Re: strange hand
 

My line on the flop was to cr a late position bettor to protect my pair of aces. The 4th heart scared me into check/folding the turn.

I assumed at least a call on the river. I couldn't believe the MPs folded. The real question I had was whether to bet the river in hopes that BB would fold was worth while, but I figured just calling was right.

Re: strange hand
 

[ QUOTE ]

I think it is more interesting if we can get BB to fold if we raise [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

Almost certain that UTG+2 does not have the Q because he would of most likely bet the turn w/ the 2nd nuts. He also will not have 8[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]7[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] here since he would have prolly bet the flop, but def bet the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, raising is a good idea.
Perhaps BB or UTG+2 are so stupid and fold, too.

Re: strange hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
Flop check is fine. Turn check is fine when it's another heart. On the river, it's a no-brainer call. If everyone calls, you're basically wagering 1 BB to win slightly less than 1 SB (due to the rake), and you don't see the royal here more than 33% of the time because the second nut flush usually bets the turn. Once two players fold, you're now wagering 1 BB to win back that 1 SB plus at least to 1/3 of the 2 SB forfeited by the folders.

[/ QUOTE ]

why we dont bet flop?
+ unraised pot
+ probably best Ax
- 4 villians
- FD danger
- str8 danger

but bet/fold line is probably weak
i would play bet/call and im waiting for safe card at turn to call also turn

Re: strange hand
 

This is fine with me. I would be very tempted to call he river.

Re: strange hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Flop check is fine. Turn check is fine when it's another heart. On the river, it's a no-brainer call. If everyone calls, you're basically wagering 1 BB to win slightly less than 1 SB (due to the rake), and you don't see the royal here more than 33% of the time because the second nut flush usually bets the turn. Once two players fold, you're now wagering 1 BB to win back that 1 SB plus at least to 1/3 of the 2 SB forfeited by the folders.

[/ QUOTE ]

why we dont bet flop?
+ unraised pot
+ probably best Ax
- 4 villians
- FD danger
- str8 danger

[/ QUOTE ]

Unraised pot is actually a - in this case. The pot just isn't big enough to be worth fighting for with such a marginal hand and too large of a field. Probably over 50% of the time you'll see a flush or a straight card fall by the river.

Also, you may have the best Ax, but any KQT makes your kicker useless (and brings a straight card), so it's not that exciting. KQT = 12 cards which means that around 50% of the time you chop with another ace a pair of aces holds.

Re: strange hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Flop check is fine. Turn check is fine when it's another heart. On the river, it's a no-brainer call. If everyone calls, you're basically wagering 1 BB to win slightly less than 1 SB (due to the rake), and you don't see the royal here more than 33% of the time because the second nut flush usually bets the turn. Once two players fold, you're now wagering 1 BB to win back that 1 SB plus at least to 1/3 of the 2 SB forfeited by the folders.

[/ QUOTE ]

why we dont bet flop?
+ unraised pot
+ probably best Ax
- 4 villians
- FD danger
- str8 danger

[/ QUOTE ]

Unraised pot is actually a - in this case. The pot just isn't big enough to be worth fighting for with such a marginal hand and too large of a field. Probably over 50% of the time you'll see a flush or a straight card fall by the river.

Also, you may have the best Ax, but any KQT makes your kicker useless (and brings a straight card), so it's not that exciting. KQT = 12 cards which means that around 50% of the time you chop with another ace a pair of aces holds.

[/ QUOTE ]

it makes sense
thx for reply !