Awkward hand means awkward river

[Zeldark]

You also have to consider that the R tards who are get involved with any 2 suited cards, have only a 1/4th chance of being our suit. (Less if you consider that the board cards and our cards hurt their chances). Then they stick around with the T[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]4[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] and their bottom pair because zomg we're totally bluffing and still pay you off on the river. I'm convinced some players don't even think that far.

This made me laugh inside:
[ QUOTE ]
If you bet despite this for value your +EV exist only in your holdem books and the -EV in your real poker life.

[/ QUOTE ]

[Buzz-cp]

[ QUOTE ]
i've been playing poker for 2 years, and this happens so frequently that i can tell what will happen before it happens. if you check, two pair will likely check, top pair will check, and you GET NOTHING!! YOU LOSE!! GOOD DAY SIR!!


[/ QUOTE ]



haha sorry to hijack

[terencetsao]

bet the river
i would seriously try to cap the river.. im serious..
people will play 2 pair on the way to the cap

[pokerkasper]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
it works in higher limits. but on these limits here with 5+ players on the river, in 95% you meet the flush for sure.

[/ QUOTE ]

If people are bad enough to call with 8 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 3 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] preflop then they are bad enough to get here with a lot of things that are not flushes and then pay off with them. You're very backwards in your thinking here.

[/ QUOTE ]

They do not pay off your strong non-flush card, but the guy holding the flush. again 5+ on a 3-flush board is to much to justify a call imo. The rare cases you win the pot do not compensate your losses. You need less players to value bet here profitable.

By the way i think you mean more limits like .05/.10 or .02/.04 or so. The hand posted is .25/.50 and in this limit at PP and PS people become more and more tougher and educated. They are more able to release poor hands and there are more aggressive and tight players. All factors are not favorable for Value Betting the River with scare cards. Value Betting is no auto-play. You need favorable conditions to make it a profitable play. And these are loose passive games, no aggressive bettor or raiser at the table. This becomes rare today at .25/.50.

[Xhad]

kasper: I think you're giving your opponents too much credit, this coming from someone who has played more $5/$10 than .5/$1. Also, if you're that afraid of flush-over-flush then I don't know why you're agreeing with getting to the river in the first place. Checking and folding for one bet is ridiculous but checking and calling pretty much just lets people bet flushes but check pairs for little gain. It would be nice if we were on the button so we could see what everyone does first but we're not, sucks to be OOP. It is true that there is an unusually high chance of flush-over-flush here but not enough to swing a bet into a check. Again if we were up against a higher flush THAT often we have no business in this pot.

[Shillx]

[ QUOTE ]
bet the river
i would seriously try to cap the river.. im serious..
people will play 2 pair on the way to the cap

[/ QUOTE ]

People who constantly overplay good hands make for the best opponents. Way better then loose-passive types.

[Aaron W.]

[ QUOTE ]
it works in higher limits.

[/ QUOTE ]

In "higher limits" (which I'm supposing means tighter and more aggressive), I don't think the action comes out this way *EVER*.

[ QUOTE ]
but on these limits here with 5+ players on the river, in 95% you meet the flush for sure.

[/ QUOTE ]

95% for sure?

[ QUOTE ]
In lower limits players tend to play suited cards more often and to hang around with them than in medium or higher limits for which value-betting on the river has been originally designed.

[/ QUOTE ]

Uhhhhhh... value-betting on the river is designed for any game where players will call with weaker hands. It happens at all limits.

[ QUOTE ]
So you need about 10% pot equity to justify a bet in exactly this spot here. You have only 5%, perhaps less.

[/ QUOTE ]

Eh? Pot equity doesn't really apply when you're discussing completed hands. This statement makes no sense at all. Perhaps your vocabulary is different, and you are using "pot equity" to mean something different than what everybody else means, just like you used "weak" differently.

[ QUOTE ]
If you bet despite this for value your +EV exist only in your holdem books and the -EV in your real poker life.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a good NC thread title. Too early?

[bennyhana]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
bet the river
i would seriously try to cap the river.. im serious..
people will play 2 pair on the way to the cap

[/ QUOTE ]

People who constantly overplay good hands make for the best opponents. Way better then loose-passive types.

[/ QUOTE ]

QFMFingT

[NIX]

[ QUOTE ]
it works in higher limits. but on these limits here with 5+ players on the river, in 95% you meet the flush for sure.

[/ QUOTE ]
While people may have been hanging around the pot because of spade draws, K9x is a flop that hits a lot of hands that people may limp with. There could easily be several pairs out there, with potentially some straights (the river completed two of them) that people may pay off with, but not necessarily bet with. I'd rather bet and get value from these hands and worry about a potential higher flush if/when I get raised.

[jeanbaptiste36]

if you don't bet this river, then you should have folded on the flop.