Re: hand
 

pbob, this hand really isnt hard to play. you call the river. simple.

the hand is still interesting tho, bc im very curious what co had.

Re: hand
 

I agree with Victor on everything especially that only a set of 9s makes sense.

-DeathDonkey

Re: hand
 

I still don't see why QcJc is out of question...

PM me results please.

Re: hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
I still don't see why QcJc is out of question...

[/ QUOTE ]
the flop action. there isn't much good that comes out of raising that hand on the flop unless SB is donking non-showdownable hands really. i still agree that he will show up with this and other flush draws quite a bit though.

Re: hand
 

Re: hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
I agree with Victor on everything especially that only a set of 9s makes sense.

-DeathDonkey

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah that was also the hand (99) that came to mind at first about this hand. It's the only one that makes any overly good sense imo.

Re: hand
 

I don't understand how people are so quick to dismiss the flush draw. Obviously there is a lot of sense to just calling the flop with the club draw. But an expert player would also know that he has a lot of equity with a flop raise (especially if he has a gutshot draw), and he gets two benefits from raising: (1) deception which may induce a bad play on a later street, (2) some information about hand strength which will help if he makes his flush on a paired board. It's also possible CO had a read that he could profitably try to push SB off his hand in certain spots.

The river play with a flush is unusual because a check/raise would seem natural, but he might have felt that either PB was likely to check behind this river as his turn cold-calls gave away his flush draw, or he might have felt PB might raise a set on the river if bet into.

So I agree that there should be some discounting of the flush draw because of the way hand was played, but I would still make it the most likely hand.

Re: hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
I don't understand how people are so quick to dismiss the flush draw

[/ QUOTE ]

I discount it because he had the chance to cap with it 3-ways on the flop and didn't.

Re: hand
 

Wouldn't he 4-bet the turn with a set of 9s? Or, differently put, is it more likely he just called the 3-bet with a flush draw on the flop or just called the 3-bet with aset on the turn?

And, either way, do you think Bob is so clearly beat here that he should fold?

Re: hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
Wouldn't he 4-bet the turn with a set of 9s? Or, differently put, is it more likely he just called the 3-bet with a flush draw on the flop or just called the 3-bet with aset on the turn?

And, either way, do you think Bob is so clearly beat here that he should fold?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think Bob is ahead. The question is if he shoudl raise. I lean towards no, but not sure.