[Garland]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I just saw this thread. I bet the turn, call the c/r, and river a flush.

[/ QUOTE ]

this is just awful. if you're gonna river a flush, 3bet the goddamn turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not going to edit/delete this out like someone else did earlier, but wrong [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img].

I'm sorry, I know you've etched the correct play in your head already by checking the turn. I'm not exactly sure what you're willing to bet on this turn, but if you're only willing to bet an 8 here, this is extremely exploitable.

These are one of these spots were I'm going to take a shot and try to win the pot without improvement. I'd much, much rather bet the turn and check the river unimproved than check the turn and call a river bet unimproved. You said your opponents never fold a pair? Ok, how about AJ? AQ? Maybe AK (forget he didn't 3-bet pre). How about any hand that has 6 outs against us when we're actually ahead (KQ, KJ, QJ)?

[ QUOTE ]
even spewmaster schneids said he only bets it 33-50% of the time

[/ QUOTE ]

Really? Well, while I'm not sure, I believe he plays the majority of his games in high and nosebleed stakes, so maybe that's where he gets his 33-50%. Maybe those players have a different dynamic; I honestly don't know. If he played mid-stakes full time I'd have a hard time believing those numbers wouldn't be higher. Anyhow, it's clear that he at least bets it some of the time while you've pretty much closed the door on it at 0%.

And BTW, there's no requisite to bet the turn and bet the river again. This is an opponent/read situational type of thing. You are allowed to check behind on the river if you feel another bet won't lodge his cards to the muck often enough, however the real purpose of betting the turn is to get his cards into the muck earlier.

If and only if I had information that BB was a habitual check-raiser would I check this turn behind. The default play is to bet, and it isn't even close.

Garland