I'm not completely sure about the second part.

[CityFan]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Can someone explain why checking behind is better than betting and folding to a c/r? It seems if we get c/r here we're good about one time in never so it's an easy fold.

I can understand it if we have the A /images/graemlins/heart.gif cos then getting c/r sucks.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've been thinking exactly this, but I decided this isn't QUITE the spot for it.

The usual reason to do that is to get villain to fold hands he might bluff with (and we would fold to) on the river. But here, we seem to be decided that we'd call a bet on the river if we check behind. So we WANT villain to make those bluffs!

On the other hand, if we plan to fold the river, why waste money now? Most of the time we WILL be beat here and are just costing ourselves a bet.

That's my analysis, although I'm not completely sure about the second part.

[/ QUOTE ]

In fact the second part is irrelevant. Checking behind and calling the river &gt; Betting here.

It's better when villain doesn't have us beat (and we snap off the bluff/loose bet) as I reasoned above.

It's no worse when he DOES have us beat, because either way it costs us a bet.

The only problem is if villain makes his hand on the river... but I don't think that happens very often (and if he makes a straight he'll likely check the river anyway).